Laserfiche WebLink
Fr - <br />Fib <br />I e MUrg� <br />BOOK i <br />f',�GE I <br />accomplish <br />this purpose other than extracting these lands <br />from <br />property owners. <br />Director Keating believed it was indicated today by some of <br />the development interests that on non -AG lands, it isn't that <br />much of an impact to require the buffer areas, setback areas, <br />etc., be kept in native vegetation. <br />Commissioner Scurlock believed that all the up scale devel- <br />opments agree it is not a hardship to provide that 200. <br />Environmental Planner DeBlois pointed out that another <br />concern is that our present Tree Protection Ordinance does not <br />protect the understory, and this could contribute to buffer and <br />afford protection of that understory. <br />Commissioner Scurlock understood Commissioner Bird's posi- <br />tion and he also understood property rights and had a concern <br />about them, but he felt rather than have a bond referendum, which <br />may or may not pass, and taking 2 years to develop maps and an <br />inventory, that we would be better off fooling with the percent- <br />ages and reducing those to percentages we feel comfortable could <br />contribute benefits specifically to the land. He felt these <br />areas would provide an asset to that particular property. <br />Commissioner Bird still would rather eliminate Policy 6.12 <br />and if the state disagrees, then we will react to it at that time <br />and put the percentage in rather than putting it in -now and being <br />stuck with it. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird to eliminate Policy <br />6.12 relating to the preservation of 250 of the native plant <br />community and SECONDED by Commissioner Wheeler. <br />Commissioner Wheeler brought up the average percentage we <br />require now to be set aside for open space for commercial, <br />residential, industrial, and felt if it could be made very clear <br />that part of that could be used, it would help. <br />64 <br />