My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/24/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
7/24/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:45 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 9:11:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/24/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
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
the people of the County. He would like to impress the Press <br />with the need to make people aware of this. <br />Director Davis informed the Board that Attorney Bruce <br />Barkett is here to talk about U.S.I. R/W acquisition in concert <br />with new development. Director Davis noted that in the last <br />couple years we have been sort of in a dilemma as to whether the <br />County should purchase additional R/W on U.S.[ as new development <br />comes in, not only in the unincorporated area but also in the <br />City of Vero Beach, Sebastian, etc. Some of this R/W <br />acquisition, now that we are paying for it, is running into the <br />tens and twenty thousand dollar range, and do we want our impact <br />fee revenue to be spent primarily for R/W acquisition along a <br />state roadway or do we want that money freed up to do capacity <br />projects on the county system. If we just secure R/W with the <br />impact fee money, we are going to dilute our ability to do some <br />road work in the county. <br />Commissioner Scurlock noted that the option is to increase <br />the impact fee to accommodate both. <br />Director Davis advised there has not been a funding source <br />quickly available from either the state or federal government for <br />these R/W acquisitions on roads such as U.S.I. or SR 60, and his <br />question is do we want to step in and use our impact fees or <br />spend our Gas Tax revenue for these acquisitions. He pointed out <br />that the City gets part of that revenue also, and do we want to <br />come into an incorporated area and use our funds to buy R/W. <br />Commissioner Bird asked if the DOT buys R/W along the U.S.I. <br />corridor in other counties, and Mr. Yesbeck stated that has not <br />been their practice, but they are starting to get into that now. <br />Attorney Bruce Barkett came before the Board and commented <br />that, as <br />he sees <br />it, <br />"buying" <br />is a <br />very loose <br />term. The <br />appraisal <br />shows <br />that <br />the <br />201" <br />they <br />are prepared <br />to dedicate is <br />worth $36,854, and staff agrees that is a fair value. The impact <br />fee the County has asked for is $18,000,.and all his client.is <br />looking for is to be relieved of the impact fee. <br />J U L 24 1990 <br />27 MOF 0 r.� < �j�p�1, <br />��'.yF i l <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.