Update on the Proposed Urban Agriculture Regulations Planning Commission August 20, 2014

1. Update on the Proposed Urban Agriculture Regulations Planning CommissionAugust 20, 2014

2. Urban Agriculture Overview • 2011 - Sustainable Code Project • 2012- 2014 - Public Involvement Committees • 2013 - Plan Tucson’s Urban Agriculture Policy • 2014 - Public Meetings (4) • 2014 - Expected Planning Commission Review • 2015 - Expected Mayor and Council Review

3. Draft Proposal • Implements Plan Tucson’s urban agriculture policy by promoting the safe, equitable growth and distribution of locally produced food. • Attempts to adjust the scale and intensity to accommodate as is practical current practices. • Attempts to remain compatible with surrounding land uses. • The amendments will be optional to property owners and not a compulsory part of a development.

4. Process Clarion Consultants diagnostic & draft recommendations Staff review & revisions Urban Agriculture Task Force Sustainable Code Committee Staff review & revisions Public meetings Mayor & Council for approval Planning Commission

5. Public Meeting Feedback • Three Public Meetings – May, June and July • Attendance respectively 150, 130 , and 30 for Spanish-only • 4th Meeting tentatively planned for September • General Response • Draft proposal is too restrictive • Does not facilitate urban agriculture as practiced in Tucson. • Feedback being evaluated to address issues raised • Return to September public meeting with revised recommendations

6. Issues Farmers’ Markets Principal Accessory Associated Issues Composting Greenhouses Larger Animals General Farming • Gardening – Principal and Accessory Uses • On-site Gardening • Community Gardening • Urban Farms • On-site Sales • Small Animals • Chickens and Fowl • Miniature Goats • Rabbits etc.

7. Gardening Re-evaluation • General Farming on large lots confusion with urban agriculture being evaluated along with clarifications on large animals • Urban Farms • Definition vs. the existing crop production, use class • Difference between large garden and crop production • Community Gardens • On-site sales • Practicality of animal raising • Accessory use at multi-family housing • State Statute affecting on-site sales being evaluated with City Attorney • May affect urban farms and sales at family dwellings

8. Gardening - Potential Solution • General Farming • Keep General Farming in large lot zones as is • Urban Farms • Consider merging with crop production • Create clearer definition based on commercial aspect and lot size • Coordinate with State Statute for on-site sales • Community Gardens • Clarify as accessory use in multi-family housing. • Clarify limitations for on-site sales • Consider Special Exception for supplemental animal raising • Clarify statutory rights of citizens on on-site sales

9. Small Animal Re-evaluation • Number restriction on chickens and other animals is too restrictive. • Current setbacks are unreasonable. • Relying on a fixed-number approach does not accommodate different lot sizes and the type of animal being kept.

10. Small Animal Potential Solutions • Use the Animal Unit approach based on lot size • Allows flexibility on choosing the number of animals • Have an overall cap on small animals for urban residential zones • Clarify differences with large animals • Clarify miniature goats and regular goats • Develop a setback for pens based on experience and code enforcement

11. PROPOSAL - The Urban Animal Unit (UAU)In urban areas, the number of animals permitted is based on property size and type of animal: UAUs consider the relative impact of different types of animals on the land and on the neighbors. 2 UAUs are permitted for every 1000 sqft of property. Chickens, rabbits and guinea pigs = 1 UAU Ducks = 2 UAUs Turkeys and geese = 4 UAUs Miniature goats = 5 UAUs

12. Rules for BACKYARD CHICKENS

13. Farmers’ Markets – Re-evaluation • Currently an industrial permanent use • Not recognized as a temporary, intermittent use • Draft still does not allow in less restrictive zones • Draft’s hours of operation are not convenient • As a temporary use should be allowed in residential and office zones

14. Farmers’ Markets – Potential Solutions • Allow as an accessory use in certain residential and office zones where parking is available • Consider if it is already an accessory use by interpretation for certain civic uses in residential zones • Consider more flexible hours of operation • Allow in commercial zones as a principal or accessory use.

15. Other Urban Agriculture Reviews Issues Non-profit agricultural programs- 4-H and the FFA, will not be able to operate under the proposed regulations. Clarify composting and greenhouse standards. Potential Solutions • Give exemption to non-profit programs like 4-H. • Allow composting and greenhouses as accessory uses with clear mitigation standards.

16. Next Steps August – September: Revise the draft Keep it simple Use tested local precedents when practical Use current standards when practical. Late September: Present the revised proposal at a public meeting November – January: Study session(s) and public hearing with the Planning Commission March: Public hearing by Mayor and Council