COM 0045.016 2002-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GOODSJiL ANDERSON QUWN & S'fIFEL A LIMITED LABILITY LAW PARTNERSHIP LLP Honorable Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, Chair April ] 7, 2003 Page 3 determine if they demonstrate a better potential for sustained high agricultural yields, taking into account soil type, climate, topography, or other factors. Under the existing General Plan, the Intensive Agriculture designation includes lands that have fertile soil and lands that have less fertile soils. The current General Plan draws a distinction between Intensive Agriculture lands that have high agriculhual potential and Intensive Agriculture land that has a lower agricultural potential in the current definition of Important Agricultural Land. In the current General Plan, the term "Important Agricultural Land" is defined as including Intensive Agricultural land "which (a) possess certain physical properties or setting capable of producing sustained high agricultural yields when treated and managed according to modern farming methods and technology; (b) contributes to the County's economic base and produce commodities for export and for local consumption; and (c) are not characterized by the above categories but are considered and designated by public policy as important agricultural lands because of some unique quality, setting or use." Not all of the lands currently designated as Intensive Agriculture have the potential for sustained high agricultural yields, and it would be a mistake to assume that all of the land which are currently classified as Intensive Agriculture lands satisfy the definition for Important Agricultural Land. 2. With respect to Criteria 2, 3, and 4, we suggest that the Council reconsider the inclusion of lands based only on soils ratings since other important factors also affect agricultural productivity, such as the availability of irrigation water and climactic conditions. For example, the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service's study of suitability fox various crops (Criteria 4), does not consider accessibility of water supply or wind considerations. Thus, even though the soil on a particular parcel may be rated "fair" for two or more crops under the USDA study, if there is insufficient water to support agricultural activity (whether from rainfall or from an economically viable source of irrigation water), or if conditions on the land are so windy that intensive farming is unfeasible, the property is incapable of sustaining high agricultural yields. If the Council decides to retain Criteria 2, 3, and 4 as the basis for designating property as Important Agricultural Land, we submit that it should also include the availability of adequate rainfall or irrigation water and climatic conditions as part of its analysis of whether land satisfies the requirements for Important Agricultural Land. Discussion Regardine the Particular Designation Assigned to a Properties With respect to the particular parcels that WDC and WLCC own, none of the Properties should be designated as Important Agricultural Land as none of these Properties shows any potential for sustained high agricultural yields. The Properties are 610-d 90/YO d 510-1 0995lY5809+ N05830NV 11150007-woad Et~91 t0-11-~tld