My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/18/1995
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1995
>
5/18/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:11 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 2:33:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/18/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
BOOK 95 PA,UE 117 <br />Incentives for Economia Development & Affordable Housing <br />Director Pinto believed that payment of impact fees at the <br />time you reserve capacity works very well, and would not recommend <br />changing it to payment at the time the building permit is issued. <br />Commissioner Eggert wanted to find out what triggers other <br />counties in Florida in having the impact fees paid at the time the <br />building permit is issued. <br />Director Pinto emphasized that it is a matter of what risk the <br />County is willing to take with regard to committing capacity to <br />someone without them paying for it. The base facility charge pays <br />for the operation of the plant which provides the capacity. He <br />stressed that there is not much risk in our county in not being <br />able to provide capacity. <br />Commissioner Eggert understood then that there is room to do <br />something about when impact fees are payable. <br />Director Pinto emphasized that the DEP tells us that we have <br />to be able to provide a certain amount of capacity. <br />Discussion ensued about the possibility of waiving the <br />franchise fee, and Director Pinto explained that the franchise <br />fees, which amount to 6% of customer billing, go into the M.S.T.U. <br />general fund which results in lower taxes somewhere else.* If the <br />franchise fee was waived, the County would have to find another <br />source for that money. <br />Commissioner Eggert felt that we should consider the following <br />items in looking at the Comp Plan policies regarding utility <br />incentives: <br />... infilling the areas and providing certain subdivisions. <br />... urban service road. <br />... lowering design capacities in Comp Plan to match State <br />design capacity requirements. <br />... Collection of impact fees at building permit time. <br />... Further coordination between Utilities and Planning <br />Departments with regard to urban service areas and <br />continuing to infill. <br />Commissioner Eggert opened the meeting up to public comments <br />and questions. <br />Ed Nelson, resident of Countryside Park North, referred to <br />Page 17 in Ordinance 91-9, Section 201.09: <br />E. Refund of impact fees. Any customer whose monthly water <br />use or sewage flow remains below the amount corresponding to the <br />number of ERUs assigned to such customer for a period of 24 months <br />8 <br />MAY 189 1995 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.