My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/4/1997
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1997
>
2/4/1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:02 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 9:26:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/04/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Bayer had a couple of concerns with staff's recommendation <br />in their memorandum, namely that the zoning by the City and Town is <br />as valid as any other zoning. He was sure that a new appraisal <br />would come in higher than the prior one. He hoped to have the DCA <br />resolving the lawsuits and approving the new zoning within a couple <br />of months. He also hoped the process could move at a faster pace <br />than as recommended by staff. <br />Discussion ensued concerning the zoning and appraisals of the <br />property. <br />Mr. DeBlois highlighted some of the points in his memorandum, <br />recounted the referendum issue, and counseled that the State <br />generally does not agree to re -appraisals unless there is a good <br />reason to do so. He felt that there would be some justification <br />for them to do so in this matter. He also explained that the re- <br />appraisals would need to be done after the zoning is changed if it <br />does occur. In addition, he explained that it would be appropriate <br />for Lost Tree to pay for the re -appraisals. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht to approve <br />staff's recommendation under the conditions that <br />(1) Lost Tree pay for the re -appraisals, <br />(2) Lost Tree waive any and all claims for <br />damages from the zoning and bridgehead <br />ordinance now or in the future, and <br />(3) Lost Tree give the County an option to <br />purchase the property at the new appraisal <br />price. <br />Mr. Bayer advised that the second part of the motion was <br />already covered under the conditions of the stipulation for <br />dismissal. He could not agree to it as a condition of <br />reappraising, but assured Commissioner Macht that it would be part <br />of the final settlement. <br />Discussion ensued on this point. <br />MOTION WAS SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn. <br />Mr. Bayer then addressed the cost for re -appraisal portion of <br />the motion and indicated he felt that the minimal cost for it on a <br />multi-million dollar deal would not be an impediment. <br />Mr. DeBlois pointed out that the State would select the <br />appraiser, it would be need to be done according to State <br />53 BQQK PnUE iijj <br />February 4, 1997 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.