Title
Planning and Building Department, Planning Division, recommending the Board receive a presentation on Agricultural Lodging options and provide direction to staff.
FUNDING: N/A
Body
DISCUSSION / BACKGROUND
In this Agricultural Lodging (Ag Lodging) item, staff will summarize what has been heard from key stakeholders, provide examples of what is currently being done by other California local jurisdictions, and outline three options for the Board to consider and provide direction on.
Prior Board Engagement
On April 12, 2017 (Legistar file 17-0154) the Board discussed options that would provide enhanced agritourism opportunities to properties with Agricultural (Ag) zoning.
On September 24, 2024 (Legistar file 24-1534) the Ag Commissioner and Planning & Building Department were directed to work with the agricultural community on an Ag Lodging model.
On August 26, 2025 (Legistar file 25-1433) the Chief Administrative Office, in coordination with the Budget Ad Hoc Committee, provided the Board information regarding revenue generating options. Agricultural Homestays/Ag Lodging was one of the potential options. An increase in lodging options on agricultural properties could increase Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues.
Community Engagement
Staff engaged with key stakeholders from the County’s Agricultural community on July 25, 2025. At that meeting the current Ag Lodging options in the Zoning Ordinance (ZO) were discussed. Staff’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis was also presented, which essentially creates the ‘side boards’ in which we must operate without further analysis. Potential Modifications to the County’s ZO were then discussed. These included providing a potential pathway for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to be used for Ag Lodging, providing a pathway for unpermitted structures to become legal through a program similar to the County’s Amnesty Program. The following questions were also discussed:
o What outcomes do we want to achieve?
§ Preserve Ag Land and its viability (top priority)
§ Increased TOT, sales tax, property tax
§ Performance-based outcomes/measurable goals
§ Streamlined process
§ Clear qualifications/checklist/matrix…but some flexibility
§ Support other industries, creates jobs (i.e., restaurants, recreation)
§ Less pressure on farmers to sell or change from Ag use thereby increasing the value of Ag land
§ Pathway for unpermitted, historic/long existing structures, ADUs to be Ag lodging
§ Consider farmers who are leasing Ag land and allow them to participate
§ Consistent messaging throughout this process to combat misinformation
o What problems do we want to avoid?
§ Don’t create a competitive environment or potential for conflict between Ag land owners
§ Lack of buffers (but buffers should make sense for large ag properties)
§ Substantial impacts on neighbors
§ Approach that doesn’t discourage investment (keep it simple!)
o Explore Further
§ Do we want to allow a combo of Ranch Marketing and/or Winery and/or VHRs and/or special events with Ag lodging? Want to be sure someone isn’t using all of the above to create a bad situation.
On April 8, 2026, staff presented an update on Ag Lodging to the Agricultural Commission. Feedback included questions about what agricultural zoning this would apply to.
On April 16, 2026, staff will present an update on Ag Lodging to the Strategic Economic Enhancement Development Committee (SEED). A summary of SEED’s feedback will be provided as part of staff’s presentation on this item.
Models from other CA Local Jurisdictions
Other local jurisdictions in CA have established Agritourism programs or are currently considering such programs.
Santa Barbara County
The best example that staff found is Santa Barbara County. Here is a summary of their program:
In December 2024, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors adopted the Agricultural Enterprise Ordinance (AEO) to “provide new opportunities for local farmers and ranchers to increase revenues and enhance the economic productivity of their agricultural operations provided the primary use of the land remains agriculture including row crops, orchards, vineyards, and ranching/grazing.”
The Santa Barbara County Agricultural Enterprise Ordinance allows land uses that support agricultural activities such as small-scale agricultural processing, aquaponics, composting, farm stands, firewood processing/sales, lumber processing/milling, and tree nut hulling, as well as rural recreational/agritourism uses such as small-scale campgrounds, farmstays, educational experiences and opportunities, fishing/hunting operations, horseback riding, incidental food service, and small-scale special events.
Santa Barbara County Farmstay Overview
A farmstay is short-term lodging offered on a working farm or ranch, where agriculture remains the primary use of the property.
