Agenda - 05-19-2015 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

16 1 Craig Benedict said the current option is privately owned pedestrian pathways on private 2 property for which the County and the DOT are not responsible. He said these pathways are 3 mulch paths that allow for safe walking routes for pedestrians, especially children. He said it is 4 unlikely that DOT will approve sidewalks being installed without a specific designate being 5 named for maintenance. He said the financial implication of sidewalks isgreat. 6 Commissioner Jacobspointed out language in 6.6.4.a.8 that discusses “an internal 7 pedestrian circulation system, owned and maintained by the property owner”. He suggested, 8 following approval,a motion be made asking staff to look at the existing language and return 9 with recommendations to whetherprivately maintained pathways is a workable system. He said 10 such an option would not involve DOT. 11 Chair McKee agreed with this course of action. 12 Commissioner Price said there is another county looking into sidewalks as well. She 13 said it is a large issue that warrants a full discussion. 14 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the public would be able to use such a pedestrian 15 circulation system maintained by private owners or if thepathwayswould only be open to those 16 living within the development. 17 Perdita Holtz said it would apply to multi-family and commercial projects. She said that 18 commercial projects are open to the public. She said public use of pathways that are internal to 19 a multi family development would be at the discretion of theproperty owner. She said each 20 issue would be handled on a case by case basis as site plans come in. 21 22 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 23 24 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs,seconded by Commissioner Rich to 25 reinstate the language for both the Efland interstate and Efland Village regarding pedestrian 26 circulation systems and to direct staff to articulate why internal pedestrian circulationsystems 27 cannot be required. He said staff would be asked to return to the BOCC before the end of the 28 calendar year with the opportunity to discuss the analysis and anyrecommendations. 29 30 Chair McKee made a friendly amendment that directs staff not only to analyze why 31 internal pedestrian circulations systems cannot be required but also to present any other 32 alternatives to such a system. 33 CommissionerJacobs accepted the friendly amendment. 34 Commissioner Dorosin asked Commissioner Jacobs if the motionislimited to these 35 internal circulation systems or if there would be broader consideration of working with DOTor 36 the County itself. 37 Commissioner Jacobs said he wantedto focus on the particular issue in front of the 38 BOCC tonight. He said he does not think this particular language involvestheDOT and,if 39 returned to its original format,can address and solve the issue. He added he does see merit in 40 a larger conversation about sidewalks as a whole at another time. 41 42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 43 44 b.Public Hearing on the Financing of Various Capital Investment Plan Projects and 45 Equipment, and the Refinancing of Two 2006 Installment Financing 46 The Board conducteda public hearing on the issuance of approximately $16,270,000 to 47 finance capital investment projects and equipment for the year; carry out refinancing of 48 approximately $10,200,000 from two 2006 installment financing issuances; and considered 49 approvinga related resolution supporting the County’s application to the Local Government 50 Commission (LGC) for its approval of the financing arrangements.