APB agenda 051601 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

M. Page 3 with a new building. Renalls noted that a larger facility incorporating previous ideas of common food processing, etc, better accessibility and other agricultural functions /special needs would be a better way to spend allocated money versus constructing a new building for Planning, Environmental Health. Recor asked if there would be design funds available for the anticipated agricultural center and what it might look like. Strayhorn reviewed the history of the old agriculture center idea where all the county offices that farmers had to come into town to deal with were in the same area. b. New Consensus for Farmland Stancil distributed New Consensus for Farmland (NCF) proposed game plan- January 5, 2001 document as was previously discussed in February. Noting that the Stakeholder groups were approved by the BOCC, Stancil reviewed that the next step was to have a kick off meeting to begin developing a farmland preservation plan. One issue where a lot of time was spent in February was to include the Ag Center as a part of this project as it would help get people interested. However, we need to be clear as to the extent of recommendations for an Ag Center. The kickoff meeting is likely to happen this fall, since the time -table has been delayed. Stancil suggested for that the APB consider how to bring the stakeholders together to talk about farmland planning and the Ag Center. Stancil reviewed the February minutes regarding the lack of interest of the rural community to participate because they've heard these ideas for many years without any action being taken. If we prove to the rural community that we are sincere about an Ag Center being built, their participation would increase. Two goals of the new consensus for farmland has overlapping audiences, if they are separated how will we get the traditional farmer interested in farmland preservation. The Ag Center could be the focal point to get both goals accomplished. Other approaches to get different groups to join forces in the creation of an Ag Center included using the center for home demonstration clubs, livestock shows, and a possible tie in with hiking trail lands and parks. The APB concluded with having a discussion with Commissioner Jacobs bout these things. The APB discussed getting the .information out to people, the potential for a joint use of facilities, different uses for an Ag Center, and the best place to broadcast the idea of a new Ag Center. A new Ag Center would show the county's dedication to agriculture /farmland preservation, a nice Ag Center does more than words can say about the way all people view agriculture in a county. The group discussed the different impact and functions of going with a retrofitted existing building versus a new center. Jacobs suggested that a clear sense of what should be in an Ag Center needs to be clarified. How does that vision differ from the Space Study Report of retrofitting this building? Should the Farmers Market be part of the Ag Center, should the center have meeting rooms, does the entire center need to be in one building It would be useful to go through that process to get things settled before it's drawn up. Kleese suggested that the stakeholders should lay the groundwork for developing a clear design of the facility. Morrow summarized by saying that by demonstrating that if farming Draft 3/21/2001