My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/17/2008 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2008
>
09/17/2008 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/2/2018 2:51:37 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:21:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Impact Fee Workshop
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/17/2008
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
4021
Subject
Impact Fee Update
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
7318
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
Commissioner O'Bryan did not think a shopping center would generate traffic; it <br />would instead capture the traffic on the road, and he was not sure why we charge them 50% <br />more. <br />Vice Chairman Davis asked how many trips originate from a commercial <br />development, and believed he could do a study that would support that trips generate from <br />residential units, not from commercial developments. He felt it defied logic to be even talking <br />about raising fees currently. It was his opinion that there was a strong consensus on the Board <br />that our commercial, industrial, and office impact fees are those that are hampering the kind of <br />growth in this community that creates jobs, the tax base that is not protected with "Save Our <br />Homes, " and it felt like we were killing what we want the most. He wished the Consultants <br />could create a study that would justify and help us do what we want to do. <br />Mr. Mullen responded defending the concept of having industry in place before <br />residential, stating that people will not move to a place if there are no jobs, and businesses will <br />not move to a place with high unemployment. <br />Commissioner Flescher agreed that this is rhetorically based, and that the system at <br />best is opinionated or selective, and at this juncture he could not eliminate the economy and the <br />challenges with which we are now confronted. He believed we are in the wrong place at the <br />wrong time with the wrong explanation. He acknowledged all the work done on this study, but <br />felt things have changed since it was conducted over a year ago. He did not believe all retail and <br />commercial are created equal; did not think those two areas bear the same burden upon the <br />community; and did not think they can fairly assess what each establishment is going to do for <br />the rest of the community and the rooftops that exist at the time of application. <br />Attorney Collins referred to the Pasco County Fishkind Analysis that talked about <br />optimizing revenue for each land use, and said it was not clear to him what kind of revenue they <br />September 17, 2008 4 <br />Public Workshop <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.