Is Marin inadvertently opening the door to development
on agricultural lands?
With little fanfare, the Marin County Community Development Agency is
proposing major changes in how it regulates uses of agricultural lands.
These changes are hidden away in a proposed revision of the Development
Code, a tome of nearly 500 pages which reworks the organization, and practically
every word and phrase, of all of the county's existing regulations on land
use and subdivisions (currently Titles 22 and 24 of the Marin County Code).
For over 30 years, the rural character of much of the county has been
preserved by limitations on the uses and subdivision of agricultural lands
that make it difficult to convert ranch land to non-agricultural uses.
A complex pattern of rules limits density (A-60), restricts uses, and imposes
stringent master-planning. The rules permit primary agriculture and necessary
incidental uses (such as housing for the farmer) and prohibit most non-agricultural
uses.
The reformulation was originally proposed as a way to make the rules
more user-friendly. Since the last comprehensive revision in 1975, piecemeal
additions to the code have made it difficult to use and confusing. Since
the county is also overhauling its Countywide Plan, the revision process
was to have two phases. Phase one would be a rearrangement and reformulation
of the existing regulations with minimum change in substance. When the
Countywide Plan process is complete, phase two would implement the changes.
County planners added one exception to this division: phase one would
also implement at least in part the recommendations of the Marin County
Agricultural Zoning Study of July 24, 1996. Among other changes, the 1996
study recommended relaxation of restrictions on some activities that are
not primarily agricultural, but that are compatible with agriculture or
do not detract from the primary agricultural use of the property. The 1996
study itself did not propose any precise language for most its recommendations.
Unfortunately, this means that the proposed revised agriculture regulations
are a hodgepodge of technical and substantive changes that so far have
received little public scrutiny. Further, some of the proposed changes
diverge from the 1996 study.
Some of the proposed changes
For example, the 1996 study recommended extending master planning to
those agricultural lands (A-District) where it currently is not required.
Instead, the revised code would relax master-plan requirements in those
agricultural zoning districts where master plans are now required (ARP,
C-ARP, and C-APZ).
Currently, in all agricultural zones a use permit is required for processing
or retail sale of agricultural products. The 1996 study recommended distinguishing
between products produced on versus off the property. Thus, the new rules
would eliminate the permit requirement for on-site products, and specifically
allow off-site products as a conditional use, subject to discretionary
approval through a use permit. These changes were to promote diversification
of agricultural business. For the automatically allowed uses, it would
eliminate safeguards for general planning issues such as traffic, parking,
and community character. Even for the uses requiring permits, the terms
"processing" and "agricultural product" are not defined, and there is no
limitation on county, state, or country of origin of the products. How
does this broad permission preserve productive agriculture in Marin?
Without precise definitions, this could open the door for non-agricultural
processing facilities with similar impacts.
Consistent with the 1996 study, the new rules would allow bed and breakfasts
in all agricultural zones. Currently they are not allowed in A and ARP
Districts. Up to three guest rooms would be allowed without use permit;
four or five guest rooms would require a use permit. Would the exception
include building of new structures to house the guest rooms? Are B&B's
really incidental to productive agriculture?
One change not contemplated in the 1996 study is to allow home occupations
in all agricultural zones (defined as the conduct of a business within
a dwelling, employing the inhabitant of the dwelling, with the business
use being subordinate to the residential use of the property). In addition,
with a use permit, one non-resident employee would be allowed. Would this
new rule facilitate purchase of ranch land by non-farmers? Would it include
permission to build a separate accessory building?
These proposed changes may conflict with the Agriculture Element in
the Countywide Plan and may weaken the existing regulation. Any reduced
oversight for activities that impact the environment, communities, traffic,
etc. should be questioned in public debate.
General problems
More generally, in all areas (not just agriculture) the draft Development
Code contains so much new language that there is a great risk of errors
and unanticipated consequences. No method has been adopted to prevent unintended
interpretations from causing substantive changes.
What You Can Do
Write to:
Marin Community Development Agency
attn: Brian C. Crawford
Deputy Director for Planning Services
3501 Civic Center Drive, #308
San Rafael, CA 94903.
Urge it to make sure that the revisions to the Development Code not
be allowed to weaken environmental
regulation.
Ask for a copy of the Draft Development Code and the latest list of
proposed revisions to the Public Review Draft. Study the code carefully
in areas that interest you, and send your comments to the planning staff.
Ask to be notified when hearings take place before the Planning Commission.
To work with the Sierra Club Marin Group on analyzing this complex document
and formulating our response, contact Herb Kutchins at (415) 663-1796 or:
kutchins@csus.edu
Herb Kutchins