My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/15/2005 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2005
>
03/15/2005 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2018 1:34:53 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 5:59:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/15/2005
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
3000
Book and Page
128, 462-534
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
230
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
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 /> <br />completed its presentation earlier. She stated that the GAC had recommended that a resolution be <br />adopted in order to establish the County’s policy on acquisition of rights-of-way and asked that the <br />Board give directions to staff to draft such a resolution. <br /> <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Davis, SECONDED by <br />Chairman Lowther, unanimously directed staff to draft a <br />resolution concerning acquisition of rights-of-way in <br />accordance with GAC’s recommendation. <br /> <br />Ms. Keys <br />Next, asked how the Board should proceed if they were in favor of the <br />amendments to the various chapters of the code. <br />County Attorney Collins advised that would have to be referred to Community <br />Development staff. Perhaps staff would meet with the GAC to clarify any differences, take it <br />through the committees, and then to the Board for public hearing and adoption. The process would <br />take two to three months at a minimum because of advertising requirements. <br />Chairman Lowther wanted it fast-tracked and County Administrator Baird advised <br />he would come back with a timetable. <br />Ms.Keys <br /> asked if they could have a pending ordinance on this while it is in the <br />discussion and process, and County Attorney Will Collins responded that a pending ordinance <br />would not be appropriate in this instance because these amendments were just presented today. <br />We would need a clear and explicit ordinance so everyone would have a clear understanding of <br />what was pending. He counseled that a pending ordinance doctrine is not favored in the law; you <br />implement law after there has been a public hearing and not before. <br />David Cox, <br />a member of the GAC, understood that Directors Keating and Boling <br /> <br />were looking for some explicit direction from the Board. Hethought it needed to be clear that the <br />recommendations would be moved forward through the process in a timely fashion <br />Commissioner Davis wanted to consider amendments to our LDRs as soon as <br />possible. Rather than waiting to the next meeting, he wanted to know about it right now. <br />March 15, 2005 6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.