City of Brentwood
Home PageContact Us!Back

Back to Agricultural AdvisoryAgricultural Advisory

Calendar of Events | Current Agenda | Past Agendas | Meeting Minutes
Agricultural Advisory Committee Final Report

City Administration
Meeting Minutes
Action Notes 
Brentwood Agricultural Advisory Committee
Meeting #3
November 11, 1999
6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
734 Third Street 

Members Present:  Jack Adams, John Chapman, Nancy Holloman, John L. Johnson, John Kopchik, Marty Maggiore, Jim McKeehan, Mike McPoland, Edward Meyer, David Navarette, Ron Nunn, William Putnam, Richard Vrmeer, Peter Wolfe

I. Introduction & Welcome
 Jeff Loux opened the meeting.  Jeff Loux led the Committee in reviewing the agenda. 

II. Review of the October 14, 1999 Meeting
The Action Notes from the 10/14 meeting were reviewed and accepted.

III. Types of Projects to Mitigate
The Committee discussed the viability of mitigating several different types of projects including commercial, non-profits and public projects. They also discussed the possibility of mitigating these projects differently from the residential projects.

The Committee recognized the need for Brentwood to coordinate its actions with the County since it was only a small part of the regional economy.

IV. Criteria for Conservation Sites
* Open space for community.
* View Corridors
* Primary reason: Preserving and enhancing the agricultural lands adjacent to urban development in the 1993 General Plan, other items would be a secondary benefit.
There was much discussion about what areas should be included in this program including the northwest annexation area, citywide infill parcels, and other county parcels outside the current city limits.

Vote on Criteria for Conservation SitesConservation Site Option Members In Favor:
* City agricultural conservation areas first, County agricultural core area only as needed 6
* City conservation areas only 3
* City and county parcels equally 3
* Include the northwest annexation area 0
* Include the city’s interior parcels 8

V. Mechanisms for Conservation
The Committee discussed how non-residential projects should be mitigated.

Vote on Mitigation Fee for Non-Residential Projects.  Mitigation Fee Option Members In Favor:
100% of Residential Fee 6
50% of Residential Fee 4
Total Waiver of Mitigation Fee 0
Defer 2

VI. Mechanisms for Agricultural Conservation [Ranked]
1) Pay the mitigation fee
2) Dedicate a conservation easement or fee title
3) On site mitigation if meets criteria
4) Combination of above
5) Other mitigation strategies? Need to specify many options- not too open-ended
The Committee agreed that paying the fee was the preferred mechanism.

VII. Conservation Vehicles
Several options were discussed, including perpetual conservation easements, transitional easements, and term easements.

The Committee then asked what was the difference between a term and a permanent easement.

Next meeting EPS will prepare comparative information on the two mechanisms.

The City Attorney will be consulted on the legal consequences of a school district condemnation of a parcel with a conservation easement.

VIII. Next Meeting December 6, 1999 6:30 p.m.

City of Brentwood Agricultural Advisory
730 Third Street
Brentwood, CA 94513
(925) 516-5444
Fax (925)516-5445