It says project would encroach on farm district in El Dorado.
By Cathy Locke -- Bee Staff Writer
A proposal to build clusters of homes on former pear orchards and ranchlands north of Placerville was rebuffed by the El Dorado County Agricultural Commission.
Members of the advisory panel, which has worked for years to protect farmlands, said they could not endorse a residential project that would significantly encroach on the Gold Hill Agricultural District.
Commission member Dave Pratt said representatives of the development company, Foster Enterprises of Redwood City, had done due diligence in presenting a proposal for a 218-unit subdivision that would preserve about 55 percent of the 220-acre Caswell Ranch property as open space.
But, he said, the developer chose the wrong spot. "If it's in the wrong spot, it's not a good project," Pratt said.
The development would require annexing the former ranchlands to the city of Placerville, creating an urbanized "finger" of land north of Cold Springs Road and south and west of Highway 49. As a result, some 420 acres of agricultural land bordering the annexation area could come under the city's sphere of influence, said Bill Stephans, county agricultural commissioner.
A sphere of influence is an area in which the city could provide services and typically is considered a prime site for urban expansion.
Pratt estimated that more than 900 acres of producing agricultural land would be at risk if the development were approved.
Ken Hill, project manager for Foster Enterprises, said the development would include conservation easements as buffers between homes and agricultural lands.
But area residents argued that the easements would not protect people moving into the area from what newcomers might consider undesirable aspects of agricultural operations. They cited noise from devices that periodically fire a cannon-like boom to scare away birds.
People buying homes on small acreages likely would complain about farming activities and seek to restrict agricultural operations, longtime residents said.
"High-density housing and a surrounding agricultural area are not compatible," said commission member Edio Delfino, citing his experience as the county's former agricultural commissioner.
Annexing the Caswell Ranch to the city would threaten the integrity of the Gold Hill district, Delfino said. "It condemns that whole area, period," he said.
Kevin Macklin said he bought 180 acres, the bulk of the Caswell Ranch property, 2 1/2. years ago. Macklin said he had hunted on the ranch, and at the time he purchased it, the land had been for sale since 1985.
"As long as I own it, it will never be the agricultural use that a lot of people think it should be," Macklin said. "I'm not a farmer or a rancher."
Nevertheless, commission members argued, the property has the potential for agricultural production if someone else were to buy or lease it.
"But once you put houses there, it's gone," Delfino said.
Kevin Cornwell said his land would be surrounded by the proposed development. "I'm not naive enough to think the (Caswell Ranch) property wouldn't develop at some time," he said. But he argued that homes on larger parcels would be more in keeping with neighboring property.
He urged the commission to encourage more "thoughtful growth," saying the goal "should not be what makes the developer the most money."
Commission member Pratt said the development would threaten small farming operations in the area that are "proving you can get the job done."
People may not be getting rich off their agricultural endeavors, but, Pratt said, "As long as you can pay your bills, things are good."
Delfino suggested alternatives, such as 10-acre lots. The larger acreages would retain their agricultural potential, and they could be developed without annexing to the city, he said.
Hill said the firm was willing to consider such options.
The commission typically makes recommendations to the county Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. But if Foster Enterprises pursues annexation to the city, the decision would be made by the El Dorado County Local Agency Formation Commission, which rules on government reorganizations.
Pratt said commission members likely would have to make their case before LAFCO.
Valerie Zentner, El Dorado County Farm Bureau executive director, urged the commission to oppose the development. Allowing the city to extend its sphere of influence into an agricultural district would have a ripple effect on other properties, she said.
"The county will rely heavily on your input," Zentner told the commission, "and LAFCO will rely heavily on the county's input."