Eligibility Requirements
• Must be in certain Ag zoning designations and at least 40 acres.
• Property must actively produce agricultural goods for commercial purposes.
• Requires an existing (or concurrently approved) primary dwelling.
• Owner or employee must live on-site and operate the farmstay.
• Not allowed in units like ADUs, farmworker housing, tents, yurts, or mobile structures.
Permits Required
• Zoning Clearance, or
• Minor Conditional Use Permit
Guest & Bedroom Limits
• Outside Limited Agricultural Enterprise (LAE) Overlay Zone:
o Max 15 guests / 6 bedrooms
• Inside LAE Overlay Zone:
o Max 38 guests / 15 bedrooms
Key Development Standards
• Must be clustered near existing structures (generally within 2 acres; remote up to 1 acre allowed).
• Designed to:
o Preserve agricultural productivity
o Use existing infrastructure
o Fit rural character
o Protect natural and biological resources
• Must comply with building, fire, health, and water regulations.
Operational Requirements
• 24-hour on-site supervision required.
• Must maintain a Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) license and stay current on payments.
• Provide visitor advisories about active agricultural operations and property boundaries.
• Must follow setback requirements from nearby farms and residences.
Additional Info
• Full rules are in Santa Barbara County Land Use and Development Code Section 35.42.134. <https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/19ecfc60-a874-4db4-8701-27bf56126c60>
• Applications are submitted via the Accela Citizens Access Portal.
• An Environmental Impact Report was prepared and adopted to address all environmental issues associated with the proposed changes to the County’s ordinances.
Key Takeaways
• Created single, broad ordinance addressing variety of uses that support agricultural activities
o El Dorado County currently has multiple code sections addressing supportive agricultural activities including Ranch Marketing, Winery Ordinance and zoning code use matrices and definitions.
• Has various review and permitting pathways depending on specific request for type and size of activities. Generally, the more intense uses proposed or potential to have negative effects, a higher level of review is required. Review and approval ranges: exempt, zoning clearance, land use permit, minor conditional use permit or use permit. Santa Barbara County Matrix of Uses <https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/3c0a0f03-508c-4cc8-9856-388222a5a1e5>
o El Dorado County has similar levels of review that could be utilized in a similar way.
• Scale of activities is tied to size of parcel. Generally, the more intense uses proposed or potential to have negative effects, the larger the parcel is required. For example, for small-scale camping on parcels abutting certain zoning, the following is allowed: Number of campsites per premises size • ≥ 40-100 acre (ac): up to 15 sites • > 100-200 ac: 20 sites • > 200-320 ac: up to 25 sites • > 320 ac: up to 30 sites • Plus 1 campsite per each additional 200 ac over 320 ac • Not to exceed 60 campsites
o El Dorado County generally has not implemented such scales for supportive agricultural uses. If considered for this effort, the acreage used in El Dorado County would likely need to be modified to reflect average agricultural acreage sizes as Santa Barbara County has much larger commercial agricultural operations.
Placer County
Placer County recently kicked off an effort to develop an “Agricultural Resilience Initiative.” On March 24, 2026 the Placer County Board of Supervisors approved and authorized the Director of Agriculture, Parks, and Natural Resources to execute an agreement with a consultant in an amount not to exceed $549,665 to assist with the development of a comprehensive Agriculture Resilience Initiative to identify policies and plans to increase climate and economic resilience for the agricultural industry.
Specifically, to address the issues of agriculture workforce housing, economic viability, and climate resiliency, the effort will include:
• Economic Analysis
• Agricultural Land Conversion Risk Assessment
• Agricultural Land Protection Prioritization
• Agriculture Land Preservation Incentive Structures
• Agricultural Community Housing Needs
• Agricultural Marketing and Tourism
• Extensive community outreach
Placer County has hired PLACEWORKS, INC consultant using a $500,000 grant to lead this effort. The contract includes a specific task focused on agricultural marketing and tourism and is intended to improve economic resiliency of the Placer County agricultural industry. This task will focus on agricultural marketing and tourism, to develop a series of recommendations to guide the development of a future agricultural marketing and tourism plan. Of note, the task also includes reviewing “agricultural tourism transit services.”
