9/1/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

m 11992 BOOK 87 PAGE 437 Utility Services Director Terry Pinto advised that the decision to reduce the square footage from the Earman property was made after discussion with the Planning Department. Commissioner Scurlock asked for clarification regarding the Earman property being serviced from an existing water line, and why that decision was not made originally. Director Pinto explained that after removing the undevelopable portion, the part that would receive service is blocked from the lake side, and the water line could not be installed from that direction. The revised property arrangement has access for a water line from 8th Street. Director Pinto stated that staff could not find anything special about the Gallagher property. Following the Board's direction, staff analyzed the possibility of removing this property from the assessment roll and concluded that the water line is necessary. If the Gallagher property is removed from the assessment roll, the assessments to the other people in the project would be raised substantially. Fred Gallagher stated that it is his opinion, as it was two weeks ago, that he is being over -assessed for this water line. He felt he will never get benefit equal to the assessment of $12,000. Mr. Gallagher stated that his original request was to exclude the properties north of 10th Street. In the alternative, he asked that his assessment be done by using the 150 -foot rate as was used for his neighbors' assessments. He pointed out that his 3.9 -acre parcel was assessed at $12,000, while his neighbor's 18 -acre parcel was assessed at $13,000. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding various methods of calculating assessments as well as the necessity for this water line to be constructed. Edwin Potter, 4720 10th Street, stated that he wrote a letter to the Vice Chairman to express his feelings about the assessment but never received a response. He also stated that he and his neighbors on the north side of 10th Street were not part of the petition for this water line. There are five property owners on the north side of 10th Street and four property owners on the south side of 10th Street who are affected by this assessment and over 2/3 of them signed a petition saying they did not want that line constructed. Mr. Potter reported that he had conversations with Mr. Chastain and Mr. Pinto and they told him the line was needed to make a loop to be able to flush the lines and because it was part of the master plan, but Mr. Potter could not understand why there has to be a water line there. when he and his neighbors do not want it. 32