SU0006227 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MOUNTAIN HOUSE PROPOSED MACHADO TENTATIVE MAP 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 4.2 AGRICULTURAL.RESOURCES to interim disposal of treated wastewater. This impact does not involve the proposed project. The other two potentially significant impacts are: Impact 4.2-3 Land Use and Agriculture—Direct Conversion of Important Farmland. [Development of Specific Plan III] would result in the direct conversion of approximately 760 acres of Important Farmland (Prime Farmland and Farmland of _ Local Importance)to urban land uses. A significant and unavoidable impact would occur. Impact 4.3-5 Land Use and Agriculture—Conflicts With Off-Site Agricultural Operations. [Development of Specific Plan III] would not conflict with offsite agricultural operations,but could potentially affect the water supply of downstream agriculture. A significant impact could occur. MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN 2005 SPIREIR The SP1IIEIR determined that no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid the impact of conversion of farmland to urban land use. Regarding Impact 4.3-5, the SPIHEIR — proposed a mitigation measure that would require project developers to provide irrigation water to downstream agricultural operations currently relying on the water from the canals by installing pipelines and other means to continue delivery of irrigation water. Implementation of the above mitigation measure would reduce conflicts with adjacent agricultural operations to a less-than-significant level. DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED PROJECT a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? — Development of the project site would result in the loss of 143 acres of Prime Farmland or Farmland of Local Importance as defined by the California Department of Conservation, — Office of Land Conservation, and San Joaquin County. This loss is consistent with the MHMP and the conclusions of the MEIR, which showed that all of the Mountain House Community, including the proposed project site would be converted from farmland to urban use. The adopted MHMP includes an Implementation Statement addressing agricultural mitigation fees. This statement says that if a countywide agricultural mitigation fee is established, the fee shall be paid by the developer to San Joaquin County at the time specified — by the enacting ordinance. At the time of preparation of this Checklist(August 2006), the County had not adopted such a fee. This impact would remain significant and unavoidable as stated in the SPIHEIR. Mitigation Measures See MEHR Mitigation Measure M4.1-1,which was subsequently incorporated into the MHMP. No additional mitigation measures are required. 4-a