Minutes - 19870818 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~\ (~a ~-i '~ Preliminary Assessment The project is listed improvements Program. eligibility to partici~ equal rate per foot of Resolution for as number one A petition was pate in the progr+ frontage for lot Moriah Hill Road and Timberly Drive. on the NCDOT 1986-87 Secondary Road presented which met the criteria for 3m. The basis for assessment is on an owners on these roads. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS. JOAN T,AMORTE spoke about the method. of assessment. She indicated that the citizens on these two roads petitioned the Commissioners through the Planning Board to have the assessment done on an equal share basis among the twenty property owners. Of the twenty property owners, fourteen are totally committed to assessing by lot, while four are committed to it only if it can be done by equal shares. Everyone is in agreement of making an equal distribution of the cost because without the support of these four individuals, the petition would not meet the 75~ participation for paving. She spoke about the condition of the road and the problems associated with the dust problem. Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill stated that divided the cost equally is not legally acceptable. The cost can be divided equally by lot. SUSANNE GOREE questioned the method of assessment and was told the assessment is on per lot basis. CAROLYN LONG spoke in support of the assessment on a per lot basis. ANNETTE JURGELSIiY spoke in support of the assessment on a per lot basis. A representative of the Mt. Moriah Baptist Church noted that the Church was not contacted to sign a petition and the Church has no funds to participate in the paving program. Gledhill explained the procedure that is followed in obtaining a petition, circulating that petition and presenting it to the Planning Board. After the project is approved by the Board of Commissioners, a copy of the Preliminary Assessment Resolution is sent to each person who will be assessed. Another public hearing will be held for receipt of comments on the amount assessed. He explained that a majority must be in agreement for the project to go forward but that everyone had to pay. JOHN RTGDON , stated he understood the right-of-way was the only thing that needed to be decided by the property owners and asked if another right- of-way had to be signed. Gledhill explained that the previous right-of-way will need to be revised to include the extra footage necessary for a paved road under DOT's standards. Whenever DOT upgrades the road, they acquire the right- of-way from the property owners. WALTER LOEHR , stated that the process of obtaining signatures on the petition was started approximately two year ago and apologized that there was no direct contact with the Church. He talked with Reverend Weatherly who indicated no opposition to the project. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD Commissioner Hartwell explained that this project is the last one under the old regulations. He encouraged the property .owners affected by this project to agree and move forward with the project as quickly as possible. Greg Szymik asked that the Board postpone the adoption of the Final