Laserfiche WebLink
APPEAL OF CHARLES PRINGLE <br /> (MS-91-20, RANCHETTES UNLIMITED) <br /> Irrigation District ' s need to review the replacement of a bridge. <br /> However, by a vote of 7-0, the Commission denied the appeal of <br /> conditions requiring the relocation and upgrading of irrigation <br /> distribution pipelines. <br /> Appeal Statement No. 1 . <br /> In his appeal , Mr. Pringle makes the following statement: "The <br /> conditions imposed by the Irrigation District are unreasonable. " <br /> The Chappel Irrigation Pipeline lies within a 5-foot wide strip <br /> offered for dedication to the County for roadway purposes. The <br /> offer of dedication was a condition of Right-of-Way Application No. <br /> RW-90-23 , approved by the Planning Division on April 27 , 1990 . The <br /> Irrigation District has indicated that the existing cast-in-place <br /> pipeline is not designed to support traffic on or near it. There- <br /> fore, the pipeline must be relocated to protect it from the <br /> increase in traffic which would be generated by the subdivision. <br /> Appeal Statement No. 2 <br /> In his appeal, Mr. Pringle makes the following statement: "The <br /> Board failed to take into account that we, the property owner, <br /> already paid for the system in 1968 or 69 . We should not be <br /> required to replace pipe that we have already paid for. " <br /> At the Public Hearing of February 7 , 1991 Mr. Pringle told the <br /> Planning Commission that the existing pipeline was financed by the <br /> previous property owner. Mr. Moore, of the Oakdale Irrigation <br /> District, indicated that, at the request of the previous property <br /> owner, the irrigation district replaced an open ditch which ran <br /> through the center of the property with the current cast-in-place <br /> concrete pipeline which runs along the roadway. The expense of <br /> relocating and upgrading the irrigation line was shared by the <br /> previous owner and the Irrigation District. <br /> Appeal Statement No. 3 <br /> In his appeal, Mr. Pringle makes the following statement: "The <br /> cost of the requirements are about $100 , 000 . 00 . " <br /> The Commission, as a part of its action, stated that the cost of <br /> relocating and improving the pipelines was part of the cost of <br /> developing the ten acre parcels. <br /> BOS LETTER PAGE NO. 2 <br />