1 SUSTAINING AGRICULTURE: SANTA CLARA LAFCO’s EXPERIENCE August 31, 2007 CALAFCO CONFERENCE Sacramento.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Applicants Rob & Judi McCarthy, SLO County Permit #DRC
Advertisements

Jackson Community Comprehensive Plan – Big Picture Planning for Natural Resources Keeping it Green: Conserving Your Future Through Land Use Planning Presented.
How to Write Goals, Objectives and Policies EAR-Based Amendment Forum Presented by the Pinellas Planning Council September 14, 2006.
Proposed Land Use & Development Regulations Public Hearing Month Day, 2012.
THE EXPANDING ROLE of RECYCLED WATER The Need, Benefits and Cost Effectiveness Make Recycled Water an Increasingly Valued Resource Harry Ehrlich, SDA Principal.
WILLIAMSON ACT AND AGRICULTURAL CONTRACTS WILLIAMSON ACT AND AGRICULTURAL CONTRACTS Fresno County Board of Supervisors February 26, 2008.
Farmlands Office Of Environmental Services Managing the Environmental and Project Development Process Presented by the Ohio Department of Transportation.
Presentation for the Policy Advisory Committee California Transportation Plan 2040 April 15, 2014 Agricultural Land Stewardship Planning.
Agriculture Sustainability Act SB 46 Senator Scott Jenkins.
Draft Kane County 2040 Green Infrastructure Plan Energy and Environment Committee November 14, 2013.
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission Peter Brundage, Executive Officer; Donald J. Lockhart, Assistant Executive Officer; Diane Thorpe, Commission.
Community GPU Forums California Native Plant Society, Monterey Bay Chapter Carmel Valley Association Citizens for Responsible Growth Coalition to Protect.
1 LAFCO FEES The Statutory and Legal Framework 2010 Annual CALAFCO Meeting Hilton Hotel, Palm Springs Scott Browne.
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) in Yolo County Phil Hogan, District Conservationist USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service 221 W. Court,
Planning Issues in Agriculture Laws and Regulations Lecture 6 Lecture 6.
CALAFCO Annual Conference, Palm Springs Neelima Palacherla LAFCO 201 Island Annexations in Santa Clara County.
Okanagan Basin Conservation Programs (SOSCP and OCCP) 80+ organizations (government and non-government) working together to achieve shared conservation.
Local Planning Process The General Plan SB 18 Training Program.
1 Preservation Parcels Investigation Report to the Board of County Commissioners September 19, :30 PM.
1 LAFCo and the RHNA Presented by Adam Lindgren CALAFCO September 6, 2006.
Summit #1 San Juan County Shoreline Master Program Update March 1 st, 2 nd, and 3 rd
Compact for a Sustainable Ventura County A project of the Ventura County Civic Alliance and the Ventura Council of Governments.
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT MAJOR COMMUNITY ISSUES RELATED TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Board of County Commissioners/ Local Planning Agency Joint Meeting.
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) Final Environmental Impact Report Amendment of SMUD’s Sphere of Influence and SMUD Yolo Annexation.
Yolo LAFCO Agricultural Conservation Policy Yolo County Local Agency Formation Commission Commissioners  Public Member Olin Woods, Chair   County Member.
California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions LAFCo 101 An Introduction to Local Agency Formation Commissions Bill Chiat, Executive Director.
Growth Management Legislative Discussion March 20, 2012.
Presentation to the Placer LAFCO Commission September 10, 2014.
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE REVIEW OF PROPOSALS STUDY SESSION ON GOVERNMENT CODE §56668.
Managing the Agricultural/Urban Interface City of Livermore Marc Roberts Community Development Director September 1, 2011.
Introduction to Transfer of Development Rights Presentation for: Skagit County – TDR Stakeholder Committee June 19, 2012.
New Brighton Planning Commission Meeting April 18, 2006 Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment: Section Regarding Commercial/Industrial Park.
CPA-14-08: Transfer of Development Rights Large Scale Text Amendment Adoption Hearing Board of County Commissioners September 23, 2008.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT SMALL-SCALE LU-MIN & ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-OTH
Sacramento LAFCo Agriculture - Open Space Preservation Policy Workshop November 1, 2006.
Annexations as a Means to Preserve Open Space October 29, 2009.
Community Development Department GRAND HAVEN DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT Planning & Land Development Regulation Board May 21, 2014.
SERVICE TO UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION SERVICE TO UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION August 30, 2007.
1 LAFCo 201 The Statutory and Legal Framework 2010 Annual CALAFCO Meeting Hilton Hotel, Palm Springs Scott Browne.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT SMALL-SCALE LU-MIN & ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-OTH
August 2009 Presented By: Tim Brodeur The Benefits of Keeping our Native Beauty Intact - Area IV Water Conservation Committee Model Native Plant Ordinance.
1 LAFCO Staff Workshop Crowne Plaza Hotel, San Jose Executive Officer Bob Braitman Legal Counsel Scott Browne.
Solano Habitat Conservation Plan 580,000 Acres 36 Covered Species; 4 Natural Communities 17,500 acres of Urban Development; 1,280 acres of other New Facilities.
Yolo LAFCO Agricultural Conservation Policy Yolo County Local Agency Formation Commission Commissioners  Public Member Olin Woods, Chairman   City Members.
1 Preserving Swainson’s Hawk Habitat LAFCO October 5, 2005.
2010 CALAFCO Annual Conference Moderator: Brendon Freeman, Napa LAFCO.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT GRAND HAVEN NORTH CONSERVATION AREA APPLICATION # 2604.
Jefferson County Agricultural Preservation and Land Use Plan Jefferson County’s Comprehensive Plan: Process and Strategies Presented to: Dane County Officials.
Bureau of Watershed Management Regulatory Proposal Chapter 102 [Erosion and Sediment Control] Erosion, Sediment and Stormwater Management February 21,
LAFCO’s and CEQA Discussion Problem The City of San Garbanzo prepared an EIR in connection with a regional commercial project “Big Box Mall” to be located.
Solar Power Project at the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant August 26, 2015.
Ventura County Population of over 800,000 Voter imposed growth boundaries for the County and 8 of the 10 cities Gross agricultural production value of.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT LU-MIN & RZ-OTH
WELCOME to the FIRE DISTRICT WORKSHOP San Joaquin LAFCo July 16, 2009.
Community Redevelopment for Eastside Report on Advisory Committee Input and Request for Board Direction June 26, 2012.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT GRAND HAVEN NORTH CONSERVATION AREA APPLICATION # 2604.
Durham Villas Planned Unit Development TSM & REZ Morris Bud Keeney Butte County Board of Supervisors December 11, 2012.
Community Development Department FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT SMALL-SCALE LU-MIN-07-03a & ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-OTH
CITY OF STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: PRESENTOR: AGENDA ITEM: DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: PRESENTOR: 9.02Public Facilities.
OPEN SPACE/ CONSERVATION
City Council Hearing #2 April 18, 2017.
Contra Costa Watershed Forum May 11, 2016
Agriculture and Land Stewardship Planning
Overview of Present Tasks
Williamson Act Sustainability
Dane County Farmland Preservation Plan Planning Areas
Agriculture - Open Space Preservation Policy Workshop
LAFCO AND CEQA LAFCO Role as A Responsible Agency
Agricultural Land & Avian Foraging Habitat Mitigation Fee
Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission
Presentation transcript:

