By Emily Slater / Times Staff Writer
NIPOMO - While a lawsuit halts progress on a controversial development off Willow Road, a developer is clearing a 20-acre eucalyptus forest for an agricultural operation.
Although developer Ken Craig has no grading permit, he is allowed to clear cut his acreage, an action that has aggravated some residents and illuminated the limits of the county's tree ordinance.
"If someone is preparing the land for agriculture, the (land-use) ordinance gives latitude and exempts one from a grading permit," said Chuck Stevenson, county planner.
Craig is considering strawberries a viable crop for the northwest corner of Willow and Via Concha, which he says he plans to eventually deed to the Lucia Mar Unified School District.
"I hope it will be a money-making venture," said Craig. He is also contemplating Christmas trees or an orchard. Currently, bulldozers are uprooting the massive trees, including stumps, on acreage he wasn't initially planning to clear.
Two years ago, Craig cleared the other 20 acres of his property.
"I wouldn't have cleared the last 20," he said. "In effect, I am doing the school district a favor."
Save the Mesa, a grass-roots environmental group, filed a lawsuit against Craig, the county and school district in May to seek further environmental review of the property and "halt the ongoing physical destruction of the environment," according to Ed Eby, a Save the Mesa representative.
The suit spurred the clearcutting, Craig said.
After the lawsuit is settled, Craig said he plans to give the school district a deed for the 20 acres in question.
In effect, he said, he is doing the school district a favor by clearing the land.
He recently posted a large sign facing Willow Road advertising the land as the future site of a Lucia Mar middle school. Craig later moved the sign on order from the county's code enforcement division as the intermediate use of the land is now deemed agricultural.
"I thought it would be nice to advertise the school ... but complaints came from the neighbors," he said.
Allowing Craig to clear his acreage under the land-use ordinance's section "creation of new fields" is a "cynical" interpretation of that law, according to Eby.
"He shouldn't be able to clear the land until the lawsuit is settled," Eby said.
Craig's clearcutting ultimately raises questions about the county's tree ordinance.
"The tree removal ordinance is very limited and only applied to vacant land in urban areas that's residentially zoned," Stevenson said. The original intent of the ordinance was to protect mainly oak woodlands and other native trees.
The ordinance has no jurisdiction over Craig's trees.
Historically, county supervisors have been reticent to adopt mandates because of concerns from agriculturists.
"This issue has been brought up a number of times. It's a big deal for agriculturists. It raises concerns with the agriculture community if we start regulating," Stevenson said.
In 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted a voluntary set of guidelines prepared by the Farm Bureau. They opted against a county-required ordinance.
"I think the issue will come up again; it's cyclical," said Jay Johnson, a county planner who worked on the ordinance in the mid- '90s.
To change the ordinance, the Board of Supervisors would need to authorize an amendment. Δ
News
Contact
Save the Mesa
PO Box 1481
Nipomo, CA 93444
805.489.8384
