My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/26/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
7/26/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:00:11 PM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:23:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/26/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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 />to cover future construction of an 8' bikepath would go in an <br />interest bearing escrow account. <br />Attorney Vitunac confirmed that they would. <br />Commissioner Bowman asked if it would be possible to include <br />a provision that there be no structures erected within that area, <br />and Attorney Vitunac advised that it would not be possible. <br />Chairman Scurlock noted that there is an equity situation <br />involved here. Now we are talking about extracting these <br />dollars from this particular developer while in the past no one <br />paid impact fees with the result that you have little strips of <br />bike paths that don't connect anywhere. We need to have a major <br />bikepath plan adopted at some point, but again you have some <br />people paying because of timing and other people not, and <br />actually there is not enough money to do any of it. The Chairman <br />noted that we include drainage in road projects so he could not <br />see why we cannot include the cost of sufficient bike paths on a <br />major road network in our impact fees because he believed it is <br />directly related to moving people. <br />Public Works Director Davis advised that we haven't done a <br />major project without accommodating the bikepath. The Florida <br />DOT green book requires you to consider the pedestrian. <br />Chairman Scurlock asked if bike paths on SR 60 are included <br />in our 20 year program and in the cost of the impact fee, and <br />Director Davis noted that SR60 improvements are not in the 20 <br />year plan nor is most of A -1-A. <br />Chairman Scurlock felt that logically a bikepath should come <br />into town on SR60 and then connect with the 17th Street bridge <br />.over to A -1-A, and we then would have a bikepath that could go <br />literally from boundary to boundary of the county. This would <br />provide the ability to come into the core system and bike a <br />tremendous distance in a safe environment. <br />Planning Director Keating advised that is consistent with <br />what the proposed sidewalk/bikeway path system does; it tries to <br />recognize planned improvements by the county so it incorporates <br />18 <br />JUL 2 6 1988 Rona 7� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.