Laserfiche WebLink
there is a recession, then those funds may be at risk. All of those costs will go through negotiation, <br />but he said a method similar to what utilities use may be something to explore. <br />Commissioner Davis liked this idea a lot. <br />Administrator Baird said staff felt the developer should be on the line if the economy <br />slows down. <br />Commissioner Wheeler felt to be fair the developer should build the road with no <br />time limit to recoup his cost, and the County should not interfere. <br />Chairman Neuberger felt there has to be an end-point at some time. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding why the County always used the 5-year end-point, <br />which has nothing to do with the proportionate share agreement. <br /> <br />George Gross <br />, Planning & Zoning member, wanted to know the rationale behind <br />changing the definition of concurrency because of Senate Bill 360, and if staff used that definition <br />to approve or reject projects. He learned this ordinance changes the current procedure from <br />3-years from Certificate of Occupancy to 3 years from obtaining a building permit. <br /> <br />6. PUBLIC COMMENTS <br /> <br />Mark Brackett <br />Developer liked Attorney Collin’s idea. He wanted to see <br />additional language in the ordinance discussing a private sector percentage threshold that would <br />mean automatic placement in the 5-year plan. He thought the formula used was fair, and he <br />wanted to see consistency regarding public hearings. <br /> <br />(Clerk’s note: The Chairman called for a recess at 10:29 a.m., and he reconvened <br />the meeting at 10:34 a.m., with all members present.) <br /> <br />March 3, 2006 <br />4 <br />Public Workshop <br />Proportionate Share Ordinance <br /> <br />