My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/4/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
6/4/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:02 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 12:30:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/04/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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
M <br />M <br />those surveys we have massive documentation which shows that in <br />some cases our trip rates are different than other counties. <br />Chairman Scurlock believed he can justify being at least as <br />stringent as the Regional Planning Council, but he could not see - <br />being less stringent. <br />t <br />Commissioner Lyons believed we must agree on a standard of <br />trip generation and have some uniformity throughout the region. <br />He noted that we are going to interphase with a project in St. <br />Lucie on 27th Avenue. <br />Commissioner Bird asked if we need to adopt these standards <br />as part of this ordinance. <br />Public Works Director Davis stated that we do not, but <br />Commissioner Lyons felt we must adopt some standards some place. <br />Planner Boling explained the formula used to escrow for <br />impact and stated that the break point is if the project <br />generates over 100 daily trips. <br />Commissioner Bird inquired if they can recoup from other <br />benefiting property owners, and Director Davis stated they have <br />not gotten into the logistics of reimbursing for that. <br />Director Keating clarified that basically this ordinance <br />doesn't say how it will be done; it just says if the project is <br />large enough that it will create ap impact, a paved road should <br />be in place prior to the C.O. being issued. The funding is <br />determined on a case to case basis. <br />Discussion continued re standards, and the Oslo area, for <br />instance; those who benefit; assessment -on corner lots by square <br />footage rather than frontage; etc. <br />Director Davis felt not only do we have an advantage with <br />the escrow situation, but the person who has put up the escrow <br />has an incentive to pursue a petition because he has already paid <br />his money. <br />The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. <br />There were none. <br />50 <br />BOOK 64 pmi c 644 <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.