My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2006-190
CBCC
>
Resolutions
>
2000's
>
2006
>
2006-190
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2015 6:06:05 AM
Creation date
9/30/2015 4:44:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Resolutions
Resolution Number
2006-190
Approved Date
12/12/2006
Agenda Item Number
No data from migration
Archived Roll/Disk#
3129
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Commissioner Craft stated that it concerns him that it has been put on a list and it has not been <br /> discussed by the St. Lucie MPO. <br /> Commissioner Smith stated as a thought, a few years ago when the regional planning council took <br /> the three counties and lined up the DRI's; he was thinking how were all the people going to get to <br /> I-95 and to this section of the region. It would be encouraging to recognize the DRI that will be <br /> happening between the three counties that somehow the people in the capacity of the turnpike and I- <br /> 95 as it exists today through the region is going to need a western edge. A question to Mr. Wolfe, <br /> the district's funding as a total, assuming all the projects are under the same usage criteria,use or <br /> lose it by the end of 2007. If for some reason.there is a project that is anticipated outside of this <br /> portion of the district that is in another portion of the district; what happens to that money when <br /> there is no conceivable way it is going to get built? Does that money get re-allocated to other parts <br /> of the district? <br /> Mr. Wolfe's response was inaudible. <br /> Ms. Miller.stated the monies come to district four; the funds were sub-divided between the southern <br /> and northern regions on an 85/15 split based on the normal statutory distribution. At this point, <br /> because of rolling forward FY 05/06 money into FY 06/07, much of that is needed to get underway <br /> in FY 06/07 as possible. The southern region has not approached the district yet, stating they won't _ <br /> be able to utilize all of their.funding. That scenario will have to be worked through whether those <br /> funds would be rolled forward to FY 07/08 or re-distributed within the district for potential use <br /> from the northern region. <br /> Commissioner Smith stated he wanted to set the stage, if there is any consideration that the district <br /> is eight months away from the end 1 of that period and there is are three proj ectsthat are active and <br /> there is a way to say, if FDOT is going to take that money back and re-distribute through the state <br /> system can there be a recognition of how to re-distribute it within the entire district four versus the <br /> south region. <br /> Mr. Wolfe's comments were inaudible. <br /> Commissioner Smith asked if transit will be a part of the discussion. <br /> Mr. Wolfe's comments were inaudible. <br /> Commissioner Craft stated that he appreciated the comments and look forward to having a <br /> conversation with the St. Lucie MPO but that is what concerns him. It is important that it is looked <br /> at and it is something that is being moved ahead and it has not been discussed on the St. Lucie <br /> MPO. -It is important to have that discussion before considering moving forward with the PD&E <br /> study. A presentation to St. Lucie MPO regarding the issue so a formal discussion could be <br /> addressed would be important moving to the next step. <br /> Mr. Drummond asked what the time line was for the TCTC to make a recommendation. <br /> TCTC Meeting minutes <br /> 05.18.06 <br /> Page 6 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.