Laserfiche WebLink
MAR 5 1991 <br />BOOK F'JEI� <br />Discussion continued, and Commissioner Scurlock felt that <br />since we would be establishing a precedent by approving this <br />Motion, he would like to see criteria set that is much more <br />stringent and specific than what we have now. He stressed that <br />we better make sure it is uniformly applied and see what the <br />long term pluses and minuses are. <br />Commissioner Wheeler stressed that the differences here are <br />that they were on a grader route and they wanted it paved, and <br />the petition paving effort failed two years ago when they didn't <br />get enough signatures. <br />Both Commissioner Scurlock and Commissioner Eggert stated <br />they would have a hard time voting for this Motion without seeing <br />something very specific set out in policy and when it applies and <br />when it doesn't and what the ramifications would be. <br />The Board discussed postponing this matter for a couple of <br />weeks, but Attorney Vitunac pointed out that if staff needs more <br />time than that, there is no emergency here as far as a time limit <br />is concerned. <br />Commissioner Scurlock noted the extensive road paving <br />improvements the DeBartolo mall would have had to make to comply <br />with the State's concurrency requirements, and Commissioner <br />Eggert felt she would be much happier if this would come back <br />with some policy setting recommendations. <br />Director Davis pointed out situations where developers are <br />paying the cost of paving an entire stretch of roadway where <br />other people fronting the road objected, such as the County - <br />maintained road in the Town of Orchid that will be used by the <br />Environmental Learning Center. He stressed that the payment of <br />these type of paving projects would deplete the resources for <br />voluntary petition paving programs. <br />COMMISSIONERS WHEELER AND BIRD WITHDREW THEIR MOTION. <br />34 <br />