Laserfiche WebLink
DATE: AUGUST 22, 1997 <br />TO: JAMES Z. CMMLER <br />COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR <br />FROM: JAMES W. DAVIS, P.L. <br />INTERIM DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICE <br />PREPARED JAMES D.CHAS <br />AND STAFFED MANAGER OF PROJECTS <br />BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES <br />SUBJECT: WEST MEADONS SUBDIVISION PETITION FOR WATER SERVICE <br />45TH AVENUE AND 45TH COURT, NORTH OF 4TH STREET <br />INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -97 -05 -DS <br />RESOLUTION III PUBLIC HEARING <br />On August 12,1997, the Indian River County Board of County <br />Commissioners approved Resolution I (97-80) and Resolution II (97- <br />81). Resolution I, contained the preliminary assessment roll <br />describing the project and cost. Resolution II, set the date of <br />the public hearing for the subject project. Property owners have <br />been notified of the public hearing by certified mail. Resolution <br />I (97-80) was published in the Vero Beach Press Journal on August <br />18, 1997. (See attached agenda item and minutes of the above <br />meeting). <br />Design of the water distribution system is complete. An <br />informational meeting was held with the property owners on August <br />26, 1997. The project will serve 27 platted lots along 45th Avenue <br />and 45th Court. The lots are ,U acre. <br />Approval of the attached Resolution III will confirm and approve <br />the preliminary assessment. The attached map displays the area to <br />benefit from the assessment project. The total estimated cost to <br />be assessed is $76,000.00. The estimated cost per square foot is <br />$0.119693. This project is to be paid through the assessment of <br />property owners along the proposed water line route. In the <br />interim, financing will be from the assessment fund. <br />The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the <br />Board of County Commissioners approve Resolution III, which affirms <br />the preliminary assessment on the subject project. <br />Manager of Assessment Projects James D. Chastain reported that the majority of <br />owners were in favor of this project and that he had not heard any vehement opposition. <br />Fourteen owners (5 couples), representing 9 properties, had attended the August 266 <br />informational meeting. An addendum to the petition was supported by 17 of the owners <br />(63%). Only 1 verbal response was in opposition and that person said he would go along <br />°�-2 PAGE 4 <br />BOOK �, <br />September 2, 1997 37 �. <br />