|
CARR SMITH: Thank you.
<br /> KAY: Mm-hmm.
<br /> UNGER: Questions?
<br /> VITOUSEK: Sure, one more question. So, the recommendation thing says that, you know, and
<br /> discussed on the presentation, that the area is considered part of the, what is it, Small Farms and
<br /> Ranches Preservation area.
<br /> KAY: Yes.
<br /> VITOUSEK: And the CDP indicates that ideally thosearen't going to be subdivided into
<br /> smaller lots. Is that right'?
<br /> KAY: So the CDP has a few, these are recommendations, not requirements—
<br /> VITOUSEK: Sure.
<br /> KAY: —and they have a few situations where and which rezone and subdivision would be
<br /> allowed; that's four or fewer lots, and if,those.lots would then, they are intended to be conveyed
<br /> to family members. In this case my understanding.is the applicant intends to live on one of the
<br /> lots and sell the second lot on the open market. So it doesn't to the letter of the CDP meet the
<br /> requirement. But what it does do is, we think,maintains the intent of the CDP, and that's to keep
<br /> the area in large enough lots for agriculture and open space.°`So there is a standard requirement
<br /> that we, or a requirement, that we put in to this,limiting the ability to build an additional farm
<br /> dwelling on the property, tohelp kind of address the additional density issue, and that's partially
<br /> in response to the intent of the.CDP
<br /> VITOUSEK Yeah, and that's kind of one of the things that I'm a little bit curious about. I
<br /> mean, it seems like, you know, the concept of creating this area is to allow for families to, you
<br /> know, do agricultural practices and hale family farms and that kind of thing, and I think having
<br /> a, you know, second agricultural:dwelling for family is part of that.
<br /> KAY: So additional farm dwellings are meant to house farm workers, and we didn't see any
<br /> proposed agriculture, any existing or proposed agriculture, on the property. So we are kind of
<br /> trying to balance what the CDP,says in terms of wanting to maintain that area in agriculture and
<br /> an open space with, I mean, the original request, if you read, would have allowed for six smaller
<br /> lots,which would have allowed for theoretically a larger number of farm dwellings. But
<br /> unfortunately, again, that was even farther outside of conformance with the CDP and the General
<br /> Plan, as well as the FA, the Family Agricultural zoning,was not intended for parcels that were
<br /> considered Prime, Unique or Other in the ALISH, and in this case the entire parcel is Prime and
<br /> Other, so the zoning itself didn't conform with this. So that was another reason that we would
<br /> not have been supportive of that original zoning request. In this case because it is Agricultural-5
<br /> acres, it's a two-lot subdivision, the Ag zoning designation doesn't have those limitations and,
<br /> again, only creating one additional lot, only allowing one additional dwelling,keeping the rest of
<br /> the area an open space and creating a second lot large enough for productive agriculture in a
<br /> 7
<br /> DRAFT
<br />
|