DISCUSSION
Supervisors Rickert and Baugh have suggested that it may be appropriate to expand the County's agritourism provisions at this time and consolidate them into a single ordinance that addresses the allowed uses and establishes appropriate permitting requirements and performance standards. Agriculture has always been a foundation of the Shasta County economy and way of life. According to the 2016 Shasta County Crop Report, published by the Agricultural Commissioner's Office, there are almost 500,000 acres in field crop production at an annual value of about $33 Million, the livestock industry brought in about $21 Million, nursery stock was valued at about $14 Million, apiary products at about $9 Million, fruit and nuts at about $4 Million and timber and forest products at $47 Million. In developing an agritourism ordinance, the County should consider the importance of agriculture and seek a balance between expanded opportunity and preservation of agricultural productivity and values. This report provides background on the current County provisions, the issues to be considered and addressed in an ordinance, and options going forward.
Current Shasta County Code: In Shasta County, Agriculture includes by definition the production of food and fiber in dry fields, irrigated pastures, and greenhouses, as cultivated crops, mushroom farms and aquaculture. It includes livestock, farming, dairying, beekeeping and other animal husbandry. The County Zoning Code makes a distinction between full-time and part-time agricultural operations, but some form of Agriculture is allowed in most Shasta County zoning districts. Agriculture does not include Agricultural Processing, defined as the act of converting or changing an agricultural product from its natural state to a different form, such as grapes to wine, olives to oil, apples to juice, nut hulling and fruit dehydration.
For many years now there has been a trend throughout the U.S. and California toward diversifying agricultural operations with supplemental economic activities designed to increase the long-term viability of agriculture as the primary land use. The Shasta County Code accommodates many such activities in its current zoning plan. For example:
-
Agriculture, as defined, includes cleaning, sizing, grading, packing and similar activities to prepare crops that are grown on the premises for shipping and sale.
-
Operators can store harvested products and planting stock onsite.
-
Operators can establish seasonal stands for sale and promotion of crops and animals grown onsite.
Other uses allowed on agricultural lands include
-
dude ranch
-
bed and breakfast inn
-
riding stable or riding academy
-
fishing and hunting clubs and lodges
-
wineries with tasting facilities, onsite sales and in some cases special events
- Additionally, through the process of rezoning lands to Planned Development or Commercial Recreation, some operations have expanded the limits of the current zoning provisions by adding seasonal amusement activities, excursions and horseback tours, overnight accommodations and restaurants to the existing primary agricultural use, allowing such operations to offer a more inclusive destination experience.
In discussions with local agriculturalists, there is a desire for the County Code to acknowledge and allow other contemporary trends in agricultural marketing such as Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), agricultural cooperatives, and certified farmers' markets; to consider a tiered approach to agricultural processing, whereby some processing may be allowed with a zoning permit or administrative permit (similar to the permit structure for wineries); and to allow additional agriculture-related tourism and educational opportunities on ranches and farms.
Issues to Consider: One purpose of this report is to determine whether there is consensus from the Board to move forward with developing an agritourism ordinance at this time, and if there is, to seek direction related to some of the issues and options identified below.
-
There is a national and state-wide trend toward bringing tourists into agricultural operations for education and tourism. Shasta County's natural landscapes and productive agricultural lands may be very desirable for outdoor gatherings and tourism.
-
Shasta County contains a lot of productive growing and grazing land in both large- and small-scale operations that may be affected by new agritourism policies.
-
The non-agricultural lands around these operations may also be affected.
-
Should agritourism in Shasta County be limited to activities directly associated with the agricultural operation onsite, or should there be broader opportunity for things like guest lodges, amusement park rides or special events?
-
Should the County Winery Ordinance be used as a model for agritourism with tiered permitting based on intensity of use, parcel size and zoning?
-
Should agritourism be limited to full-time agricultural zones and operations or should some level of agritourism be allowed in all agricultural and resource zones? What about Rural and Limited Residential zones that also allow agriculture?
-
Some concerns that will need to be addressed include:
-
Compatibility with agricultural operations and non-agricultural use of adjacent and nearby properties related to traffic, noise, nighttime lighting, etc.;
-
Sufficiency of roadways and the availability of emergency services in rural parts of the County;
Sufficiency of water and wastewater systems;
-
Need for limits on agritourism activity (size of gatherings, times per year, hours per day, etc.) to ensure that the agritourism activity is not adverse to the primary agricultural production onsite and on adjacent agricultural lands;
-
Performance and operational standards to ensure long-term compatibility and compliance;
-
Application of other codes such as health and safety, commercial building and fire safety codes.
Options Going Forward: The following options make a distinction between those changes that are in line and consistent with the County's current General Plan and Zoning Code related to agricultural uses (option 1) and those changes that represent an expansion of potential uses that go beyond current agricultural policies and zoning and would warrant more analysis and community input (option 2). These options are not mutually exclusive, but would progress on substantially different timelines and costs, with option 1 estimated at six months and the standard rezone cost of $10,000 and option 2 at 12 months and likely upwards of $20,000 with more staff work and more community meetings or workshops required.
1. It would be relatively straight forward for staff to focus on those parts of the General Plan and Zoning Code that are directly related to agriculture and, with assistance from the Agricultural Commissioner, Cooperative Extension, develop draft revisions that would address the following revisions, among other similar changes:
-
Introduce a tiered permit structure for agricultural processing of products grown on site (e.g., olives to oil, mint to oil, nut hulling) similar to the County's winery regulations.
-
Address and allow for Community Supported Agriculture, agricultural cooperatives, buying clubs, community gardens, farmers' markets, etc.
-
Address and allow cottage food production, limited farm stays, and educational activities on most agricultural and resource lands.
-
Make the appropriate changes within the existing zoning code with an informational handout summarizing the agritourism provisions for easy public reference.
2. Undertake a longer term investigation and comprehensive amendment that would include the items in #1 above, but would also address standards and conditions applicable to agritourism activities that are larger-scale, more commercially intensive, more permanent and less directly related to agriculture, such as special events, lodges, and amusements. I would anticipate the level of analysis and public debate would be considerably higher with this option.
|