3/28/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAR 2 8 989 Croo 0,L 468 Mr. Boling explained that this additional provision in the Development Order will allow the developer to acquiesce to the rules in effect at the time the D.O. is issued, particularly the DER rules that are in effect. The County Attorney's Office reviewed this request yesterday afternoon, and staff has no objection to adding that paragraph. Vice Chairman Eggert felt that when we discussed "substantial construction" at the February 28th meeting, the intent was that it should be something more than pilings and a slab, and she didn't feel this was saying that. Mr. Boling explained that we are talking about the founda- tional elements in place as opposed to a house or something like that. It would be the entire slab and all the structural supports that are needed, not just footers, stem walls, or form boards. As far as a dollar figure is concerned, the developer has said that it could run $1 -million in construction costs because it has to cover the entire mall area itself, which is at least 320,000 square feet. Vice Chairman Eggert realized that is a lot of development, but that is just what she has seen people walk away from. Commissioner Scurlock felt that the concern should not be how much it costs, but rather what it looks like while it's lying there for two years. Commissioner Bowman had been of the understanding that we were not going to allow any out -parcel development before the mall is constructed, but Vice Chairman Eggert explained that this only includes the existing commercial along U.S. #1. Commissioner Bowman noted that it doesn't specify that in Item #1 on the second page of staff's recommendation, but Item #2 does say commercial along U.S. #1. She wanted to make sure that we don't end up with a McDonald's or something before we get the mall. 28