My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/19/1976
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1976
>
10/19/1976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:28:20 AM
Creation date
6/10/2015 4:29:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/19/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
L ■ <br />THE AREA AND PROBABLY ASK FOR A CHANGE OF RATES. MR. LLOYD POINTED <br />OUT THAT THE ORIGINAL TENTATIVE APPROVAL IN 1973 WAS UNDER THE. OLD <br />REGULATIONS, BUT THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS NOW GONE OVER THIS <br />ACCORDING TO THE NEW REGULATIONS. <br />ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE SUBDIVISION <br />REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THIS PLAT AND IT MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS, <br />COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REST OF <br />THE LAND, AND MR. LLOYD STATED THAT IT WILL HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED ACCORDING <br />TO THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN AS THE STREETS AND WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS <br />ARE ALREADY IN. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT QUESTIONED PARAGRAPH E IN THE DEDICATION AND <br />SAID HE FELT IT WAS NOT THE STANDARD DEDICATION, <br />MR. LLOYD STATED THAT.THE ROADS ARE NOT BEING DEDICATED; THEY <br />ARE PRIVATE STREETS AND THEY PROPOSE TO HAVE A GATEHOUSE AND A GUARD, <br />ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS SAID HE FELT THE INTENT WAS THERE THAT <br />WHEN THE COUNTY AGREES TO TAKE OVER THE STREETS OR ASKS FOR THEM, THEY <br />WILL BE GIVEN. HE NOTED THESE ARE PRIVATE STREETS AND THE COUNTY HAS <br />NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT THE DEDICATION DOES NOT SAY <br />THAT IF THE COUNTY ASKS FOR THE STREETS, THEY HAVE TO GIVE THEM. <br />MR. LLOYD FELT THIS IS COVERED IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. <br />COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT THE PLAT STATES THAT 20 ADDITIONAL <br />FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY IS BEING "REQUIRED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT," AND <br />SHE QUESTIONED THIS WORDING, <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THE BOARD "REQUESTS THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY, <br />BUT DID NOT BELIEVE THEY CAN LEGALLY "REQUIRE" IT. <br />THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HE FELT IT IS ACTUALLY REPUIRED <br />WHETHER BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, HIMSELF OR THE BOARD, <br />MR, LLOYD NOTED THAT IN ORDER TO DEDICATE THIS ADDITIONAL 20', <br />THEY HAD TO REVAMP THE PLAT TO DO AWAY WITH THE STREET PLANNED NEAR A -1-A. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF IT WOULD BE AGREEABLE TO MR. LLOYD <br />TO REMOVE SOME OF THE WORDING ABOUT THE 20' BEING REQUIRED, AND MR. LLOYD <br />DID NOT FEEL IT WOULD PRESENT ANY PARTICULAR PROBLEM, <br />DISCUSSION CONTINUED ON THE CORRECT WORDING. <br />MR. LLOYD NOTED THAT THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO GO IN TO BUILD <br />UTILITIES, BUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC WILL NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO INGRESS OR <br />EGRESS, <br />9 <br />OCT it <br />1976 <br />Btooz 2'7 PtA t 89. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.