Title
Potential Changes to City Code Related to Urban Agriculture Policies
Issue:
Included on this year’s Planning Commission work plan is review regulations related to urban agriculture and food security and recommendation to the City Council about whether changes to City codes are warranted. Five hours of committee time and 20-30 hours of staff time are projected for this effort.
City Manager Recommendation:
Receive a report on the April 25 community meeting; and provide general guidance to the Planning Commission on a scope of work that is within the designated Commission and staff time available for the effort.
Staff Contact:
Jennifer Kenny, Associate Planner, Community Planning and Development, 360.753.8031
Background and Analysis:
Project Description:
On September 26, 2011, staff briefed the LUEC on current policies regarding urban agriculture and proposed changes to the City Code. The LUEC directed staff to collaborate with Sustainable South Sound’s Local Food Systems Program to explore the issues further.
We co-hosted a public meeting on April 25, 2012, to hear community member’s concerns and ideas about potential changes to City Code and programs. Around 80 people attended the meeting. There was unanimous support for more permissive Codes related to the growing and selling of agricultural products and to declassify chickens as pets, among other ideas.
Status:
The Planning Commission will receive a briefing on the matter in October, followed by a public hearing and deliberations in November.
Considerations:
1. There are three areas in which the City may choose to address the myriad of issues related to urban agriculture: Code changes, programs, regional/interjurisdictional policies.
2. Near-term actions could include Code changes in such areas as farm stands and pet definitions, and promotion of existing programs that allow gardening in the right-of-way.
3. Longer-term actions could include expanded Park and Recreation programs, Comprehensive Plan amendments, and a county-wide food policy and program coordination.
Neighborhood/Community Interests:
Since at least 2011 many people have expressed support for a strong urban agriculture program in Olympia, including changes to Codes. However, no formal public hearings have been held and there may be opposition within the neighborhoods to some or all of the potential changes that could be considered. As noted above, about 80 community members participated in an April public meeting.
Options:
1. Give general guidance to the Planning Commission and staff on expectations for the scope of the review.
Financial Impact:
None identified for review and recommendation.