My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/2/1991
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1991
>
4/2/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:08 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:07:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/02/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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 County and do the limerock section on the 4' addition to 99th <br />Street and be reimbursed out of traffic impact fees for the cost <br />of the limerock and then the County can come in and asphalt that <br />road. He believed this was recommended by Mr. Davis. That is <br />his position because the problem is already there - Breezy <br />Village is there; New Horizons is there; and there are existing <br />industrial places (fertilizer and chemical suppliers) which are <br />non -Fischer, and there are a lot of recreational uses. <br />Chairman Bird noted that he, therefore, is agreeing to do <br />the signage and the widening of 99th Street, if he can get credit <br />for the sub -base, but what about the other 3 recommended improve- <br />ments? <br />Dr. Fischer felt those are the responsibility of the DOT <br />because he is only a minor user. <br />Commissioner Scurlock agreed that we have had many incidents <br />of this intersection being raised as a problem area, and Dr. <br />Fischer stressed that 99th Street is a joint problem; it is just <br />a short feeder road. <br />Discussion continued at length in regard to the complexities <br />involved, the possibility of an assessment district, the possi- <br />bility of bonding, cash flow, deficit situations, impact fees, <br />the fact that more development creates more impact fees, the fact <br />that CR 512 is one of our top priorities, and the effects of <br />concurrency. <br />Commissioner Scurlock agreed that this is a dilemma, and he <br />believed it is the responsibility of the County Commission to <br />find a solution. He did not think there is any question the <br />intersection should be improved, and asked if we can fund those <br />improvements and get an agreement with DOT to refund that cost as <br />their cash flow allows. <br />Director Davis felt we can pursue that but noted the DOT is <br />reluctant to sign an agreement unless that improvement is in <br />their current 5 year plan. <br />Commissioner Scurlock recapped that Dr. Fischer has agreed <br />to Items 2 and 5. As to the other items, Commissioner Scurlock <br />did not think Dr. Fischer should have to do 3 and 4, and although <br />Item 1 needs to be done, he did not feel that is all Dr. <br />Fischer's responsibility. <br />Chairman Bird concurred with Commissioner Scurlock's summa- <br />tion. He agreed that Item 1 definitely needs to be done and felt <br />that Dr. Fischer should participate to some degree. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt it is the County's responsibility <br />to step forth and do something about this, possibly even if DOT <br />doesn't. This is a very busy intersection, and he would like to, <br />accelerate this and get the turn lanes. <br />AF' <br />��� 31 BOOK 83 PAGE- 35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.