My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/6/2001
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2001
>
3/6/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2020 8:32:35 AM
Creation date
9/25/2015 4:14:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Migration
Meeting Date
03/06/2001
Archived Roll/Disk#
2275
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
146
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 />• <br />ALEACEMEhas <br />1) Confirming Resolution <br />2) Assessment Roll and Cost Estimate <br />3) Assessment Map <br />4) Copy of typical letter sent to property owners <br />5) Copy of Publication <br />Public Works Director James W. Davis advised that initially the County had received <br />a valid petition which 60 of the 90 owners had signed in favor of this project. He then <br />explained the increased cost of asphalt which resulted in a significant increase in the cost to <br />owners. Staff had met the previous week with the property owners and there was great <br />concern about the cost. He had just received a petition signed by 33 of the owners who are <br />opposed to the project especially since they have been assessed recently for a water project. <br />(Clerk's Note: Also on file with the backup is a letter from another property owner opposed <br />to the project.) Staff has looked at ways to reduce the assessments, but cannot avoid the fact <br />that costs have increased. He concluded by recommending that the Board not move the <br />project forward today, but authorize staff to meet with the property owners in the future, see <br />if staff can get the cost down, and see if they can bring in a project that is amenable to the <br />majority of the property owners since many now feel that it is not cost-effective for them to <br />proceed. <br />Commissioner Adams understood that petition paving requests are coming in slower <br />for several reasons, including the costs. When the County undertakes one of these projects <br />It drags on for so long that the people get discouraged. She suggested that the County look <br />at '`packaging" these road projects. She also suggested setting a goal to try to get more of <br />these roads paved. She suspected increased costs have a lot to do with stormwater runoff and <br />not just the cost of asphalt. She suggested the County look at the alternative paving we have <br />been using, try to get that refined and get more accomplished. She pointed out that the <br />grading of the roads is just like cleaning a house, it is never ending. <br />March 6, 2001 <br />63 <br />BK 1 + D= 322 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.