My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/28/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
2/28/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:41:47 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:42:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/28/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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
Pr" <br />FEB 2 8 1989 <br />Boob 6 F'GE 4 <br />Commissioner Eggert felt that when the T.C.R.P.C. reviewed <br />this development, the whole thrust was towards getting something <br />going on the mall first, not the out parcels. <br />Commissioner Scurlock hoped that we have defined this well <br />enough so that we don't run into a situation where we have to <br />decide whether one piling or one slab is sufficient progress. He <br />wanted to see it clearly defined so that we keep things on track <br />and substantial progress is made. <br />Mr. Boling noted that the D.O. defines "substantia,I <br />progress" as placing of a permanent structure, other than a <br />mobile home, on the subject commercial out parcels or residential <br />developments such as the pouring of slabs or footings or any work <br />beyond the stage of excavation, clearing, or earthwork. <br />Commissioner Scurlock had a problem with that, because he <br />felt that what the Board considers substantial progress is the <br />installation of plumbing, electricity, roofing, etc. There have <br />been cases where the builder went in periodically and laid a <br />slab or poured a footer. With such minimal effort from the <br />builder, the Board of County Commissioners gets stuck with <br />residents coming in and screaming at us because the project isn't <br />completed. <br />Director Keating suggested that in this case it could be <br />tied to specific milestones such as framing, plumbing, <br />electricity, etc., by client permit on a certain date. <br />Commissioner Scurlock still maintained that "substantial <br />progress" needs to be better defined, and Commissioner Eggert <br />wanted to see "structure" defined as "completed building", <br />because that is what we are talking about. <br />Commissioner Scurlock suggested that for the out parcels we <br />give a specific time between commencing construction and getting <br />a Certificate of Occupancy. He assumed that since the mall will <br />take more time, they probably would be getting partial C.O.s in <br />some cases. <br />26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.