1 SUSTAINING AGRICULTURE: SANTA CLARA LAFCO’s EXPERIENCE August 31, 2007 CALAFCO CONFERENCE Sacramento

2 Why Protect and Preserve Agricultural Lands? Every minute of every day, America loses 2 acres of farmland to development Every year on an average, California loses over 15,000 acres of valuable farmland to urban development

3 Why Protect and Preserve Agricultural Lands? Within the last 20 years, Santa Clara County has lost over 11,000 acres Less than 39,000 acres of agricultural lands with high quality soils remain in Santa Clara County (that is less than 5% of total land within the county)

4 Why Protect Agricultural Lands? Irreplaceable and non-renewable resource. These lands are our legacy and they: Provide local and regional fresh food supplies, reduce dependence on foreign products, conserve energy

5 Why Protect Agricultural Lands? Maintain/ create unique community character, provide open space and wildlife habitat, support area’s tourism industry Contribute to the local economy and add to the quality of life of a community

6 What’s So Special About Agriculture at the Urban Edge? More than 75% of America’s fruits, vegetables and dairy products are produced on urban edge farms that are threatened by sprawling development In California, 70% of ALL food agricultural food production occurs on the urban edge or is urban influenced

7 What’s Sprawl Got To Do With It? Urban development, sphere of influence expansions, and service extensions can disrupt the conditions necessary for agriculture leading to: Land use conflicts and increasing calls for regulation Land speculation which drives up the price of farmland Impermanence which causes disinvestment in agriculture

