Later this month, the San Benito County Board of Supervisors is
expected to decide whether to loosen restrictions protecting prime
agricultural land from development for housing.
Later this month, the San Benito County Board of Supervisors is expected to decide whether to loosen restrictions protecting prime agricultural land from development for housing.
The supervisors’ consideration of the change is being driven by a proposal to expand a small subdivision just south of Highway 152 called Pacheco Creek Estates from nine homes to 13, all set on one-acre lots.
At issue is the fact that expanding the subdivision as proposed would mean building on a piece of Grade 1 soil, the very best farmland. Building homes on Grade 1 ag land is now prohibited by the county.
However, some members of the Board of Supervisors have said they would like the flexibility to grant case-by-case exceptions to that rule. Of course, simply changing the law won’t green light the Pacheco Creek Estates expansion. But it would open the door for that proposal – and invite others that involve turning the county’s prime ag land into subdivisions.
It’s not unreasonable to loosen existing development restrictions to allow for some case-by-case discretion by our elected supervisors. We can think of some instances in which it might be a good idea.
But the ordinance is on the books for good reason – to prevent San Benito County’s best farmland from being built over with homes – and before they open this door the supervisors need to make sure they have a good set of guidelines in place to determine when it would be allowed and when it wouldn’t.
These guidelines should take into account whether the ag land in question is still viable for commercial farming. For example, a small piece of Grade 1 land that’s pinched on all sides by other uses – commercial here, residential there – might in fact not have a future as productive farm land.
The guidelines should also require affirmative answers to other questions: Is the proposed development contiguous to other residential development? Is adequate infrastructure available? Is it infill? Does it help meet an important community need that outweighs the benefit of protecting our very best farmland?
Ideally, these guidelines should be written in concert with the county’s general plan, a document that’s still being developed. That would be the best way to ensure that the guidelines for allowable exceptions reflect the plan’s guiding principles.
That said, it might be a bit premature to be loosening the restrictions right now. Better to wait a few months and do things right than to hurry into a decision we’ll regret a few years from now.
