My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/19/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
1/19/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:17:58 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:02:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/19/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
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
Where they have actual costs for R/W acquisition and road <br />construction for similar projects, they can easily verify that <br />impact fees in Districts 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and possibly 9, should <br />increase two or maybe even threefold. Staff will put these <br />figures in a formal memo and bring that back to the Board as a <br />proposed amendment to the Traffic Fee Ordinance. <br />Attorney Vitunac noted that this is a major change. We now <br />are paying for R/W as the fifth amendment requires and are in <br />compliance with the Supreme Court cases; so, we no longer have to <br />send our people out on the unenviable job of trying to get R/W <br />donated. The down side is that the impact fees have to go up. <br />Commissioner Eggert pointed out that there is an error in <br />the proposed ordinance in the last part of Section 1.a. General <br />Requirements - "in which case, the entire road right-of-way <br />deficiency will be made up by dedication of land from the <br />opposite side of the existing road right-of-way." The word <br />"opposite" should be corrected to read "project site." <br />Planner Boling advised that there are two other changes. <br />They would like to go ahead and renumber some of the sections to <br />make it easier for the Municipal Code service, and on Page 5 of <br />the ordinance, Section 3, where we are amending the section <br />dealing with single family home development, they would like to <br />have an effective date of February 29, 1988, to allow time to <br />make sure all the contractors involved in single family <br />development understand the new regulations. <br />The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. <br />Nancy Offutt, representing the Board of Realtors, commented <br />that the workshops went smoothly, and on the basis of equity, it <br />is refreshing to see that the county now recognizes that <br />applicants really do need to be compensated for their use of <br />their property. Mrs. Offutt then noted that when the county <br />demands R/W dedication on projects that are not on the Thorough- <br />fare Plan, that means those developers can't get density transfer <br />and can't get credit on impact fees, and she wondered if perhaps <br />JAN 19 1988 <br />67 <br />BOOK 70 P GE 627 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.