My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/17/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
9/17/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:33 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 11:18:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/17/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
SECTION 21: would amend the landscape chapter to require use of <br />rain sensors in automatic irrigation systems. This is now required <br />by state law, and is already in effect in the county. <br />SECTION 22: would specify the minimum size requirements for <br />"understory trees" Understory trees are included in the current <br />buffer requirements; yet no written standards exist. The proposed <br />standards correspond to the unwritten, policy standard that staff <br />and developers have agreed upon in past development plans. <br />SECTION 23: is directly related to Section 15. Both sections <br />would require owners of single-family lots containing the habitat <br />of federally threatened or endangered species to obtain a tree <br />•removal and/or land clearing permit prior to tree removal or land <br />clearing activities on the lot. Presently, county regulations <br />exempt owners of single-family lots of less than an acre in size <br />from obtaining a tree removal or land clearing permit. However, <br />under current federal law and regulatory interpretation, it is <br />illegal for these presently "exempted" property owners to destroy <br />threatened or endangered species or their vital habitat. <br />Furthermore, the county is liable under federal law and regulatory <br />interpretation, if it permits development which destroys such <br />species or habitat. Therefore, these changes are needed to <br />implement federal law and fulfill the county's responsibility (and <br />relieve its liability). As proposed, this amendment would allow <br />county staff the opportunity to review habitat sites and ensure <br />that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that the <br />proposed clearing or tree removal would not violate the Endangered <br />Species Act. <br />Through the land clearing and/or tree removal permit process, <br />county staff would coordinate with state and federal agencies to <br />ensure that no agencies would object to proposals to develop single <br />family lots in relation to the Endangered Species Act. Staff <br />anticipates that owners whose lots serve as habitat for endangered <br />or threatened species will need to preserve some trees or habitat <br />area on their lots. However, lot development in most cases will be <br />accommodated. <br />It must be noted that this amendment will not require owners of all <br />single family lots to conduct an environmental survey to determine <br />if they are or are not exempt frgm permitting requirements. County <br />staff, with the help and expertise of state and federal agencies, <br />will determine which single-family lots in the county now contain <br />habitat of federally threatened or endangered species. County <br />staff intends to individually notify these property owners, before <br />the owner applies for a building permit. Thus, only those lot <br />owners (or their successors in title) who are contacted will be <br />required to. obtain permits prior to tree removal or land clearing <br />activity.. Staff agrees with the PSAC recommendation that the Board <br />of County Commissioners should specifically direct staff to contact <br />any and all property owners affected by this proposed amendment. <br />Finally, ordinance Section 23 deletes the last sentence of section <br />927.06(2). The sentence should be deleted since the issue of dune <br />vegetation maintenance is now addressed in another section of <br />Chapter 927. <br />SECTION 24: would <br />requirements. The <br />bring the county's <br />current St. Johns <br />regulations. <br />SEP 17 ➢992 <br />expand an exemption from certain stormwater <br />proposal, made by the County Engineer, would <br />stormwater permit exemption into line with the <br />River Water Management District (SJRWMD) <br />E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.