My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/22/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
3/22/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:40:49 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:10:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/22/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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
the entire bonding procedures, and instead of one bond that.. is <br />kind of nebulous in our present ordinance, staff recommended and <br />the P & Z Commission approved 3 types of compliance bonds, which <br />give the applicant the impetus to comply with the regulations, <br />rather than a financial incentive not to. The restoration bond <br />insures that the site is going to be put back. The road bond <br />insures that if any road damage occurs within a quarter mile <br />radius, the damage will be corrected or the bond will be <br />forfeited. The compliance bond ensures that the applicant will <br />comply with the regulations during the mining process. <br />Commissioner Bowman noted that the ordinance does not <br />mention how long the survey stakes should be maintained, and she <br />felt the stakes should be maintained for the duration of the <br />permit because they often get lost. The Commissioners indicated <br />their agreement to the change on Page 7 -of the ordinance, <br />sub -section (d)(3). <br />Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing, and asked .if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Jim Gallagher, executive director for Sebastian General <br />Partnership, felt the proposed ordinance is flawed in the respect <br />that it lacks a definitive identification of property and surveys <br />or legal descriptions of the property that is going to be <br />affected. He referred specifically to Part I of the Ordinance, <br />Section 6, sub -section (c)(4) on page 6: "If the project site is <br />located (in whole or part) on the Atlantic Coastal Sand Ridge, no <br />excavation governed by a mining permit shall result in an average <br />elevation of less than twenty-five (25) feet mean sea level (MSL) <br />for that portion of the project site located on the Sand Ridge." <br />Mr. Gallagher felt there is a question of what constitutes <br />"average elevation", as he did not see it defined in the <br />ordinance as to how that will be determined. <br />Commissioner Bird understood that staff has a map <br />delineating what we consider to be the areas that qualify as the <br />32 <br />ViAR 2 2 1988 <br />BOOK <br />71 F,CE 331 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.