Although Placer County is just kicking off this effort, it will be prudent to monitor their progress and learn issues, opportunities and concerns that arise in their effort given the similarities and proximity of the two counties.
Current County Zoning Ordinance
Agritourism is defined by the County Zoning Ordinance as a commercial enterprise at a working farm, ranch or other agricultural business conducted for the enjoyment of visitors that generates supplemental income for the owner/operator. Agritourism may include, but is not limited to, outdoor recreation such as horseback riding or hiking, educational experiences that feature the farm, ranch or natural environment, local food or wine tasting, agricultural homestays and guest ranches, agricultural lodging, and on-farm or ranch direct sales.
The County’s current Zoning Ordinance allows for two zoning use types that would allow for Ag Lodging (Attachment X). Agricultural Homestays zoning allows for lodging facilities operated by the resident of the property on which the facility is located that is accessory and subordinate to the on-site, bona fide agricultural or grazing operation. Agricultural and Timber Resource Lodging zoning allows for lodging arrangements, accessory and subordinate to on-site commercial agricultural operations for the purpose of educating and informing the public about local foods, fiber, flowers or timber.
Ag Lodging is currently allowed in Limited Agricultural (LA), Planned Agricultural (PA), Agricultural Grazing (AG), Rural Lands (RL), Forest Resource, (FR) and Timber Production Zone (TPZ). Depending on the use type (Ag Homestay or Ag & Timber Lodging), the use may be permitted by right (P) or require an Administrative Permit (A), Minor Use Permit (MUP) or Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Staff recommends the Board provide direction to analyze and get community and industry feedback on what use type is allowed in which zones and what level of review is appropriate.
Options for the Board to consider and provide direction on
Staff propose three avenues for the Board to consider and provide direction on.
Option 1: A Simpler Approach - an update process working within the framework of the County Lodging Facilities section (130.40.170) of the ZO. This option works within the existing bounds of the CEQA analysis performed for the County’s 2004 General Plan and Targeted Update. It would leave other related portions of the ZO (Ranch Marketing, Wineries) separate. It would not create a new Special Events ordinance. If the Board chooses this option the following sideboards/standards would be in place:
1. A minimum lot size of 10 acres;
2. Agricultural homestays are limited to a maximum of 6 guests in not more than 3 guest rooms/structures;
3. It precludes lodging that would conflict with agricultural, winery, or timber-related uses;
4. It is an accessory and subordinate use to the operation of agriculture, ranch-marketing, timber, or grazing operation;
5. It meets all applicable health and safety standards of the Environmental Management Department and Local Fire Districts;
6. It must meet the development standards of the respective zone;
7. It must have direct access to a maintained road in conformance with DOT standards;
8. It shall provide street parking at a ratio of one space per each guest room, plus two spaces required for the primary dwelling;
9. It is operated by the resident of a bonafide operation; and
10. It meets the minimum qualifications for agricultural or grazing uses set forth under the minimum criteria for a Williamson Act Contract, whether the property is under contract or not.
Pros:
• Simpler, quicker changes (8-12 months estimated)
• Provides flexibility to better define Agricultural Homestays and Agricultural Lodging and align definitions with needs and opportunities reflective of current county agricultural operations and community expectations (i.e., modernize definitions)
• Minor changes to related ordinances such as Ranch Marketing and Winery Ordinance may be done to ensure alignment between all ordinances
• Can likely be completed within existing environmental/CEQA documents
Cons:
• Does not incorporate related ordinances such as Ranch Marketing and Winery Ordinances under one umbrella; more potential for conflict and confusion
• Would require separate ordinance to allow for low-impact camping
Option 2: A More Complex/Comprehensive Approach - a comprehensive update building a new Ordinance section that incorporates related existing ZO sections (Lodging Facilities (Ag Lodging), Ranch Marketing, Wineries). This option would require more resources (staff time) including additional environmental analysis to ensure this option would not exceed existing CEQA assumptions.
Pros:
• Creates a coordinated and seamless ruleset for Agritourism in our County.
