Agenda - 08-10-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DEFINING AGRICULTURAL PRIORITIES In a purchase of development rights program where participation is voluntary, a LESA system does not determine who will offer to sell his/her development rights or how many. Neither does it guar tee that once an offer is made to the seller that he/she will accept it. The advantage of Having a LES system is that it provides a tool to aid in decision-making, e.g,which development rights to acquire. For purchase of development rights program, it can be used, as Forsyth County has, to rank individual f and assign priorities in acquiring such rights. It may also be used to identify important farmlands and target" potential agricultural districts. Identifying Agricultural Priority Areas. The first level at which a LESA system is useful is for general planning purposes; e.g., identifying the most productive land for farm and forest use. Using Bing Township as a case study, the location and relative values for each agricultural and forest land grow were combined using the County's geographic information system. For example, the relative value of cultural Group#1 is 100 (Table 2.2.3)while the relative value of Forest Land Group#2 is 91 (Table 2.2.1 ). The combined value of the two soil groups is thus 191. j Of 70 possible combinations of relative value scores(10 agricultural groups x 7 forest groups), only 19 wSre found to exist. The composite scores were then grouped into three priority categories - critical, high, and moderate - based on their distribution and the soil chz..-acteristics associated with each. The composite scores as well as the priority categories are shown on Table 2.2.29. The land coverages ass fated with these categories have been mapped on Figure 2.2.16, illustrating where priorities should be signed if important farm and forest lands are to be preserved in Bingham Township. However, the map oes not indicate whether such lands are located in rural subdivisions or in association with farms and ed forest tracts. Based on parcel data from the Orange County Land Records Office, Figure 2.2.17 shows the locat on of the boundaries of lots and tracts in the township. Properties in single ownership comprised of 100 res or more in size and participating in the Preferential Assessment/Deferred Taxation Program are also 'ghlighted. Where such tracts are contiguous, they have been combined to identify "critical masses" of farm and forest land. In addition, public and university-owned lands have been denoted. Finally, soil groups which fall into the "critical" priority category have been plotted. The resulting map narrows the focus of planning efforts by identifying large tracts of land in farm and forest use where the most productive soils exist. In this sense, the focus shifts from a resource to a geog aphic orientation and assists in defining broad conservation areas comprised of public lands, farms, and rests within which rural subdivisions may co-exist. Ranking Farmland.The second level at which a LESA system is useful is in evaluating specific tract in farm and forest use. By combining the land evaluation and site assessment scores derived in the prec ding sections, an overall agricultural significance rating for individual farms may be obtained. To illust ate this use of the LESA system, scoring sheets for each of the 12 study farms have been provided in A pendix G and the results summarized in Table 2.2.31. The table provides two different sets of agric tural significance scores and rankings, with the difference resulting from the number or points awar ed for farm distance from an urban area. Table 2.2.30 illustrates the shift in ranking when more points are awarded to farms closest to urb: 1 areas. As shown in that table, there is no change in ranking for one-fourth of the farms, and half the = is- shift only one position. In only one instance, the Hogan farm, does the ranking change 'y ' ,cantly, enabling that farm to rise from eleventh to fifth position. 2.2.39