Development Interests Seek to Circumvent Measure A

green grass and yellow poppies
California golden poppies growing at the site of the proposed Traveler’s Station development near Highway 129 and Searle Road in San Benito County, one of the areas removed from commercial zoning by Measure A.

Measure A, passed in November, requires voter approval for development proposals that change agricultural, rural, or rangeland to commercial, industrial, or residential in San Benito County. This added protection for open space and farmland is great for nature and the county but was opposed by developers.  In the weeks surrounding the election, a few developers and landowners sought to circumvent Measure A. Fortunately Green Foothills, our partners, and community members came together to stop them.

Ag Center Development Agreement: Vested Development Rights In Exchange For Practically Nothing?

One of the attempts to circumvent Measure A involved a proposed truck stop known as the “Ag Center.” This truck stop would have sprawled across 15 acres that lie within a pathway critical for wildlife moving between the Santa Cruz Mountains and the Gabilan and Diablo ranges, a pathway essential for their resilience to adapt to climate change and maintain a genetically diverse population. Because Measure A removed the commercial zoning from the Ag Center property (as well as from three other commercial “nodes” along Highway 101), the Ag Center developers were facing the prospect of losing their ability to develop this land if Measure A passed.

In an attempt to lock in their then-existing commercial land designation, the Ag Center developers proposed a Development Agreement that would grant them vested rights to develop the land. If approved, the county could have been waiving its rights to request changes or deny the project. In exchange for this loss of rights the proposed Development Agreement offered three things. The first was a $500,000 payment to the county for transportation or public safety benefits. This $500,000 is a paltry amount compared to what development agreements typically include, and since the proposed site is on the western edge of the county, it would not even cover the added cost of providing services such as water, sewer, police and fire, or the cost of road repairs. The second thing developers offered was a “wildlife corridor” and “open space easement,” which were simply two narrow stripes drawn by the developers with a highlighter pen on a map of the property, without any input from local wildlife agencies, biologists, or anyone else who would know whether wildlife would actually benefit. One was too close to the heavy traffic of Highway 129 to be of any value for wildlife, and the other was in a ravine that would be impossible to develop anyway. In addition, the agreement reserved the right to use those areas for underground utilities and roadway purposes, which would mean they would not be open space easements or wildlife corridors after all. The third offer was a commitment to design the buildings to look like agricultural structures. Not only were these three offers essentially of no value to the county, they also were all items that the county itself could have required the developers to add to the project anyway, as mitigation measures through normal permitting processes under the California Environmental Quality Act. So in exchange for giving up the rights of the county and circumventing Measure A and the will of the voters, the developers were offering the county practically nothing.

Green Foothills worked to protect the land and stop the developers from circumventing Measure A. We spoke to County Supervisors individually, wrote letters to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, helped to get the word out to the community, and gave public comments. After hearing much public outcry, the Planning Commission denied the proposed Development Agreement. The developers appealed the denial, but by the time their appeal came before the Board of Supervisors, the election had taken place and Measure A had passed. With the will of the voters plainly evident, the Board of Supervisors also voted to deny the Development Agreement. So the Ag Center land will be removed from commercial zoning as Measure A requires, and will not be commercially developed. This was a victory for local wildlife, responsible land use planning, and the democratic process.

Zoning Ordinance Changes: Gas Stations and Mini Marts on Agricultural Land?

Just after the November election, San Benito County considered an extensive overhaul to the county’s zoning ordinances. Many of the proposed changes were intended to streamline permitting processes, and to make things like low-impact camping on agricultural land easier, in an effort to support agritourism. However, the proposed changes also would have allowed gas stations, alternative fuel stations, charging stations, mini marts, and retail businesses on agricultural land. Since Measure A requires a vote of the people for any changes to agricultural land, these proposed changes would have been just another way to circumvent Measure A – this time by changing the very definition of what “agricultural” designation means. And since many of the proposals the county had been considering in the commercial nodes were proposals for gas stations and mini marts, this was also an attempt to ignore the will of the voters, who clearly rejected the possibility of gas stations and mini marts on agricultural land when they approved Measure A.

Green Foothills again contacted Supervisors, wrote letters, helped spread the word about this issue, and gave public comment. The community again turned out to express their concern and frustration. Since the County is currently working on drafting an Agricultural Element (a section of the General Plan dedicated to agriculture), the Supervisors decided it did not make sense to consider these proposed changes to the zoning ordinance until the Agricultural Element was completed. They also voted to remove gas stations and mini marts from the proposal entirely, so those two items will no longer be on the table, even if the proposed zoning changes come back up for consideration later.

Green Foothills Will Continue to Watch and Act

As of December 10th, the election has been certified and Measure A is in full effect. But this doesn’t mean that the development interests in San Benito County won’t continue to try to find ways to get around the measure, or create loopholes so that they can develop on agricultural and rural land without voter approval. Green Foothills will continue to watch carefully, and act when needed to uphold the will of the people and to protect open space and farmland in the county.

If you have friends or family in San Benito County who might be interested in receiving an email alert when there’s an opportunity or threat to open space and farmland in their area, please encourage them to sign up for our mailing list at greenfoothills.org/subscribe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Note

You are leaving the Green Foothills website to go to our Protect Coyote Valley website.

Continue on to PCV Petition