BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA

animal habitat or even flooding. If that's the case, then why should a restrictive
standard be applied? There is no good answer.
I suggest staff consider a MATRIX of values be prepared in conjunction with the
biological staff so that values are assigned to each factor. Factors totaling an
agreed upon threshold would either be given more or less latitude to disturb or
preserve a slope feature. When a draft is completed, it should be reviewed by an
acceptable peer group of outside biologists.
However, if the staff is not comfortable with this approach, then I recommend NO
CHANGE.
3. One key component not found in #1 above is the preservation of visual quality. A
diverse landscape, with slopes, is one of the things that make Tallahassee unique.
We don't want to look like anyplace USA.
One problem with the current requirements is that they don't allow for flexibility
in meeting the standards. For example, consider Policy 1.2.2(L):
"The type, intensity and structural design of any development proposed for
a site shall be appropriate to the existing natural topography."
Staff should develop criteria that biologist, engineers and citizens can agree upon that
allows one to build even in a severe slope areas IF (1) a matrix as suggested in #1 above
suggests approval, and (2) a design can be shown to not be detrimental to the protection
of the slope at issue.
4. The engineering section needs to show why/how removing slope protection
DOES NOT increase public costs of treating stormwater elsewhere, including
offsite. Related to this, studies should be done to show WHY on-site stormwater
retention is preferable to regionalized systems.
5. I believe INCENTIVES should be developed that promote the preservation (by
recorded easement) of the most severe slopes, with the idea that a property owner
with a high quality/most sensitive slope actually gets credit for having and
maintaing such a feature. The "incentive" could be more density or intensity of
uses that may even need to be transferred to another site.
6. What happened to offsite mitigation? My understanding is that this was added
recently with no takers even though this was pointed to as the solution to "infill".
Has this option been explained to the development community?
7. NO CHANGES should be made to slope protection without understanding the
impact such changes could have to other ordinances, and vice versa, regarding
other issues such as stormwater, native vegetation, density, lot size, etc.
Page 583 of 622 Posted at 5:00 p.m. on April 1, 2013