My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/21/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
8/21/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:46 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 9:40:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/21/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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
AUG 211990 60 _1 uUF. <br />R�raK: <br />Attorney Vitunac confirmed that is how it would work. He <br />noted that he and Terry O'Brien had written the Vero Beach <br />ordinance when they were with the City and it has worked fine as <br />far as he knew. <br />Bill Koolage, 815 26th Avenue, emphasized that in order for <br />the people to pay attention to it, the ordinance will have to set <br />enough of a penalty and will have to be enforced. <br />Attorney Vitunac noted that he and Terry O'Brien had written <br />that ordinance when they were with the City and it has worked <br />fine as far as he knew. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized <br />the County Attorney to draft an ordinance based on the <br />City of Vero Beach ordinance relating to unwanted <br />things being tossed -in yards and driveways. <br />UPDATE ON TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL <br />Chairman Eggert reported on the 14-5 vote taken last Friday <br />on the amended upland vegetation preservation requirement under <br />the new Comp Plan. The amendment just said that any county or <br />municipality that had a requirement that was greater than the <br />original requirement could keep it and that it was all right to <br />have that stronger requirement. That was not the exact wording, <br />but that was the gist of it; so, anybody who wanted to have 25% <br />or 50% wouldn't be inconsistent with the rule. <br />Commissioner Bird asked if it will come to a vote again, and <br />Chairman Eggert explained that the issue will be discussed again <br />as the public hearings go along, but it certainly will have to go <br />to a final vote. A brief discussion followed regarding <br />Commissioner Bowman's strong feelings for requiring 25% instead <br />of the 15-10% requirement preferred by the rest of the <br />Commissioners. <br />58 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.