Laserfiche WebLink
F- <br />BOCK `62 FAGE 624 <br />Director Keating reported that the good news is that <br />with the adoption of the road impact.fee ordinance,.many of <br />the problems will be solved. The bad news is that many <br />roads that are not on the Thoroughfare Plan will require <br />paving, which is the problem we are trying to solve today. <br />He explained that there are 3 major components of road <br />paving: <br />1) Paving required, <br />2) Responsibility <br />3) Financing/timing <br />Director Keating pointed out that there are several <br />alternatives to each of the three components listed above. <br />What staff is recommending is to amend Section 23.13.3, Paved <br />Road Requirements (Reserved), of the Site Plan Review and <br />Approval Section of the Zoning Code to incorporate the <br />proposed policy, which is primarily that a developer has the <br />responsibility of getting his paving done; the paving has to <br />be done to his access point prior to C.O. if it is a large <br />development, he has to escrow the funds for any roads that <br />abut his site that are not being used for access; and he has <br />to escrow funds for any part of his access road beyond his <br />access point. For smaller projects that are not closed to a <br />paved road, the developer has to escrow his portion of the <br />money. How he actually funds it is the developer's <br />responsibility, be it by voluntary petition or paying for it <br />himself. <br />Commissioner Bird recalled that the reason we got hung <br />up on this issue before was the question of just how far a <br />development must be from a paved road. <br />Bill Messersmith, 572 Peterson Street, suggested tying <br />it to trip generation rather than how far it is from a paved <br />road. <br />The Commissioners considered that an excellent <br />suggestion. <br />M <br />38 <br />M <br />