A Feasibility Study for Urban Edge Agricultural Parks - SAGE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Case StudiesAppendix B presents in-depth case studies selected to reflect strategies thataddressed at least one major aspect of the AgPark concept: preservation offarmlands on the urban edge, increased public access to and education about foodproduction, and/or assistance to limited resource farmers. Further, the cases wereselected to reflect different sector’s responses to the goals inherent in the AgParkconcept, from private sector to government to non-profit/NGO. In addition, ALBAprovided case studies of two of its projects, the Rural Development Center and theFarm Training and Research Center, both of which reflect strategies inherent in theAgParks concept and are instructive for the development of the AgParks model.Summary of Findings: Models and CaseStudiesThe purpose of the models research and the case studies was to identify existingprojects which illustrated at least one and preferably several of the themes in theAgParks concept: preservation of farmlands on the urban edge, assistance tolimited resource farmers, increased public access to and education about local foodproduction, and support for farmworker housing on the urban/rural edge. Themodels and case studies presented above reflect a wide variety of innovative,geographically and economically varied, responses to these themes.Findings include the following:Farmland Preservation/Retention• Nearby/adjacent preserved farmland and/or open space are valuable amenitiesto some homebuyers. This value can be used to compensate for seemingly highagricultural land prices.• If zoning allows for development, the price of agricultural easements is relativelyhigh.• Conservation easements alone may not ensure that properties will be activelyfarmed, and may need to be combined with incentives, program funding and/ornegotiated public access to be able to support ongoing agriculture.Increased Public Access and Education• Agricultural tourism and public access increase support for local farming projectsand public appreciation of agriculture.• Collective operations and ownership seem to support project viability andcommunity investment in many cases.Limited Resource Farmer Assistance to Land, Markets or Training• Crucial to the success of small-scale agricultural projects are practices such as:diversification, marketing, branding, reuse of obsolete farm facilities for touristDRAFT 1.6.05 14
accommodations, value-added production, and internal purchasing of farmproducts.• Projects utilizing a combination of affordable leases and structured, collaborativemarketing have been successful.Farmworker Housing on the Rural/Urban Edge• The land trust model presents a functional option to ensure that housing willremain affordable and primarily for farm families. Federal funds may beavailable for the development of affordable farmworker housing.DRAFT 1.6.05 15
Page 1 and 2: DRAFTURBAN EDGEAGRICULTURAL PARKSFE
Page 3 and 4: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYOverview of AgPark
Page 5: Farmworker Housing on the Rural/Urb
Page 10 and 11: seeking to develop effective collab
Page 12: INTRODUCTIONHistory of Collective F
Page 15: Contemporary Models of Agricultural
Page 19 and 20: 45%, from 5,347 in 1997 to 7,771 in
Page 21 and 22: information about each site include
Page 23 and 24: undertaken. It may be best to furth
Page 25 and 26: IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL AGPARK
Page 27 and 28: SONOMA COUNTYLaguna Farm 80-acre 3
Page 29 and 30: The above examples reflect a range
Page 31 and 32: MARTIAL COTTLE PARK FEASIBILITY STU
Page 33 and 34: Median household income in the neig
Page 35 and 36: • Relationship to surrounding nei
Page 37 and 38: • Education/Research Center: 4-H,
Page 39 and 40: Management and DevelopmentRole of S
Page 41 and 42: Beyond the capital costs for the in
Page 43 and 44: ConclusionThis property has great p
Page 45 and 46: Ardenwood Historic Farm is the rema
Page 47 and 48: • Establish Ardenwood as a vibran
Page 49 and 50: These ideas complement and build on
Page 51 and 52: • Farmer Housing: None proposed.
Page 53 and 54: ConclusionsThis project identified
Page 55 and 56: Appendix A: Overview of Ag Park Mod
Page 57 and 58: The National Trust(England, Wales,N
Page 59 and 60: Crystal Waters Village(Malaney, pop
Page 61 and 62: McBryde AgriculturalPark (Kauai, HI
Page 63 and 64: Farm worker Housing on Rural/Urban
Page 65 and 66: Occidental Arts& EcologyCenter(Occi
Page 67 and 68:
The FarmSchool (Athol,MA)Privatelyo
Page 69 and 70:
To ensure conservation in perpetuit
Page 71 and 72:
King County FarmlandPreservation Pr
Page 73 and 74:
development.Economics/Sources of Fu
Page 75 and 76:
In 2001, the Trust advanced a susta
Page 77 and 78:
LandThe cooperatives have sought la
Page 79 and 80:
ALBA’s Farm Training andResearch
Page 81 and 82:
• “ALBA Organics” distributio
Page 83 and 84:
in addition to herbs, flowers, and
Page 85 and 86:
APPENDIX C: FUNDING SOURCES FOR AGP
Page 87 and 88:
Public Support for FarmlandPreserva
Page 89 and 90:
transactions. Transaction types wil
Page 91 and 92:
Affordable Rural Housing Grant andL
Page 93 and 94:
farm" program, established farmers
Page 95 and 96:
Appendix D: Producer Survey Instrum
Page 97 and 98:
12. Would you be interested and wil
Page 99 and 100:
Feasibility Study for Urban Edge Ag
Page 101:
Site BLocationFremont, adjacent to
show all

A Feasibility Study for Urban Edge Agricultural Parks - SAGE

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?