SU0012885 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

l Approval of the proposed project at the alternative site would result in the conversion of 60.93 acres of prime agricultural land to urban uses. The County Agricultural Report for 1987 stated that 25, 318 acres of walnut orchards were harvested. Conversion of thero 'ect site p J to urban uses would represent a . 24 percent reduction (based on 1987 figures) in the total County-wide acreage devoted to walnut production. In the context of all County-wide acreage devoted to agricultural use, conversion of the project site would represent a . 01 percent reduction. (Based on 1987 figures. ) o Althou h the Although percentage f land lost is considered small when compared to the amount of acreage in the County devoted to agricultural use, agricultural land is considered an important nonrenewable resource. Therefore, the conversion of agricultural land, regardless of the amount, is a significant impact. The proposed project is a General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use designation from Agriculture to Rural Residential. Concurrent with this application is a request to rezone the site from GA-40 (General Agriculture, 40 acre minimum/dwelling) to. RR- 65 (Rural Residential, 65, 000 square foot minimum) . The FEIR provides a discussion of the proposed project in the context of the various policies of the County General Plan. (See Section IV.B. , pages 21-29 of the FEIR. Figure 4 depicts the General Plan designations for the alternative site and surrounding area. Also shown on Figure 4 are the General Plan Designations for the proposed project site. The alternative site is within the Morada Rural Area and is designated for rural residential uses in the County Land Use/Circulation Element. The land to the northeast, east and south of the project site is located outside of the Morada Rural Residential Area and i., is designated for agricultural use. � - Development of the alternative site would be consistent with the current Rural Residential land use designation, thus approval of a General Plan Amendment would not be necessary as it would be if development were to occur on the proposed project site. Approval of the proposed project at the alternative site would also be consistent with the various General Plan policies, thus no mitigation measures would be necessary. A discussion of this alternative in the context of applicable planning policies is provided in Table II. zoning Figure 5 shows the zone designation for the alternative site and surrounding area. The applicant is proposing that single- family units be developed on 65, 000 square foot lots. This would be consistent with the current RR-65 zone classification for the site,, thus no mitigations would be necessary. f 19 z