SU0013441 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Analysis By way of background, staff has received approximately one-half dozen inquiries about constructing ponds generally as an amenity to a residence in agricultural areas of the County. The stated purposes for these ponds would be aesthetics, recreation, raising fish, and water supply for fire suppression and irrigation. Construction of a pond is permitted under the current code provisions. However, the size of the ponds and the amount of material being excavated would in most cases necessitate removing material from the site. There are two significant areas of concern with the excavation of ponds and removal of material from the site. First, there is a concern that the ponds should be constructed for their intended purpose and not for the soil material itself to be sold for profit, and second, the Farm Bureau is concerned about removing land from agricultural production. George Brown was one of the people who inquired to staff about the construction of a pond. He filed for Text Amendment TA-93-6 and has worked with staff and the Ordinance Subcommittee to draft the Text Amendment in its current form. The Ordinance Subcommittee has reviewed the draft Text Amendment and is generally in support of the language. The standards that have been developed are intended to address the concerns associated with constructing ponds and removing material from the site. To address the issue about removing soil from the site, the ponds are limited to being accessory to an existing residence, a maximum of 35,000 yards of material can be removed from the site, and pond size shall be limited to two acres in surface area and 12 feet in depth. The response from the Department of Public Works, received on August 31 and amended on September 3, requested four additional development standards (Sections 9-1420.3(r), (s), (t), and (u)) to address groundwater usage, connections to the public road, and pond construction in watercourse areas. These additional standards have been reviewed with George Brown, and he is in general concurrence with the requested amendments. 'o address the concerns of the Farm Bureau, the parcel in which the pond would be constructed would have to be a minimum of 20 acres, and the pond would be limited in size to a surface area of two acres. One of the findings further requires that the ponds be excavated on non-prime soil or on a site that contains unique environmental or geographic features that will be retained and preserved as a result of the project. A response was received from the Farm Bureau on September o, 1994, which indicated that aithough the Farm Bureau has not been able to schedule a meeting to discuss and take a formal position on the proposed Text Amendment, they are not supportive of the proposal because of the removal of acr:cuitural farm land from Production. -he pond excavation permit is a discretionary permit that will require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. As a discretionary permit, it is subject to full CECA review. The site specific environmental effects wili be addressed during the individual project's CEQA review. Based on the Initial Study that',vas Prepared For this Text,amendment, it ,vas found that the proposal will not have a significant effect on the environment. pan .:cacuin County 7.�-93 6r'ercwn �:mmunity eveicement -1b-