My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/9/2000 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2000
>
5/9/2000 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2018 2:46:06 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 3:50:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/09/2000
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
95
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
• • <br />Works Director James W. Davis advised that this had been discussed with County Attorney <br />Bangel last week and he had done some research on the question of equitable methods of <br />assessment. <br />County Attorney Bangel advised the Commissioners that it was for them to determine <br />what is fair and equitable, their decision is given great deference. He was not certain he <br />could comment on the actual mechanics of the method. <br />Director Davis explained that his office received the petition prior to any paving in <br />the area and staff evaluated the petition at that time. Sometimes when a petition is received, <br />some people want to be added or dropped, so staff has to establish a date and make their <br />determination at that time. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn MOVED to deny the assessment proposal. MOTION FAILED <br />for lack of a second. <br />Commissioner Macht asked if 10th Street had been abandoned. <br />Director Davis advised that the right-of-way was still intact; it had been closed over <br />the years since there has been no demand for it. He felt it should be opened for two reasons. <br />First, the Code says that future development should access roads with the lesser functional <br />classification, that is the local road network, which would be 19th and 10`h. It would deny <br />access on 20th Avenue because it is a collector road. The circulation of a car wash or any <br />development could be advantageous to having two road frontages, plus 10th Street would <br />connect 18th Avenue with 20th Avenue and south of 10th Street is residential zoning. The <br />thrust is to segregate the commercial land use away from the residential zoning. The way <br />to do that is to open 10th Street, so the commercial vehicles will not travel through a <br />residential area. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn understood and agreed with the rationale, but thought that the <br />September 5, 2000 <br />65 <br />BK I14P6799 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.