08/10/2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9.B.3. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM – DIAN GEORGE – ROAD WIDENING PROJECTS th Dian George , 1515 27 Avenue, advised that she has attended all Board meetings th since and including the May 17 meeting and has also viewed the video tape again. She found one consistency in all the meetings: that the general public does not want roads to be widened and the developers do want roads widened. She also stated that staff is obtuse on the subject and has presented no solutions. She had read and found information in the Comprehensive Plan and §163 FS. She suggested the Board stop being confused by the “shell game” and read these regulations for themselves and demand the County’s employees abide by them. 9.B.4. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM - ADRIENE CUFFE – DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS POWERPOINT TH PRESENTATION JULY 20 OR RELATED SUBJECT ROAD WIDENING rd Adriene Cuffe , 695 43 Avenue, referred to the PowerPoint presentation she read th on July 20regarding Mr. Oujevolk’s computer software simulation for traffic studies She did not understand why the County has not used his suggestion. (Presentation is on file with the backup of July 20, 2004 meeting.) 9.B.5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM - JOHN T. WILLIAMS – VISIONING PROCESS John Williams read from prepared comments (A copy is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board.) which contained nine (9) suggestions for the Board’s consideration concerning the urban service area, height limitations, road widening, lowering of densities, narrowing the window on permitting concurrency, reduction of the road improvement set-asides from the optional sales tax, protection of the Indian River Lagoon frontage through transfer of development rights, purchase of development rights of agricultural land within the urban service area only, as well as other subjects. August 10, 2004 25