Agricultural landowners will have an easier time keeping the house and selling
the farm thanks to new land zoning changes passed by the Merced County Board
of Supervisors on Tuesday morning.
Supervisors unanimously approved three amendments to the county's zoning code,
relaxing restrictions on dividing and selling properties.
While supervisors said the rule changes are small, technical tweaks to the law,
some farming interests expressed concerns about impacts on agriculture.
"When farm parcels are split up, almost always, a new home site results,"
said Farm Adviser Maxwell Norton with the UC Cooperative Extension.
"Cumulatively, it's having an effect on farming countywide."
County officials said the changes will not have an appreciable consequence
on agriculture, and, if anything, might add to the amount of land used for
farming.
The changes include:
-
Allowing property owners to keep a homesite of between 1 and 5 acres and
combine the rest of his or her property with an adjoining lot;
-
Allowing smaller-than-usual minimum lot sizes within areas designated for
urban development;
-
Allowing a 2.5 percent lower minimum size for lots that had been surveyed
and recorded before current technology. The allowance provides for a margin
of error in surveying methods from past generations.
Norton said he is finishing a study that examines how the proliferation of
new homes in rural areas often clashes with existing agricultural practices.
In particular, he said, crop dusters face the stiffest pressures of urban
encroachment -- even those that spray seeds.
Norton said that when nonfarmers move into agricultural areas, they tend to
be intolerant of noisy, smelly and dirty operations. As a result, more farms
are being forced to change age-old practices.
Noticing few public comments by the agricultural community, District 4
Supervisor Deidre Kelsey motioned to delay the vote.
"We need to somehow loop in the Farm Bureau and ag groups and explain these
issues to them," she said.
That motion died for lack of a second.
John Pedrozo, the recently sworn-in in District 1 supervisor whose
campaign was buoyed by several contributions from local farmers, did not
comment on the changes.
Not all at the meeting were happy with the vote, though.
County resident Bryant Owens, who often speaks at public meetings on
land use issues, said supervisors were ill-informed.
"I don't think you have the appropriate resources to make an informed decision
on a topic of this magnitude," he said.
District 3 Supervisor Mike Nelson said a "mountain" had been made out
of a "molehill" and that the vote was merely one to "clean up language."
