File #: 07-1404    Version: 1
Type: Agenda Item Status: Adopted
File created: 8/13/2007 In control: Board of Supervisors
On agenda: 8/28/2007 Final action: 8/28/2007
Title: Hearing to consider adoption of Resolutions 220-2007, 221-2007 and 222-2007 to divide existing Agricultural Preserve 142 into three separate agricultural preserves No. 311/ Williamson Act Contract WAC06-00016 consisting of 50.6 acres (APN 088-020-85 - Thompson); No. 312/WAC06-0017 consisting of 62.8 acres (APN 088-020-84 - Roe) (portion of Boundary Line Adjustment BLA06-0076); and No. 313/WAC06-0015 consisting of 307.5 acres (APNs 088-020-72, -79, -81, and -82 - Rutz) in the Garden Valley area, requested by Roy and Marilyn Rutz. (District IV)
Attachments: 1. WAC06-15, 16, 17 Findings.pdf, 2. WAC06-0015 16 17 Minutes 072607.pdf, 3. WAC06-0015 Resolution.pdf, 4. WAC06-0016 Resolution.pdf, 5. WAC06-0017 Resolution.pdf, 6. WAC06-0015 16 17 Staff Report.pdf
Title
Hearing to consider adoption of Resolutions 220-2007, 221-2007 and 222-2007 to divide existing Agricultural Preserve 142 into three separate agricultural preserves No. 311/ Williamson Act Contract WAC06-00016 consisting of 50.6 acres (APN 088-020-85 - Thompson); No. 312/WAC06-0017 consisting of 62.8 acres (APN 088-020-84 - Roe) (portion of Boundary Line Adjustment BLA06-0076); and No. 313/WAC06-0015 consisting of 307.5 acres (APNs 088-020-72, -79, -81, and -82 -  Rutz) in the Garden Valley area, requested by Roy and Marilyn Rutz. (District IV)  
 
Body
RECOMMENDED ACTION:  Planning Commission recommending the Board take the following action:  1.  Certify that the division of existing Agricultural Preserve No. 142 into three separate preserves is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15317 of the CEQA Guidelines; and 2.  Approve WAC06-0015, WAC06-0016, and WAC06-0017, based on the findings listed on Attachment 1.
 
Background: The applications were on the Consent Calendar/Applications July 26, 2007.  Commissioner Machado pulled these items from the Consent Calendar, as he was concerned about the preserves being able to maintain the necessary viable agricultural uses. Commissioner Mathews voiced the same concern.  After further discussion with the applicant and his agent, both Commissioners commented that their concerns had been addressed.  As this is an existing agricultural preserve, adjacent parcels are already subject to the 200-foot agricultural setback requirement.  No changes would occur as a result of this proposal.  There was no input from the public.  No new issues were addressed other than those in the staff report. The applications were recommended for approval on a 4-0 vote, with Commissioner Tolhurst being absent.
 
Contact: Gregory L. Fuz (5445)/Lawrence W. Appel (7698)