Losing the Community in our Agricultural Area Amador County’s agricultural community is in danger. Development and vacation rentals have started to proliferate our area and are taking away our residents, our sense of community and our stock of residential homes. I moved to my 20 acre vineyard property 18 years ago and was immediately welcomed by the rural agricultural community. I discovered that “close” neighbors were not just next door, but those 20, 40, and even 1,000s of acres away. I recently took stock of the properties on my private road and those behind me lining Shenandoah Road. We have lost eight residences in our residential agriculturally zoned neighborhood. Now, on Tuesday, January 13th @ 7pm, the Amador County Planning Commission will be asked to approve a use permit application to develop a 15,292 square foot resort they are calling a Bed and Breakfast (B&B). The conversion of residences to commercial uses in Amador has snowballed recently, to the point we are losing our residents and sense of community. At least with the use permit process for a B&B I have a chance to voice my concerns. Besides the multiple homes that have been converted to tasting rooms or winery offices, three of my neighboring properties have been converted to VRBO’s with guests nearly every weekend and there was no application process or approval required. Without any official county policy or limitation on these types of uses, we could potentially see a whole community of residents turn over to weekend rentals and vacationers. A use permit is being requested to demolish the existing home at 10508 Dickson Road (a private road in a residential agriculturally zoned neighborhood in Shenandoah Valley) and build a 15,292 square foot development under the guise of a B&B. The project includes a 13,626 square foot main lodge/event center with 5 guest suites (15+ bathrooms), a 5,000 square foot courtyard, pool, spa, sports court area, and a 1,666 square foot manager’s residence. The application also requests approval to host up to 24 weddings or special events per year with up to 100 guests. This does not include “incidental parties and events” such as birthday parties, graduation parties, corporate meetings or reunions to be held by guests of the inn, proposed without the other limitations. The applicant has stated that once this project is developed he will apply to add another 5 unit development on the adjoining parcel. To put this development into scale: The Shenandoah Inn (on Hwy 49) has 48 rooms and is still only 22,526 square feet; The Amador Harvest Inn (on Steiner Road) is a 3,400 square foot house. This proposed project is actually a commercial development not suitable for an agricultural property. The mitigated negative declaration document states that this “project would be located on second highest point within a mile of the site” and “This site gives the proposed two-story main building the potential to be one of the most visible in the area with above-grade heights of between 32 and 40 feet. It would also be the largest structure…in the neighborhood.” Yet, they are trying to claim that the “impact to the visual character will be less than significant.” I have always supported agritourism as long as it is a compatible use and is properly located. This is not a NIMBY (not in my back yard) issue. My husband is on the county Planning Commission and has voted against projects in other areas of Amador when they were not compatible uses. We have supported B&B projects when they were properly located on public roads, making use of existing dwellings that could easily revert to use as homes. We’re being more vocal this time because this currently proposed project is on our residential agricultural private road and the size is unprecedented. Our current County codes and ordinances do not take into account the growth of our region or the impact that strict regulation in other wine regions are having on us. As these other regions ban and regulate the more commercial type developments in their agricultural regions, Amador has become a prime location for developers to take advantage of our somewhat vague ordinances and codes. Here are some examples: • El Dorado County requires B&Bs to be an owner-occupied residence and considers it an expanded home occupation when in agricultural and residential districts. (El Dorado County Ordinance 4770) • Napa County does not allow any new B&Bs in their areas zoned agriculture or residential country and prohibits VRBOs in those zones. (Napa County Summary of Allowable Uses By Zoning District) • Sonoma County Sonoma County has enacted strict regulations on both B&Bs and VRBOs including limits on the number and locations to keep them from getting out of control. They define a B&B as a single-family dwelling, with an owner in residence under strict regulations. When Sonoma County enacted their ordinances they stated the purpose was to “allow new visitor serving uses and facilities in some agricultural areas but limit them in scale and location.” They stated that their ordinances were “necessary to enable expanded opportunities for visitor serving uses to support the tourism industry, ensure neighborhood compatibility, protect the general welfare of residents in the County, protect the existing housing stock and residential land supply, facilitate economic growth, and further the public necessity and convenience.” (Sonoma County Code Section 26-16-20 and Ordinance 5908.) We need to learn from these areas and protect our own existing housing stock and our strong sense of rural community. How can we have a sense of community if we no longer have many true residents? Nicole Ryan Shenandoah Valley Resident and Grape Grower Plymouth, CA
Posted on: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 01:19:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015