Laserfiche WebLink
tmn AGES oil farmland of equal quality in the <br />un ty at `a',1:1 ratio, or pay "an la -lieu mitigation <br />ids mitigation requirements ntsrwere concluded <br />easonably <br />ated to die adverse public impact of such <br />4ects and thus an authorized use of the <br />mq?s Pollee power. 'the court observed that <br />esidandal . project would not be approved 1Smfil <br />developer provides permanent protection of <br />"sere bf farmland. for every acre. of farmland <br />wetted 'to' residential use. Agricultural <br />iservatiOn easements granted in perpetuity <br />the prhn sty means of accomplishing this <br />maMet protection requtre men t... [(H1.,. <br />11, AithOugh the developed farmland is <br />replaced, an equivalent area of comparable <br />gland is permanantlypprotected from a similar <br />"(7d. atP. 592.) Staxfslaus teaches thatACEs <br />a reasonable mans to mitigate die impact ofa <br />act that replaces agricoltura! land. <br />doreover, it appeas thatAC& are commonly <br />Iforthat)) Be. TheDOCde scribed <br />ACES <br />i comments as "accept[edl net uae[dl by lead <br />icies as appropriate mitigation measure <br />•r CEQA,. and the admiulatratiV0 record. <br />A evidence that ACES ate -so employed <br />number of dries and countles. The EIR at <br />h, r.44...a.._e .,_. _.. <br />to <br />"In addition to the City of Lodi, the <br />agencies in the surrounding area aI I <br />dgatian ratio: cities Of Stockton and Ells <br />modes of San Joaquin and Stanislaus, <br />w <br />Conservancy (Evermore /Alameda <br />Environmental Quality Act plays all importam <br />role In die preservation of aggrricultural lands, "t) <br />TO mitigate thea s <br />conve excude faErniland means to be <br />contrary to One of CEQA's Important purposes. <br />We agree with the CFDF that ACES should not <br />be removed from agencies' toolboxes as available <br />mitigation" for this environmental Impact.. <br />that ACEss arealegallyhinf asibleete cannotube <br />AM to <br />sustained, to the Prof ct's Impact offsite loss <br />of 45 acres of prime farmland must be explored, <br />(b) In•CdeuFees <br />As an alternative to the outright purchase of <br />ACEs, tine DOC continent letter recommended <br />"the donation of mitigation fees to n, local, <br />regional or statewide Organization ar agency <br />whose - Purpose includes die acquisition and <br />stewardship of [ACEaj.,, Masonite argues that <br />the EIR was deficient because It did not address <br />this soggesdon. The County responds, saying <br />It was legaily Precluded from accepting in -lieu <br />fees because it does not have a comprehensive <br />farmland mitivadnn nr..— . <br />%vwueunes, B louse; subda, (a) & (c) <br />With reasoned analysis ate required ) <br />legal: ersuaded The DOC was not not <br />Payment offniieu fees to a county pk <br />rather to thfM ...Neo h ....r.._.i ,_ ­ <br />V <br />that ACES <br />to the conversion <br />WILY <br />comprehensive farmland midggaeon p or gramgis <br />Immaterial and does not <br />Legislature has <br />explain.'whylml ,,,program fees <br />ere not feasible: midgadon.'17dsissug requires <br />further analysis in theRM .. <br />in of agricultural <br />. <br />W. (Gov. Code, <br />D. Cumulative lmpaeta•onFainilanit• <br />ni <br />servation of a <br />dted supply of <br />The discussion of ^the Project's 'cumulative <br />Is conservation <br />impacts oil agricultural • <br />andisnecessary <br />resources, set forth <br />forth <br />in section 5.2.3' of Draft <br />the agricultural <br />and i,.set <br />wldhoutchangeintheEfR <br />irthe assurance <br />,readsinfull; ,Some of <br />the land bi the vicinity <br />Hun food for <br />of the proposod project fe <br />CanFtYtnrwri hinhh...... a.. _.:.._�_ .. <br />1191... <br />to • to <br />Ffecfa <br />es, "l; _ <br />in its <br />75B -228 <br />n. <br />I <br />