Laserfiche WebLink
18686 - N <br />goals and the Plan text. For example, decidedly lower <br />residential densities and a much larger land supply may <br />result in lower land costs, but energy savings may very <br />well be sacrificed through need for longer transportation <br />routes and accompanying fuel consumption . <br />Factor 6. "Retention of agr i c u,l t ur al land as defined , with Class I <br />being the highest priority for retention and Class VI the <br />lowest priority;' <br />The compact urban growth and sequential development prin- <br />ciples embodied in the Plan text and diagram allow - for <br />retention of the' most productive agricul - tural lands when <br />balanced with other planning goals-, <br />Factor 7. "Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby <br />agricultural activities." <br />Again, the diagram adheres to the compact urban growth <br />form and sequential development. The separation between <br />urban and urban i zab 1 e lands and rural lands formed by the <br />urban growth boundary creates a sharp distinction between <br />ultimate urban uses and agricultural uses on rural lands. <br />While urban development may create prob l ems from an agr i ;- <br />cultural production standpoint, the compact urban growth <br />form is, i n many ways, compatible with nearby a g r i c u l - <br />t u r a l activities. <br />First, as urban densities increase, the close proximity <br />of productive agricultural areas have the potential to <br />access larger markets for their products, thereby increas- <br />ing their economic return. Second, .close proximity can <br />reduce transportation costs for agricultural products <br />grown near metropolitan population concentrations, <br />e n a b l i n g local farmers to remain or become competitive <br />with more distant markets . Third, retention of prod uc -- <br />t i ve agricultural lands immediately adjacent to urban <br />development can provide possible social and psychological <br />benefits to urban residents. Fourth, the compact urban <br />growth form and sequential development avoids the problem <br />of leapfrogging and the problem of surrounding an area of <br />agricultural development with urban areas. <br />Since the most productive agricultural lands are typified <br />by Class I agricultural soils located in the f 1 oodway <br />fringes, the boundary of the fl oodway fringe often serves <br />as the location of the urban growth boundary. when the <br />fl oodway fringe fol 1 ows ' a natural bench or-when a road <br />II-E-11 <br />