My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/31/2005
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2005
>
01/31/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/28/2022 12:00:45 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 5:59:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Joint Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/31/2005
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
3000
Book and Page
128, 273-287
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
238
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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 />A consultant study to include a detailed analysis, forecast modeling, a fiscal <br />impact analysis and other data. <br /> <br />The County will soon be enacting eight new impact fees: <br /> <br />1.increased traffic impact fees; <br /> <br />2.major changes to the land development regulations; <br /> <br />3.expanding buffer requirements; <br /> <br />4.expanding existing corridor requirements; <br /> <br />5.changing concurrency; <br /> <br />6.requiring concurrency tests; <br /> <br />7.payment of concurrency impact fees earlier in the process; and <br /> <br />8.changing bond requirements for structural improvements. <br /> <br />He noted that IRC has made it perfectly clear that the urban service area boundary <br />is not changing. The Comp Plan does allow for new towns outside of the urban service area since <br />it was adopted in 1990. The “new town” initiative provides for l unit per 5 or 1 unit per 10 acres. <br />He explained that the County encourages developers to come in with Planned Developments <br />where the Board has more control and discretion. The “South County Initiative” project is being <br />repeated in Sebastian. This is allowing us to work with developers to create communities in <br />neighborhoods rather than distinct stand-alone non-connected development projects. He then <br />responded to questions. <br /> <br />SLC Commissioner Coward felt it was important to discuss positive economic <br />development and Chairman Lowther agreed. Chairman Hutchinson asked this to be on the agenda <br />for discussion at their next joint meeting. <br /> <br />CLERK’S NOTE: <br />( The Chairman called for a short recess at 10:12 a.m. The meeting <br />reconvened at 10:29 a.m.) <br />January 31, 2005 <br />6 <br />Growth & Development Issues Workshop <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.