My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/18/1991
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1991
>
6/18/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:09 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:29:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/18/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
175
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
► JUN 1810 <br />BUGK:l F,'.uE <br />of this reduction to the USA will be more in fill development. The <br />total amount of growth and development is not expected to be <br />reduced; however, its location will be changed. The county will <br />still have residential capacity to accommodate projected demand far <br />beyond the planning horizon (2010). <br />The DCA's position was that all active agricultural lands must be <br />excluded from the USA; that included areas north of Gifford and <br />areas in the south portion of the county as far east as 20th <br />Avenue. DCA recommended density reduction in these areas. Since <br />these agricultural lands have access to urban services and are in <br />close proximity to existing development, the county opted not to <br />exclude them from the USA. Further density reduction within the <br />urban service area 3s an alternative to the proposed remedial <br />action amendments; but such action would reduce the county's <br />capability to provide for various housing types and to provide for <br />the construction of affordable housing. <br />Reduction of density in the agricultural areas will provide for <br />additional protection of agricultural lands. This action combined <br />with the requirement that all residential development in <br />agricultural areas be clustered will constrain development of large <br />lot development projects. While somewhat limiting choice of <br />housing type, these actions will reduce the existing residential <br />development unit over -allocation. <br />Urban Sprawl.* <br />The proposed. amendments will effectively eliminate urban sprawl <br />problems. By constricting the urban service area, these amendments <br />will increase the overall efficiency for provision of facilities <br />and services. Provision of services in a compact area is more <br />economically feasible than extending those services over a large <br />area. Elimination of urban sprawl will also increase the <br />opportunity for protection of agricultural lands. Both the <br />increased efficiency of facility and service provision and the <br />additional protection of -agricultural lands are positive factors <br />associated with the elimination of urban sprawl. <br />One of the most important requirements established as part of the <br />proposed remedial actions to eliminate urban sprawl and provide a <br />clear separation of urban and rural land uses is the requirement to <br />cluster residential development in the agricultural area. The <br />alternative is - to use the traditional land use and zoning <br />regulations and to reduce agricultural densities even lower. <br />Protection of Upland Plant Community and Agricultural Lands <br />The remedial action amendments relating to upland preservation <br />involve acquisition of conservation easements and/or fee simple <br />purchase of native upland areas and the requirement for a specific <br />site -design for environmentally sensitive and important lands to <br />minimize impacts upon endangered and threatened plants and animals. <br />The county proposes to acquire more environmentally sensitive and <br />important lands, actions which would have a direct and indirect <br />effect on the quality of life. This amendment will give the county <br />the ability to protect upland communities by acquisition as well as <br />through developer exactions. Objective groups 5 and 6 of the <br />Conservation ' Element will support additional preservation of <br />environmental lands. The principal disadvantage of this proposed <br />remedial action amendment is the cost to the county to finance <br />additional land acquisition. <br />Agriculture has played a major role in development of the county <br />and is one of the county's major industries. Preservation of <br />agricultural lands from encroachment of non-agricultural activities <br />is important. Requirements such as clustering of non-agricultural <br />activities and approval of non-agricultural development through the <br />Planned Development (PD) process will maximize the preservation of <br />42 <br />M M M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.