Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />understanding that by someone paying an assessment for road paving <br />caused the property to be valued greater because it has a paved <br />road._ The law does allow property owners to come in and prove <br />otherwise if they can. The Board made a finding in its°first <br />resolution that these properties do receive a benefit and Mr. Davis <br />and half the audience testified to the various reasons why property <br />owners would benefit and he thought they could presume the <br />properties were increased in value by the cost of the road, subject <br />to somebody proving otherwise. <br />Teresa Hullfish, 12490 84th Street, was concerned about safety <br />issues and felt something had to be done about the road. <br />Stan Dismukes, 77th Street property, has to travel on the road <br />every day and was willing to pay his share. He believed that <br />paving the road would benefit many. <br />Alvin Thomas urged that the project be continued and stated <br />that the majority of the people want to do the project. <br />Mr. Yurkiewicz, speaking again, took offense that Fellsmere <br />residents do not pay. He claimed a "collector road" was not needed <br />and that the reason it was being built "heavy duty" was for the <br />benefit of business and not the household residents. <br />Mr. Barkett wanted to make two points: first, that he wanted <br />to dispute it because his client would not benefit. Secondly, his <br />client owns in excess of 165 acres of wetlands that will not <br />benefit at all, because those acres are unbuildable. He also <br />pointed out that the ordinance says special assessments are to be <br />placed on properties especially benefitted by the improvements "in <br />proportion to the benefits derived therefrom". He reasoned that <br />because an analysis had not been done, Director Davis, staff had <br />only defined the area they thought was benefitted; therefore, in <br />his opinion, the ordinance had not been satisfied because it was <br />not done in proportion. <br />Mr. Tillman, owner of property on 77th Street across the ditch <br />from Berry Groves in the middle of the Kahn property, felt there <br />was benefit to all properties in the yellow area (on the map) <br />including Mr. Kahn. He suggested giving Mr. Kahn credit on the <br />wetlands lots. He strongly favored paving the road. <br />Ms. Wilson, speaking again, interjected her animosity for Mr. <br />Kahn because he had, she said, raped the community. She felt he <br />deserved to pay this and more. <br />Mr. Vilardi, speaking again, felt that paving would make it <br />easier for those who purchased land as speculation to sell their <br />lots. He believed the residents want it and deserve it. <br />15 moo 96 PAGE 4 <br />September 12, 1995 <br />