News
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Sign up for Email Updates
CGF In the News
Press Inquiries
Past Articles
Calendar

Why Our Cities Need Agricultural Mitigation Policies
 
by Brian Schmidt

On February 5th of this year, a referendum failed to win the votes necessary to a stop development in the City of Santa Clara that would convert a for-mer University of California agricultural research area called “BAREC” to single family homes with some community housing.

From the Committee for Green Foothills’ view, this was unfortunate, but we also acknowledge a split in the environmental community. Some groups felt the proposal was close enough to being a good project and should be allowed to go forward — rather than stopping it and fighting for a better project later.

While the agriculture that formed the core of the Valley of Heart’s Delight has almost entirely disappeared from San Jose northwards, it is not all gone. BAREC and the Grant property in Mountain View represent recent losses in the last year, but some agriculture survives in Sunnyvale, in Saratoga, and elsewhere, even in San Jose well north of Coyote Valley.

Just talking about protecting remaining farmland is not enough, and failure to act, as in Santa Clara’s case, is completely unacceptable.

How Mitigation Can Work
On one key issue, the need to mitigate for the loss of agricultural lands, strong agreement exists among environmentalists. Even groups that supported privatizing BAREC agreed that a better project would have done some kind of mitigation for the loss of agricultural lands.

Santa Clara County cities with remaining agricultural land under their jurisdiction, no matter how small, should develop agricultural mitigation policies before allowing agricultural land to be developed. Barring great need, these lands should be kept agricultural.

Even creating new farmland, while difficult, can be done. Andy’s Orchards has done it in Morgan Hill, leasing some unused land from a neighboring homeowner and planting an expanded orchard. Mountain View discussed doing something similar when it supported developing Grant Farms.

If development is essential, then the resulting financial windfall to developers should pay for the creation or protection of farmland. If as in the case of Santa Clara, no other farmland exists in that city, it should look to the nearest area to protect farmland or create new farmland. Gilroy has done this, and Morgan Hill is considering it. Other cities should do at least as much because they have preserved far less farmland than those two cities have.

Even doing something creative, like facilitating children’s access to farmland and 4-H programs, would be far better than doing nothing, the option Santa Clara chose for BAREC.

Taking the Next Step
The next step is for cities with remaining agricultural land, no matter how small, to adopt well-thought-out agricultural mitigation policies. Agricultural land and open space provide welcome relief from the asphalt and concrete that surround us — our quality of life depends on it.

Published Spring 2008 in Green Footnotes.

Page last updated May 26, 2008.