My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/27/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
2/27/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:43 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:50:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/27/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
84
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 271990 r, <br />BOOK I PAGE <br />looked at under a microscope by a number of agencies, and today <br />just means you are forwarding this application to have another <br />agency look at it. Certainly no decision can be made until <br />everything is settled. <br />Mr. Greco pointed out that one thing that wasn't mentioned <br />was that the traffic concerns now run about 6.5 million dollars <br />off-site. He felt that the County staff is as thorough as any he <br />has seen in the state and again assured the Board that all of the <br />questions people had last time and that the Board has today will <br />be answered specifically and everything will be resolved before <br />any final decision is made. They want very much to get this <br />project under way; they have been meeting with the TCRPC about <br />traffic concerns, and they should be getting some answers in <br />another 2 weeks. Mr. Greco stressed that they are 100% <br />cooperative at this point, but when they get all the answers, <br />they will weigh the economics again. They still have a few <br />months to go before they can get even more specific. <br />Michael Kiefer, resident of 1943 Charlotte Avenue, informed <br />the Board that he moved where he lives, which is about 100 yards <br />from the proposed mall site, just because it was zoned residen- <br />tial and AG. He complimented staff for helping him with his <br />concerns but stated that his quality of life is under attack <br />right now. He asked that the Board defer judgment on passing <br />this on to the state until they can address more of the impacts <br />and have a better understanding of what is taking place. One of <br />his questions is how viable will the wetlands be when they are <br />surrounded by pavement. He also raised the question of the <br />inconsistency of this proposal with the present Comp Plan, spe- <br />cifically Policy 1.23 about 70% build -out of nodes, especially <br />when you consider the empty spaces in the malls we have now. <br />Also, have we really put the reverter clause to test? Mr. Kiefer <br />believed the traffic on SR 60 will be about double that in front <br />of the Vero Mall, and he is very concerned not only for his <br />family, but all the residents of the area. <br />60 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.