My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/13/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
2/13/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:43 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:46:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/13/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
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
FEB P4 <br />1990 <br />BOOK79 <br />F1�E136 <br />a <br />compliance agreement. <br />He further explained that <br />each <br />region <br />adopted a plan consistent with the state plan, the main objective <br />of which is reducing urban sprawl, and now local government must <br />have a plan consistent with their region and the state. <br />Commissioner Scurlock continued to object to what the DCA is <br />doing, stating that they have even got to the point of telling us <br />that we are going to issue long term bonds for infrastructure, <br />and, on the advice of the Finance Committee, we got a 1¢ sales <br />tax passed just so we wouldn't have to issue bonds and incur <br />interest expense. <br />Chairman Eggert did not think DCA told us we had to do that. <br />She believed it has been rewritten in here, and there is a <br />difference in agreement as to what it means. <br />Director Keating continued to explain the state plan and the <br />local plan, emphasizing that consistency is one of the issues and <br />one basis by which DCA makes its determination of compliance and <br />non-compliance. <br />Commissioner Wheeler expressed his concern that we are <br />arbitrarily deciding about the use people's property can have <br />just based on the location of a certain line. <br />Director Keating did not think we did things arbitrarily and <br />believed he can supply reasons for what we did. <br />Commissioner Scurlock believed the people in our particular <br />community said they would like low rise, low density, and now we <br />get the Urban Sprawl concept, and the DCA is saying raise some <br />densities east of 1-95 because we want to concentrate it in <br />there. So what happens is that you get packed in there, and then <br />you move the line to the west, and the result of that is a higher <br />density countywide and more population in the long run. He <br />believed the DCA originally said that if you can provide the <br />infrastructure to meet the needs of the growth, that is what the <br />goal is. One of the problem he has with the urban sprawl idea is <br />that you don't give any credit for the node concept. He <br />26 <br />® s M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.