Laserfiche WebLink
13 <br /> Exhibit 1 <br /> enhancement/restoration actions are identified in this element. Other actions may be <br /> added over time, as new information is available. <br /> Part of Salmon Overlay Table 6.2 is reproduced below, along with the current status of <br /> each property, when known. The model used two different ranking scenarios. In the <br /> first, sites near the top generally had a combination of high salmon habitat restoration <br /> potential, moderate to low existing values for wildlife and water quality functions, and <br /> low technical difficulty. The second scenario (right-hand column scores) used the <br /> subtotal ranking score before inclusion of the technical difficulty factor. The sites are <br /> ordered in the Table based upon the first scenario, that considered technical difficulty. <br /> The timing of restoration on specific sites is not dependent upon the priority identified <br /> below. Factors that will affect timing include existing land uses, property owner <br /> willingness to participate in restoration or sell their properties, property acquisition and <br /> restoration costs, and funding opportunities. <br /> SEWIP and the Salmon Overlay used a landscape approach to the estuary. This approach <br /> evaluates the estuary as a whole, without regard to jurisdictional boundaries. Therefore, <br /> the table identifies opportunities within city and county jurisdiction. The landscape <br /> context is important to understand the City's overall restoration strategy; however, the <br /> rest of this element primarily focuses on land in the City's boundaries that are subject to <br /> the City's shoreline jurisdiction. <br /> 116 <br /> Section 3 General Goals, Objectives,Policies and Regulations Page 3-46 <br />