6/27/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r_ I JUR BOOK ��7 P,iiJt.1 74 Management Plan, and thus its 30' protected area buffer requirement, would be effective until such time that the Town may choose to pass its own Jungle Trail ordinance. In practical terms, the Town could require setbacks from the Trail without buffer requirements along the Trail or could allow walls or other "barriers" close to the Trail for security purposes. In the opinion of the County Attorney, there is a very good chance that the Town could "opt -out" of the County's Trail Plan and require significantly less in regards to preservation of Trail corridor vegetation than is required by the County. It is quite likely that the Town would prevail in the event of a lawsuit. Thus, the County's protected area requirements, in all likelihood, could only be enforced by the County in "protected areas" established by the applicant and granted to the County. This proposal would establish conservation areas and buffer areas adjacent to the roadway to be dedicated or granted to the County and the Town. Within such established areas, native vegetation would be preserved. If the proposal is approved, the specific legal language of all established conservation and buffer areas should meet the requirement of the protected areas section of the Management Plan. To further strengthen the proposed buffering along existing Trail segments and the proposed realigned segment, the proposed "30' habitable building setback should be clarified to allow only certain uses and structures. Such restrictions would effectively prohib- it certain potential nuisances to the Trail's character such as parking areas and maintenance buildings. In staff's opinion, the proposed 30' setback should be established as a buffer, where only certain improvements can be provided or constructed as follows: 1. vegetative plantings, - 2. fences or walls located at least 10' from the Inner (Trail -ward) boundary of the 30' buffer, 3. golf cart and/or pedestrian paths. f. will the realignment adversely affect the historic character of Jungle Trail as a whole? This issue deserves its own subsection. Historical Impact: The applicant is of the opinion that approving the proposal would not adversely affect the historical character of the Trail. The applicant states that the proposal: "...will not affect the historical integrity of the roadway. It should be recognized that any alteration to the Trail, for whatever reason, would represent a deviation from it's established location, which may result in a 'modification to the actual historical correctness of the road's alignment. However, the limited area of re -alignment and the proposed treatment of the re -aligned section will not affect the traditional character of Jungle Trail. In fact, the modi- fication will re-create a route that more closely resembles a "jungle trail", than does the present day roadway." The Historical Society has reviewed the proposal and is of the opinion that although "... it may be quite possible that there are steps which can be taken to preserve the historical integrity of the Trail while accomplishing the realignment" the applicant has failed to adequately research and propose such steps. Unless the applicant hires a qualified consultant and more specifically addresses the integrity issue, the proposal in its present form should be denied. 36