Planning commission recommends zoning ordinance changes for agricultural zones, adds definitions, animal-unit chart, temporary grazing rule

The Tulare County Planning Commission voted to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve a statutory exemption and adopt proposed amendments to Zoning Ordinance No. 352 addressing agricultural zones.

Staff presentation and scope

Emily (last name not specified), a planner with the Tulare County Resource Management Agency (RMA) Project Processing Division, told commissioners the ordinance update is being implemented in phases to align the zoning code with the Tulare County General Plan and stakeholder input. Staff proposed changes to definitions (including agricultural service establishments, battery storage, grazing, recreational camp, private solar and utility-scale solar), a new land-use matrix showing which uses are allowed or require permits in each agricultural zone, and reorganized and consolidated standards carried forward from earlier sections of the code.

Key proposed changes described by staff

- New and clarified definitions: agricultural service establishments (businesses whose gross receipts are 75%+ from farm-related services), battery storage, grazing (defined as allowing livestock to consume vegetation for production), recreational/educational camps (replacing “summer camp”), and distinctions between private and utility-scale solar.

- Land-use matrix and carryover: A matrix will consolidate uses and indicate whether uses are allowed by right, require an administrative special use permit, or require a full special use permit; staff said the update will reduce redundant language between sections of the existing ordinance.

- Temporary grazing: Staff proposed a temporary-grazing use limited to 10 days every six months to allow targeted or aftermath grazing (staff said the definition was developed with input from the Tulare County Farm Bureau).

- Animal-unit approach: In response to Farm Bureau comments, staff presented a proposed animal-unit chart (to count immature animals toward totals) so that mixed-animal operations can be objectively assessed instead of relying on conflicting prior interpretations based on per-acre or per-square-foot counts. Staff said they will finalize the chart with the Farm Bureau.

- Operational limits and by-right uses: Staff proposed specific numeric limits for poultry and rabbits in some zones (for example, certain zones would limit poultry to 500 or 1,000 head without a use permit and set rabbit thresholds unless a use permit is secured), clarified when slaughtering animals is allowed, allowed mushroom growing as a by-right use in the AE zone, and added harvesting/processing/packaging/shipping of on-site agricultural products as by-right activity in the AE zone.

- Development standards: Staff proposed raising the maximum height for fences, walls and hedges from 3 feet to 8 feet (subject to line-of-sight requirements) and reducing separation distances between human habitations from 20 feet to 10 feet and between human and animal habitations from 100 feet to 40 feet in several zones, to achieve consistency across zones.

Public comment and staff responses

Jim Sullins, chair of the Ag Advisory Committee, thanked staff and described how an animal-unit approach helps code enforcement and accommodates common grazing and vegetation-management practices (for example, bringing sheep or goats onto a field for short “targeted grazing” periods). Sullins said the animal-unit method provides an objective basis for mixed-animal operations and avoids counting only adult animals while excluding immature animals that nonetheless affect carrying capacity. He told the commission, “they've gone through two reviews or multiple reviews with the land use committee at Farm Bureau,” and described why the animal-unit approach is used in neighboring counties.

Emma de la Rosa of Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability asked several clarifying questions about how the code treats bovine facilities and animal confinement facilities, the role of "administrative special use permits," and whether digesters are included in the code. She asked, “are the bovine facilities and the animal confinement facilities the same thing?”

Emily replied that bovine facilities with more than 25 quadrupeds require a special use permit; existing compliant facilities may use an administrative special use permit for expansions, while a full special use permit always comes to the Planning Commission. She said animal confinement facilities are a broader category that includes bovine operations, and that administrative special use permits are described in section 16.2 (staff cited the relevant ordinance subsection). On digesters, Emily said they typically fall under accessory or incidental uses listed in the applicable ag-zone sections and that staff would follow up with Emma on specific questions.

Enforcement and practical concerns

Commissioners and public speakers discussed enforcement practicality. Aaron (RMA staff) explained that county code compliance generally responds to complaints and that targeted grazing or temporary uses are unlikely to be inspected proactively across rangelands; code compliance would investigate when complaints arise.

Commission action

Commissioner Joe Aguilar moved to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve a statutory exemption and adopt the ordinance amendments identified in the staff report. Commissioner Bill Whitlatch seconded the motion. The motion passed on the record; commissioners recorded six votes in favor with one member absent. The recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for final action.

Why this matters

The proposed changes affect how agricultural activities are categorized and regulated across the county, including animal holdings, temporary vegetation-management grazing, definitions for energy production (battery storage, solar), event/assembly uses, and processing activities on agricultural properties. If adopted by the Board of Supervisors, the amendments will change which activities are allowed by right, which require administrative approval and which require a full special use permit, and will create an animal-unit counting method that staff and some stakeholders said will reduce ambiguity in enforcement.

Ending

Staff said they will finalize the animal-unit chart with the Farm Bureau and follow up on outstanding questions from the public (for example, digesters and matrix clarifications). The Board of Supervisors will consider the commission's recommendation at a future board hearing; staff did not set a date at the Planning Commission meeting.