My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/4/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
11/4/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:20 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 1:13:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/04/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
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 principal` disadvantages of the County taking no action <br />regarding native vegetation protection are increased water <br />consumption and the loss of wildlife habitat. <br />Advantages of the "take no action" alternative are: <br />1) No additional County administrative costs are necessary <br />for review of all barrier island building plans and <br />enforcement of the ordinance; <br />2) Property owners (especially single-family property owners) <br />will continue to be allowed to build on their property <br />consistent with current regulations. <br />r <br />Alternative #2: Protection of All Barrier Island Native <br />Vegetation <br />This alternative is the most restrictive scenerio relative to <br />the protection of native vegetation. An ordinance which <br />implements this alternative would require all property owners, <br />including those with single family residential lots, to <br />preserve all native vegetation not within the net buildable <br />area of a given site. The advantages of this alternative are <br />directly in opposition to Alternative #1. Implementation of <br />this alternative has three major disadvantages when viewed from <br />a different perspective as shown on the the following table: <br />ALTERNATIVE #2 <br />ADVANTAGES DISADVANTArRs <br />1) Preservation of a large % <br />of native_ vegetation on <br />Island <br />2) Preservation of native <br />vegetation <br />3) Water Use Conservation <br />4) Soil stabilization/ero- <br />siolt control <br />5) Habitat protection <br />1) Additional County admini- <br />stration costs and time <br />for review <br />2) Limits property owners <br />use of land (lawns would <br />essentially be prohibited <br />on the barrier island) <br />3) Vegetation may harbor <br />undesirable fauna <br />ie. rats, snakes, etc. <br />Alternative #3: Implementation of Comprehensive Plan Policy <br />Preservation of 25% Native Plant Communities <br />The Conservation and Coastal Zone Element of the Comprehensive <br />Plan .contains a policy whereby "the County shall require that <br />all new development preserve a minimum of 25%, where possible, <br />of the native plant communities occurring on site as green <br />space". Creation of a native vegetation protection ordinance <br />will implement this policy; however, the "25%" alternative must <br />beviewed as a compromise scenerio with inherent disadvantages. <br />Most. significant of these is that in attempting to partially <br />satisfy the opposing concerns of resource protection and <br />property rights, an ordinance which specifies a percentage <br />35 BOOK 6 F}ac. X17 <br />- ®V 4 1986 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.