|
+41) Alford easements. The conversion of agricultural ]t
<br />1 y should be deemed an impact of at least regio
<br />��'he j]e gated: why atis unpact could not significance, Hence Ole search for repiaCem,
<br />essmly6, u Mefor nfor agricultural lands should be conductod iegionan re0latem,
<br />,psquices mit�y'. Cake. the form of avoidance,
<br />}7h!imlzadon,',',fiestoia(on, Preservation, or sud not li itedrea ctlytolandwfthintheproje,
<br />;ompensntion '(providing substitute resources
<br />�ff�ite) These forms Ofmitigntloneorres lid 'be County didnotrespondtotheseconrmoc
<br />? , �CFr�Air Cuide ines Section 15370.8 Ford did except to note that no Williamson Acts contra(
<br />Rp,Q¢�,jl pS4 ept avoidance Is not possible, ae would be affected by die Project and cite to H
<br />e' locdgopotlthomineralreaourcescorresponda DraftRSif7teprpf i�GU
<br />for lost
<br />farmland it, e P e fartmland a9 identified in the WIVIR of such im(gahon was like a m land i 1 O
<br />tkijjmraat�pon is incorporated into the project to an {Apra ell lntq'dte)r]
<br />��tpnf as't]ie project is phased, slid agricultural withoutchange,., -
<br />Ise9tu , ndnueonaphase'untll.Itlsmined, Commis�3ondasiuns 'todiBoard'of5usiiei•vison
<br />usekt €ndmgagriculturalactivit du' pp e pl`n
<br />the Ppr41 ct_: However, this will no eiduce orichs ion th
<br />that i was no fo ogical basis for th At easible,�`,vo 11Yhe9niming will residt Insnofinished a�County r�epres,st�tap'�ve responded that theta "Lt]b,
<br />8 sgncultGralland Cool
<br />irids' Instance, e Is similar ell Preservation basic. w se of an" qt
<br />th]s the is similar son voidance, and is eaale Purpose of an he aeCUpdaryi6neerstha
<br />easiUle for thn. same mason.
<br />Compensation easemeni is to void theressecondary la lint land
<br />lieraliy takes die form of off -site ac;quisitian of You know, sometimes considered the so callet
<br />e -Men, typically an Agricultural Conservation domino effect As you extinguish
<br />temeit (ACE): ACquisiOOn of an ACE is you're putting developmen essupe on them now
<br />siilered infeasiblefor the proposed projectfor termer and you're causing nuisance n the next
<br />re' ACE,scu es not aregoingtomakatifedif (cu[tforhfmassues that
<br />An ACE, _ rises not replace the on•site
<br />tunes, but'rather, it addresses Elie Indirect more likely that that operationlsgofngtowaritto
<br />bcnOffs is effects of farmland conversion. you' renotteplacing eresom•ces;'Wecanputan
<br />rock e' Offsets include the pressure created to easement somnwhere else abut It(,,'] a can ut to
<br />>urageaess th alconvarsione,asdeve'lopment recreate (rose few acres of pt9me;S'llot farmland ing to
<br />su {a raises the speaulaOve value of theland are present on that sitenaw, 'Sa: "that',s }row we
<br />to fire econom c costs 0f farrnng approach that analysis and you.hamto look e
<br />to land use Incompatibilities (limitations on
<br />cide nCr. ,des..,. __ the C.iPrumc +�....,... _s.e..
<br />Wa east; but they wersepgratadi 6 y die natural
<br />bail -neref the Russian Riven ]n addition, the
<br />end age of the property is open space (Including
<br />habitat, rather than urban developments. Open .
<br />otCnmldevelopment se n'reate dreet Presure on
<br />agricultural lands,
<br />are not vailableeaanbd this impact would be significant and unavoidable." .(Italics and bold
<br />type dejetedJ
<br />of a ''ultural lauds as Can una- about the
<br />)P the I'rojeit in ifs comments on the Draft,
<br />�4COrtipg'to the UDC; the loss should have
<br />lennmhiit]dzed through the acquisition ofACEs
<br />n comps aU]a Isud of at least equal size,. The
<br />>DC 4onsidererl this means of mitieation,m ho
<br />easements care be 1111 1 etttedrby at least a
<br />altefgdOve appreaches;;. the outright purehase
<br />4ref slnents'or the dona n of miOgation fees
<br />to a local; 'regional , or st a te wide'organizafion or
<br />agency whose purpose Includes the acgldsidan
<br />and stewardship of agriCUlhu•al' conservation
<br />• " " +r�� uieapproprhflmy sponselnjtiig case y
<br />(2) Review
<br />w r
<br />Wfiigriculturalconsei vsOop);asaments .
<br />CEQAprovides that "public agencies should
<br />notapprode,pcionM asproposed:ifitareare ,.
<br />feaslblomlflU O ninebsuiesavaitaliiewhichwould
<br />affects of such lesion projects,&i (ub. Resources ce Code
<br />921002; see also id at 921002:1, subd:. (U)
<br />[agencies must mI F.Me significant. effects Of projects they approv'e,'whealMr itisfeasibleto do
<br />so "j.} _CEQA defines feasible "to mean "capable
<br />of being accomplished jn,a au@ceeean caumer
<br />widen t eaaanable `Period, oft 'a Asking into
<br />account, economlc envifonlicis 1, sego], social
<br />;
<br />andteChno]oglealfactors.. (Guidell",i .8 15'xaai.
<br />PasrAeres &Nei i o — �C,' e•g•, G'herry Yallei
<br />190 Cal ¢ a. City 01Roauinorir (2010)
<br />ApA.se'. 916, 350351 (Reaumont)) But
<br />not in (1119 naBC "
<br />Here,, di , detet 1'a mitigation
<br />was feasib(e for jt p qss *df'r� Ii]0'reated On a
<br />conclusron'tiiTt'of(site agf901t1t(t}ai conaervation
<br />easaments,.(ACE�S) ,canndt'udOgakelYortho. land
<br />75A -70
<br />is
<br />I
<br />
|