My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/11/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
12/11/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:47 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:02:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/11/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
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
DUE C 111990 <br />mQK S " FA. 7E 15 d <br />the July amendments would not be considered for final action until <br />1991. Since the staff had anticipated execution of a county/state <br />compliance agreement prior to the scheduled October, 1990 <br />administrative hearing and because such a compliance agreement <br />would require a comprehensive plan amendment to adopt the remedial <br />actions, such action would also result in final action on a plan <br />amendment in 1991. If both the July amendments and the compliance <br />agreement amendment proceeded separately, the result would be that <br />the plan would have been amended twice in 1991. That would have <br />precluded consideration of amendment requests which may be <br />submitted in January. <br />For those reasons, -the July plan amendment requests have been <br />combined with the intervenors' amendment requests and the remedial <br />actions amendment request. All of these proposed amendments are <br />scheduled for consideration by the Board of County Commissioners on <br />December 11, 1990. The specific requests are as follows: <br />County's Proposed Amendment <br />•Remedial actions comprehensive plan amendment request <br />Intervenors' Proposed Amendments <br />*Diamond Wedge <br />•Coraci -- <br />*Mixed Use Designation <br />July Amendment Requests <br />*Graham Stikelether <br />*Dean Vegosen <br />•Jerome Quinn <br />*Betty McRae <br />ANALYSIS <br />It is staff's position that the remedial actions amendment and the <br />intervenors' proposed agreements should be considered differently <br />from the July amendment requests. Since the remedial actions <br />amendment and the intervenors' amendments are extensions of the <br />comprehensive plan preparation process, these requests need not be <br />reviewed for concurrency. As with plan adoption, these proposed <br />amendments must meet internal consistency and -financial feasibility <br />tests; however, concurrency criteria need not be considered. For <br />the July amendments, the established amendment criteria apply, and <br />concurrency must be evaluated. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends that th <br />of the plan amendment <br />resolution, transmitting <br />review. <br />e Board of County Commissioners review all <br />requests, and then approve the attached <br />the proposed amendments to DCA for their <br />38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.