|
five-acre minimum lot, were the reasons that we, the Director decided to support this. Did that
<br /> answer your question?
<br /> VITOUSEK: Yeah,I mean, you know, I get it. I just, to me it kind of makes it seem like it's,
<br /> okay,this is now not really intended for agriculture, because they don't have the opportunity to
<br /> have an additional dwelling for, you know, farm work, but instead it's like creating two kind of
<br /> more seemingly residential parcels.
<br /> KAY: Well, so there is a, in our General Plan, there is a policy in terms of agricultural, not
<br /> subdividing–pardon me–"Important Agricultural Land shall not be rezoned to parcels too
<br /> small to support economically viable farming units." We consider"economically viable farming
<br /> units"to be about five acres. We used to have an Agricultural-l'acre zoning designation; we no
<br /> longer have that, our minimum Agricultural zoning designation is five acres for that reason.
<br /> There are some, you know, crops that can be grown on smaller plats of land,but in this area,
<br /> given that the lot is part of the Small Farms and Ranches kind of designation, given what the
<br /> kind of requirements and the intent of the CDP was, and the policies,the language in the General
<br /> Plan,we felt that the Agricultural-5 acre was more appropriate. Also, the adjacent properties
<br /> kind of were also granted that in the last six or seven.years. So there was a bit of a precedent for
<br /> that.
<br /> •
<br /> VITOUSEK: Got you. I guess the other question is that this isn't, I mean, historically, it has
<br /> never really been used for agriculture,for planting agriculture,but it's been ranching.
<br /> KAY: Understood.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Has there'been any like analysis on stocking density that would indicate whether
<br /> what parcel size is economically viable for the stocking density in this area?
<br /> KAY: I'm not,familiar..with that. ,Your Chair may know better than I.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Yeah,I figured—
<br /> [Laughter]
<br /> UNGER: One cow.
<br /> KAY: One cow.
<br /> [Laughter.]
<br /> KAY: And there are other topographical issues as well; there is the flood zone area, there is the
<br /> stream running across the property, there is, you know, at the upper portion of the property, is
<br /> hilly and, so, I mean, the reality is these are all the kind of things that we balance in making a
<br /> land use recommendation. Again, this is just a recommendation to the Planning Commission,
<br /> then ultimately to the County Council. Should you disagree, you are welcome to do that. Should
<br /> you want to suggest additional conditions to help address some of, or what you are looking for,
<br /> you are welcome to do that as well.
<br /> 8
<br /> DRAFT
<br />
|