5/16/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

some houses and this assessment will cost him approximately $26,000. In spite ofwhat people might think, he was in favor of putting the water in; it has been needed for some time. The longer it is put off, the more costly it will be. He urged the Board to go forward with the project. Ms. McAlpin, 1665 SW 2nd Court, was in favor of getting the water for all of the previously stated reasons and 25 more. In spite of three systems on her well water, she is still unable to drink it. She hoped the Board would vote in favor of it. Joe Pittman, 348 16th Street SW, related problems he has had with well water since he bought his property two years ago. He has a water system, which stopped the rust, but the water is still terrible. He was in favor of the project. Todd Smith advised that he is an engineer in town who designs water systems for a living. He presented a unique situation to the Board (which he has discussed with Mr. Chastain) in that he has a project that has about 15 metes and bounds parcels mainly around the periphery of Dixie Heights. In 1995 he had received an assessment on the full acreage to which he had objected. In 1998, he sent some correspondence to the Utilities Department showing that he could not develop the back of his property and proved that he could not plat a right-of-way through it as it was basically land -locked. At that time, Mr. Chastain had advised him that the original 1995 project had been re- evaluated and it was assessed using the "150 -foot rule". As it stands now, he was opposed to the project because he thought there should be an equitable distribution of gain in the project. His home is modest just like his neighbor's across the street, the same house, but his assessment is nearly 50% higher than his neighbor's. There are approximately 380 lots in the project and 10-15 of them are metes and bounds which are being assessed on the 150 -foot rule. At a recent public meeting about this project, he had been advised by both Mr. Chastain and Mr. Doyle (Steven Doyle, Capital Projects Manager) that their "hands were tied and limited to the 150 -foot assessment, unless there was further direction by the Board." He was in favor of the water, but asked that the Board get some input from the Utilities Department on the metes and bounds parcels and give them the authority to assess the metes and bounds parcels at the 100 -foot depth and make the assessment equal to his across -the - street neighbor's. This has been a big issue and, based on it, he had been opposed to the assessment May 16, 2000 31 BOOK Jc F'AGE •