• Can streamline processes that are reflective of the intensity of use and/or parcel size as well as other factors
• Low-impact camping can be included in effort
Cons:
• Will take more time (12-24 months estimated)
• More thorough review and analysis of existing CEQA documentation related to various elements (Ag Lodging, Ranch Marketing, Wineries) to ensure we do not exceed assumptions.
Option 3: In addition to either of the above options, the Board may consider incorporating a new Ordinance section to address Special Events. This option would potentially expand zoning designations for special events and special event venue uses beyond the current commercial zoning designations or special events allowed through the Ranch Marketing Ordinance. This option would require additional CEQA analysis and would not be covered in existing CEQA documents.
Pros:
• Even broader umbrella to include special events and associated venues
Cons:
• Would require CEQA analysis (funding not identified); and a longer timeframe (24-36 month estimate)
• May negatively impact viability of Agricultural operations as event centers could become primary use rather than supplemental to Agricultural operations.
Other Considerations
Outreach. Regardless of the selected option, community outreach will be a key component. Outreach will include the County’s Agricultural Commission and Strategic Economic Enhancement Development Committee (SEED), agriculture-based organizations, residents and businesses in agricultural zoned areas and other stakeholders. Outreach will be done through workshops, surveys and a website with all relevant documents and information.
Steering Committee. Both the Agricultural Commission and SEED have appointed an Ad Hoc committee to work together on Ag Lodging issues. Staff proposes that this Ad Hoc committee work closely with staff to develop recommendations on the options the Board selects.
Ag Lodging, VHRs, ADUs, Ranch Marketing and Wineries
Although there are elements that overlap with Ag Lodging, VHRs and ADUs, these programs and their ordinances serve different purposes.
VHRs - Sec 5.56.010 - Hosted and vacation home rentals, when properly managed, provide a community benefit by expanding the number and type of rental lodging facilities available and assist owners and hosts of home rentals by providing revenue which may be used for maintenance upgrades and deferred costs. Hosted home rentals provide a community benefit by allowing full-time residents to remain in their home while generating supplemental income.
• Zoning: No specific zoning noted, but structure must be a primary single-family home, one unit of a duplex, or a single condominium unit.
• Rental length: Not less than one night and not more than 30 days.
• Generates TOT
ADUs - Sec 130.40.300 - Implements California Government Code…to provide affordable housing alternatives, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of residents of El Dorado County. The accessory dwelling unit may be rented separate from the primary residence for a term of not less than 30 consecutive calendar days but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence except as provided for in Government Code Section 65852.26.
• Zoning: All zones that permit single-family or multi-family residential development, the expansion of the primary dwelling or the construction of a new structure for the purpose of creating an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit is allowed by right.
• Rental length: Not less than 30 consecutive calendar days.
• Generates longer-term affordable housing.
Ag Lodging - Similar to Santa Barbara County, Ag Lodging and any other economic benefits the Board chooses to adopt are intended to provide new opportunities for local farmers and ranchers to increase revenues and enhance the economic productivity of their agricultural operations provided the primary use of the land remains agriculture including row crops, orchards, vineyards, and ranching/grazing. Specific to lodging facilities, the intent is to allow short-term rentals on Ag zoned land, providing safe lodging options in rural areas and generate Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue for the County.
• Zoning: Staff recommends the following Ag zoning:
o Planned Agricultural (PA)
o Limited Agricultural (LA)
o Agricultural Grazing (AG)
Staff recommends further analysis and community feedback on the following zoning.
o Timber Production (TPZ)
o Forest Resource (FR)
o Rural Lands (RL)
• Rental length: Staff recommends not less than one night and not more than 30 days.
• Generates TOT
Shared Features:
• Supplemental income for property owners
• Requires building permit
• Must comply with applicable environmental review
Ranch Marketing & Wineries - These zoning code sections allow certain activities on ag zoned properties that meet specific criteria. These activities can be rolled up under a broader approach (Option 2). One of the qualifying criteria for Ranch Marketing and Wineries benefits is minimal cropland of five acres. For Ranch Marketing, this is defined as:
• Five acres of permanent agricultural cropland; or
• Ten acres of annual agricultural cropland in production.