8 What Can LAFCOs Do? Help educate local agencies, organizations, and the community on the importance of urban edge agriculture When approving proposals adjacent to agricultural lands, encourage local agencies to adopt measures to protect adjoining agricultural lands, to prevent their premature conversation and to minimize potential urban edge conflicts When reviewing environmental documents, review and comment on the analysis of impacts to agriculture based on definitions and codes within CKH Act Conversion of prime agricultural land should be a last resort and in some cases may not be appropriate Adopt policies aimed at mitigating the negative impacts to agricultural and open space lands

9 Development of Santa Clara LAFCO’s Agricultural Mitigation Policies Purpose Of The Policies To provide guidance to property owners, potential applicants and cities on how to address agricultural mitigation for LAFCO proposals. To provide a framework for LAFCO to evaluate and process in a consistent manner LAFCO proposals that involve or impact agricultural lands.

10 Development of Santa Clara LAFCO’s Agricultural Mitigation Policies Diverse Group Of Stakeholders Cities of Gilroy, Morgan Hill and San Jose, the County of Santa Clara, the County Farm Bureau, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Gilroy Chamber of Commerce, the Coyote Housing Group, the Home Builders Association of Northern California Silicon Valley Land Conservancy, Santa Clara County Open Space Authority, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Friends of Coyote Valley Greenbelt, Committee for Green Foothills, Greenbelt Alliance, Sierra Club Property owners, developers, concerned citizens, etc.

11 Development of Santa Clara LAFCO’s Agricultural Mitigation Policies Process Used to Develop the Policies LAFCO Planning Workshop and discussion of LAFCO’s role in protecting and preserving agricultural lands (Feb. 2006) LAFCO directed staff to develop agricultural mitigation policies (April 2006) Staff researched existing policies and practices of other LAFCOs and jurisdictions and considered Santa Clara LAFCO’s experience on this issue Staff Developed and Circulated a First Draft of Policies for Comment (August 2006)

12 Development of Santa Clara LAFCO’s Agricultural Mitigation Policies Process Used to Develop the Policies Four Stakeholder Workshops/Presentations on Draft Policies (2 Held in South County) + presentation to a local Chamber of Commerce LAFCO forms a Two-Commissioner LAFCO Subcommittee on Agricultural Mitigation and 2 Subcommittee Meetings are held in South County to discuss the policies and take comments Four LAFCO Meeting/Hearings (Oct – April 2007) Draft Policies revised 4 times in response to stakeholder concerns

13 Issues: Authority to Adopt Mitigation Policies Policies are recommendations on acceptable mitigation Variations may be considered with appropriate support/justification LAFCO will not require or condition an approval on specific mitigation for a proposal impacting agricultural lands LAFCO may deny a proposal if the application will not result in orderly growth and development based on LAFCO’s policies. Cities are encouraged to adopt similar mitigation policies

14 Issues: Definition of Prime Agricultural Land LAFCO will use the CKH Act’s definition of “Prime Agricultural Land” when considering impacts Fallow lands must meet CKH Act’s definition of “Prime Agricultural Land” (based on soil class/rating, feasibility of irrigation, and recent productivity) LAFCO will not use the LESA Model. The Model does not fit existing agriculture or agricultural trends in Santa Clara County

15 Issues: Type of Mitigation 1:1 mitigation recommended with 3 options Mitigation lands within Santa Clara County Mitigation with similar type of lands (soil class/rating, etc.) No exemptions for lands used to support a development (e.g. public roads, private roads, sidewalks, etc.) In-lieu fee methodologies should have provision to adjust fees to reflect land values at the time of payment of in- lieu fees

16 Issues: Enforceability of Mitigation Plan for Mitigation and Mitigation Agreement between property owner, city and ag. conservation entity should be provided to LAFCO Agreement should be recorded against the property, upon LAFCO approval of the project Annual reports on the status of the mitigation should be provided by the city to LAFCO Annual reports on the use of the in-lieu fees should be provided by the agricultural conservation entity to LAFCO Mitigation should be fulfilled before city approves final map, issues grading permit or building permit

17 Development of Santa Clara LAFCO’s Agricultural Mitigation Policies The Results So Far LAFCO Unanimously Adopts Agricultural Mitigation Policies (April 2007) Catalyst for Cities to Develop Their Own Mitigation Policies Catalyst for Open Space Districts and Organizations to consider their Potential Role in the area of Agricultural Preservation within Santa Clara County So far, LAFCO has NOT Received any Proposals that are Affected by the Policies