The Santa Barbara County Planning Commission is still considering rules for agritourism businesses such as farmstays, campgrounds, special events and tours.  

The panel is inching closer to consensus for the agricultural enterprise ordinance, which would outline what uses are allowed, where, and what level of permitting to require for each project.

Commissioners are also trying to foresee and prevent nuisances to neighbors such as noise from large groups or heavy traffic.

Philosophically, the ordinance is meant to supplement income for owners of working agricultural properties such as ranches, orchards, vineyards and row crop farms. Realistically, not all properties zoned for agriculture are used for agricultural purposes.

Many people with 50- to 100-acre properties in the Santa Ynez Valley “aren’t really doing much agriculture,” Commissioner John Parke said at last week’s meeting.

“They might have a couple of pet longhorns, but I don’t think they’re doing much agriculture. So, to allow them to have weddings and whatnot, am I really helping somebody keep the land in agriculture? It’s really a home site for someone who likes to have a couple cows in their front yard.”

The Agricultural Advisory Committee is also concerned that agriculture remains the principal use on ag-zoned lands, and that agritourism allowed by the ordinance doesn’t affect ag operations on neighboring properties.

There are already property owners who want to start the kinds of businesses this ordinance will legalize, especially at wineries.

Sep Wolf of Buttonwood Farm & Vineyards near Solvang said his business wants to have somewhere for people who are wine tasting to stay. Plans for a 60-room hotel are just a rumor, he said, and they are considering something like a farmstay under this ordinance.

Jimmy Loizides of Vega Vineyard & Farm, near Buellton, said the ordinance will help people like him and his family.

“We’re in a position now where we can’t make money in the winery business, and we stand a chance of losing our winery if we don’t find different ways to supplement that with all the different things proposed here today,” he said.

At last week’s meeting, Parke and Commissioner Roy Reed presented their list of ordinance recommendations, focusing on the “big-ticket items.”

“We think discussing the permit levels first is the tail wagging the dog,” Parke said. “It’s better to decide what uses are allowed, what levels, then decide does it require an exemption, a zoning clearance, a LUP, a CUP.”

Parke and Reed said wineries should be allowed to do incidental food service at tasting rooms during tasting room hours of operation, and commercial kitchens should be allowed.

They think farmstays could include converted buildings, new buildings and modular trailers. Structures shouldn’t have to be located next to existing buildings, they said.

Campgrounds could include tents, yurts, travel trailers and other recreational vehicles, they said.

Parke was adamant that mobile-home-like structures are permanent and shouldn’t be allowed in campgrounds under the ordinance.

“I don’t want to see 30 of them on somebody’s ranch and have them call it a campsite,” he said.

County staff and commissioners want to have multiple tiers of use, based on property size, so owners of larger parcels can host bigger events and build bigger campgrounds than owners of smaller properties.  

Commissioners have been getting into those details in the previous meetings, in pursuit of recommendations for a draft ordinance that will go to the Board of Supervisors for approval or denial.

The agricultural enterprise ordinance is set to be discussed yet again at a March 13 meeting, where commissioners expect to finalize their direction to staff.

Four hearings in on this, Commissioner Michael Cooney said, “I leave these studies and ask time after time, are we getting closer or are we getting farther away from an end product?”

He suggested having the staff present a list next time that highlights the areas with differing recommendations among staff, the AAC and commissioners. That could help them identify which areas still need decisions, and where there’s consensus, he said.

The Planning Commission previously met to talk about recommendations on Nov. 29, Dec. 13, Jan. 10 and Feb. 14.