Laserfiche WebLink
<br />13.A.1. CHAIRMAN CAROLINE D. GINN – COMMITTED <br />ROADWAYS – TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE <br />COMP PLAN <br />Chairman Ginn spoke of what she sees as a serious matter appears improvements <br />budgeted in the Transportation Element of the Comp Plan for construction within 5 years are <br />considered committed improvements: “For travel demand forecasting and transportation planning <br />rd <br />purposes, committed improvements are considered in place and existing.” Heading the list is 43 <br />Avenue. <br />Director Keating replied that it is not considered “in place and existing” for <br />concurrency purposes. He read Policy 1.4, page 115 of the Transportation Element, explaining <br />they do not consider a project in place for capacity purposes unless it is going to be under <br />construction no more than 2 years. After the CO of the project it is a development order of <br />condition. <br />Commissioner Macht thought it seemed odd that they approved Echo Lake yet the <br />permits are issued on a concurrency basis instead of a one-by-one basis. <br /> Attorney Collins explained this was the way the requirements were structured <br />several years ago. Due to a lot of debate whether that was appropriate or not, a decision was made <br />not to frontload all impact fees at one time. <br />JUNE 22, 2004 <br />31 <br /> <br />