• The minimum cropland area shall be properly maintained and cared for to produce a commercial crop. The Agricultural Commissioner may determine whether the cropland area complies. Failure to maintain cropland will void the ranch marketing uses.
For Commercial Vineyard, this is defined as:
• A minimum of five acres of wine grapes are planted and are capable of producing a commercial crop.
• Five acres shall mean a planting of wine grapes spanning an area of at least 217,800 square feet and consisting of a minimum of 2,200 grape vines that are properly maintained to produce a commercial crop.
• The Agricultural Commissioner may, when calculating acreage, include wine grapes planted on contiguous property under common ownership.
Staff recommends further analysis and feedback from industry and community members to determine if a similar method can be used to verify any minimal cropland requirements necessary for this proposal. Other options that have been considered are minimum income requirements and variations on minimal crop size depending on ag product type.
Questions for the Board to Answer
• Does the Board prefer Option 1, Option 2 or Option 3?
• Do we want to provide a pathway for ADUs to be converted to Ag Lodging on Ag properties?
• Do we want to create a pathway to permit unpermitted structures on Ag properties similar to the County’s Amnesty Program?
• Do we want to pursue low-impact camping (addressed differently in Option 1 and 2)
• Appoint the Agricultural Commission and SEED Ag Lodging Ad Hoc committee members along with the Agricultural Commissioner and Planning and Building Director (or designee) as a Steering Committee?
• What zones should be considered and what level of review is appropriate? Attachment B shows current requirements for various Agricultural zoned parcels. As noted, staff recommends further analysis of this question including feedback from industry and community. Considerations should include:
o This effort is intended to support and be a benefit for true agricultural operations. The Santa Barbara County model specifically notes “row crops, orchards, vineyards, and ranching/grazing.” Should this benefit be extended to Forest Resource and Timber Production Zones? Are there fundamental differences in the purpose or characteristics of those zoned lands so that lodging is not an appropriate use or requires a higher level of review?
o Rural Lands (RL) is intended to identify those lands that are suitable for limited residential development based on topography, access, groundwater or septic capability, and other infrastructural requirements. This zone may be applied where resource-based industries in the vicinity may impact residential uses. Commercial support activities that are compatible with the available infrastructure may be allowed within this zone to serve the surrounding rural and agricultural communities. Although agricultural uses are allowed, these lands generally do not support exclusive agricultural use. This zone is applied to those lands to allow uses which supplement the agricultural use. For special setback purposes, the RL zone is not considered to be an agricultural or timber zone. Furthermore, the “right to farm” ordinance section 130.40.290 applies to all ag zoned parcels EXCEPT Rural Lands (RL).
• Should there be limitations on the number of uses on one parcel to ensure preservation of Ag as a primary use and limit impacts on surrounding parcels? For example, should a single site be able to utilize Ranch Marketing/Special Events, VHR and Ag Lodging? Or should there be limitations? Should those limitations include parcel size? Should multiple uses necessitate a higher level of review such as a CUP?
• Should staff use similar minimal viable crop requirements as defined in Ranch Marketing and Wineries to determine qualifying parcels or consider other criteria such as income?
In conclusion, the overall goal of this initiative is to conserve and protect agricultural land and to encourage agricultural operations within the County. In order to do this, a thoughtful, thorough approach based on extensive community and industry input should be pursued.
ALTERNATIVES
N/A
PRIOR BOARD ACTION
See Discussion/Background above.
OTHER DEPARTMENT / AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
Chief Administrative Office, Agricultural Department, County Counsel
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Provide feedback on the proposed approach, and direct staff to conduct public outreach with the Agricultural Industry and other stakeholders to gather input, and to return to the Board with a conceptual ordinance for further consideration.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no change to Net County Cost associated with this item.
CLERK OF THE BOARD FOLLOW UP ACTIONS
N/A
STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENT
N/A
CONTACT
Karen L. Garner, Director
Planning and Building Department
LeeAnne Mila
Agricultural Commissioner