8/14/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the intent is and asked Asst. County Attorney Collins what his interpretation would be. Attorney Collins stated that he would interpret it to mean DRIB, but he would want that confirmed. Commissioner Bird noted that they put the strict require- ments on the DRIB, but it seems other projects have very little constraints. Chairman Eggert felt that continues to be a concern, and Attorney Collins believed the reason the TCRPC made the distinction was that Director Keating and others told them about the difficulties of applying these 5 and 10 acre set asides to small subdivisions, and their thinking is that in the DRIB they have a large project with a little more flexibility in the design. Attorney Collins thought that it is important to note that the existing TCRPC policy puts us in an impossible situation in terms of compliance with our Comprehensive Plan. Either their adoption of our County policy or their adoption of the last proposal staff made will allow us to comply because at the last meeting, they modified that proposal to say that local regula- tions, even if they don't meet the 25% set aside, will be acceptable until you get to the stage where only 200 of the original habitat remains. Presumably if we start applying these regulations as we go along protecting 150 of each, we won't be approaching those threshholds. If we do get to the point where only 200 of the original was left, then they would start applying their 25% rule, and if we ever got to where 10% was left, they would say go out and start buying it. Even their staff proposal as modified would be much better than what is existing. Chairman Eggert noted that the objection to that was the question of exactly how and When those percentages kick in, and there were massive objections to having these percentages kick in at certain times. She then referred the Board to the TCRPC staff AUG141990 80 �) �r