Laserfiche WebLink
Proposed MRCCA Land Use Distrir-ts <br />• The rubs developed through this process should be guidelines and allow for local <br />decision making. <br />1-imiUng heights in potential redevelopment areas may prevent redevelopment. <br />`Heights' need to be consistent with approved comprehensive plans and ioning <br />ordinances. <br />Care should be taken such that district boundaries do not extend across or abut <br />prominent transportation corridors. For example, including a boundary that <br />extends onto US 1C as'riverfront' land does not adequately portray or account <br />for what has already happened on that transportation corridor. <br />Vegetative buffering standards for properties should directly correlate to the <br />intended use or scope of development. For example, single family property <br />owners should not be deprived of their use and enjoyment of their riverfront <br />property by being required to adhere to restrictive vegetation management or <br />revegetation standards that would more applicable to areas of concentrated <br />riverfront use. <br />The rules should include a tiered approach for regulation of the shcreland. <br />The rules must allow for flexibility in using various methods of stormwater <br />management and erosion control (i.e. riprap, storm water structures, etc.). <br />• Roadways cut across all districts. There are safety reasons dnd capacity needs <br />for modifyirg the road -ways. As such, the districts need to accommodate <br />roadway needs. <br />When county and state road agencies make changes, they are required to go <br />through a comprehensive environmental review process. This process should be <br />sufficient for protecting resources in the MRCCA area. <br />