• 
• CLASS
• JOBS
• AUTO
• HOMES

Farmland preservation balances urban, ag needs

Photo

Al Sweeney

Photo

Tony DiNicola

Farmland preservation target areas

JANESVILLE — They don’t want to take a shotgun approach to farmland preservation.

Nor do they want to encourage leapfrog development.

But drawing a line in the soil isn’t all that easy.

Last week, the Rock County ad hoc PACE/PDR committee voted to approve a set of criteria that could be used to protect farmland from development. The decision is the first big one for the committee, and a lot of work remains before the proposed program becomes a county ordinance.

“PACE” stands for purchase of agricultural conservation easement. “PDR” stands for purchase of development rights.

If it comes to fruition, the county’s program would pay farmers for the value of their land, although the land would not be sold. An easement would permanently prevent development on the property.

The ad hoc committee will make a recommendation to the county’s land use committee. That committee could make a recommendation to the full county board as early as this fall.

The PACE committee’s vote was not unanimous. Some committee members thought the criteria were too restrictive and could limit urban growth in 30 years or more.

Especially at odds were 1,400 acres on Janesville’s east side that both urban and agricultural advocates consider prime for their needs.

How it would work

According to state law, any land that’s not inside a city or village would qualify for the state’s PACE program, said PACE committee Chairman Al Sweeney.

But money is limited. And the committee wanted to strike a balance between farmland preservation and urban expansion, Sweeney said.

The committee and county staff came up with a list of weighted criteria to rank each agricultural property in the county.

The criteria add up to make a “LESA” score for each parcel. LESA stands for Land Acquisition and Site Assessment.

The criteria include the size of the parcel, its soil quality, whether it’s in a transportation corridor and its proximity to environmentally sensitive areas, among other things.

Using the criteria, the committee selected 11 blocks of properties that would be the best qualified for farmland preservation. The committee will recommend the program target those areas.

With one exception, the target blocks did not include any properties in areas targeted for urban expansion.

Any farmland property owner would be able to apply for the PACE program. Property owners would apply to the county. The county will seek state, federal and private money to pay for easements. Some property owners could donate all or part of the easement in exchange for tax credits.

The county has about $600,000 set aside of its own money to start the program, Sweeney said.

Other funding options could be necessary in the future, he said.

Sticking point

Farmers aren’t the only people who would benefit if fields were kept permanently as farmland.

Agriculture is an important part of Rock County’s economy, said Brad Cantrell, city of Janesville community development director.

It’s “indisputable” that Rock County contains some of the world’s best farmland, he said.

However, Cantrell was one of four ad hoc committee members that voted against the criteria.

The sticking point was 1,400 acres in La Prairie and Harmony townships on the Rock Prairie east of Janesville, he said.

Those acres are in the city’s urban reserve area as well as the proposed PACE program’s target area.

Urban reserve is an area around the city that could be used for expansion beyond the city’s 20-year plan.

“I voted against it because our urban reserve area still hasn’t been adequately addressed,” Cantrell said.

Cantrell doesn’t think any of the properties in the city’s 20-year expansion area or its urban reserve should qualify for the program.

Cantrell will talk with city council members and ask them to decide if the city should speak against allowing the target areas to include the land the city has labeled urban reserve.

A permanent easement would prevent any kind of development, including agricultural industry development, he said.

“Those are the things we need to look at or, at least, think about,” Cantrell said. “We don’t want to shoot ourselves in the foot.”