My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/21/2013 (3)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2013
>
05/21/2013 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2018 1:56:51 PM
Creation date
3/23/2016 8:57:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
05/21/2013
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Book and Page
87
Supplemental fields
FilePath
H:\Indian River\Network Files\SL00000E\S0004N9.tif
SmeadsoftID
14214
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
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 facility those comments were validated. To better understand the automated storage facilities <br /> its best described as the building is a wrapper for the system not the building houses the system. <br /> One such situation described was that by raising a portion of the building height by 1/3 of the <br /> building foot print by 25' the storage capacity of that floor area is increased by 25%. This <br /> industry is cost conscience and if we need more height than what is the magic number? <br /> We need to clearly define what needs to be changes so that we can propose changes to these <br /> zoned areas so that they can accommodate these newer systems. <br /> 5. Highway 60 Commercial Nodes Available Acreage <br /> When driving along Highway 60 you see a lot of vacant acreage. The only problem is that most <br /> of this acreage is zoned for other uses other than Commercial or a combined use where <br /> Commercial is only allowed if multi-family is included in the project. <br /> If you take form 74`" Avenue to the west and 43rd Avenue to the east you have very little vacant <br /> acreage that is zoned commercial, <br /> I have had conversations with a company that assist national retail companies that have <br /> expressed the desire to have a presence here in IRC. However they are site challenged and <br /> cannot find a suitable place to locate. <br /> The issue appears to be that current land development regulations require that we are built out to <br /> 80 percent, currently we are at 78 percent+-. <br /> We need to see what LDR needs to be changed so that we can add more commercial space to <br /> have available to those companies currently looking to have a presence here in IRC. <br /> 6. Impact Fees <br /> Community Development department has drafted a RFQ for consultants to complete a detailed <br /> review of all Impact Fees. I mentioned at the meeting last week that there may be some additions <br /> that EDC might want to have the consultant work on. <br /> 1. would like to have specific areas of review that the consultant report will cover. <br /> A detailed review of all businesses types or the possible addition of new businesses categories so <br /> that we are only collecting for the actual demand that the business or facility is placing on our <br /> infrastructure. <br /> CVS distribution facility for example where I feel that the amount of traffic trips charges was <br /> vastly more than the actual amount used on a daily basis. These are unique facilities and a unique <br /> category and fee structure should be developed. <br /> Another area that I think we can be creative is a way to establish Impact Fee banking or the <br /> • ability to transfer vested capacity from an existing use to another property. <br /> 2 <br /> 64 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.