My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/10/1982
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1982
>
8/10/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:39 AM
Creation date
6/4/2015 10:34:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/10/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
AUG 101902 WX 50, PAC F. <br />B. Erosion Control <br />Mr. Davis stated that erosion control on both the state <br />and local level is an important consideration, and we do try <br />to address erosion control in this element. <br />C. Sanitary Sewer, Potable Water and Solid Waste Element <br />Chairman Scurlock felt our sewer and water priorities <br />are a bit mixed up in that a higher priority should be given <br />the Route 60 area as opposed to the North County. <br />Planning Manager Challacombe stated that staff <br />concurred with this view for a number of reasons. Situa- <br />tions have changed. We now have a number of large rezonings <br />in the South County area, as well as a number of large site <br />plans, and it appears to be inevitable that this area will <br />be developed prior to North County. In addition, the South <br />County system could tie in on an expansion basis to Route 60 <br />much easier than creating a new system in the North County. <br />Chairman Scurlock stated that his personal feeling is <br />that where septic tanks are suitable and conditions are <br />acceptable, we should not encourage mass systems; rather we <br />should make use of what makes sense. <br />Mr. Challacombe agreed that we.do not want to strap the <br />County for excessive sewer service and their wording speci- <br />fies that extension of sewer service shall be economically <br />feasible. <br />Commissioner Fletcher emphasized that it should be not <br />only economically feasible but also ecologically. <br />Chairman Scurlock asked if anyone had any real problem <br />about priorities. No one did, and it was agreed that the <br />North County would be made a second priority after Route 60. <br />Planning Manager Challacombe next discussed Solid Waste <br />on Page 65, Policyl-A, which deals with funding of County <br />transfer stations, and noted that this does not pose a <br />problem except in relation to the City. of Vero Beach where <br />the question of dual taxation arises. <br />30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.