My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/10/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
10/10/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:23:40 AM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:06:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/10/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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
CT 1C 1969 <br />BOOK � � %��jj CC//�� �vOOK 8 Fr i�C_ 1 3 <br />before we did the Impact Fee Program where we spent about 1/4 <br />million on R/W acquisition. <br />Commissioner Bowman asked how Fellsmere managed to wiggle <br />through the fence as she felt that was a bad precedent. <br />Attorney Collins advised that at the time Fellsmere opted <br />out, we were relying on the Florida Constitution that says <br />municipalities can opt out of countywide ordinances, but since <br />that time a case law came down that said they could only opt out <br />if it serves some valid public purpose. <br />Discussion continued at length about the general misunder- <br />standing of what impact fees can be used for, and Director Davis <br />believed that they now understand they cannot be used to do any <br />maintenance activity. He believed they now are interested in <br />some internal city collector streets that do not traverse the <br />county unincorporated area, and they are looking at expansion to <br />their own city network. <br />Commissioner Scurlock noted that those could be added to the <br />CIP through the formal process of going through the Transporta- <br />tion Planning Committee on which they have a representative, and <br />it would accomplish -exactly what they don't want to accomplish - <br />the impact fee would have to go up. <br />Administrator Chandler informed the Board that we have <br />already indicated to them that we have no adversity to looking at <br />these additions because it is within our scope to look at those <br />type of things. <br />Commissioner Scurlock believed we have a$6 million shortfall <br />just to do CR 512. <br />Director Davis advised that is for the ultimate project; the <br />immediate phase is about$5 million, and Commissioner Scurlock <br />noted that we still have possibly a$3 million shortfall in the <br />existing impact fee escrowed monies to support that. <br />Director Davis explained that now our attack is to expend <br />impact fees in segments and do incremental phases of improve- <br />ments. He noted that back when we were communicating with Mayor <br />33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.