P&Z Exempts Some Horse Farms From Strict Review Process

By Andrew Gorosko

The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) has approved a controversial equine zoning amendment, which provides certain commercial horse farms with limited exemptions from the “special exception” requirements of the town’s zoning regulations.

The P&Z approved the zoning rule change August 2 over the objections of P&Z member Meg Maurer. Applying for such a special exception subjects an applicant to a strict and expensive review process.

The equine zoning amendment applies only to horse farms that were in operation before December 28, 1986 and which did not expand their horse operations from December 28, 1986 through August 13, 2001, which is the effective date of the zoning amendment. Horse farm owners seeking the exemption must register with the P&Z within one year. Town officials have said it is unclear how many local horse farms are affected by the rule change. One estimate has put the number of affected farms at eight.

Until now, only three horse farm owners had complied with the special exception process. They are: Richard Haas who received a permit for a horse farm at 16 Brushy Hill Road in August 1998; Robert and Jody Boles who received a permit for a horse farm at 39 Aunt Park Lane in January 1999; and Annette Sullivan who received a permit for a horse farm at 5 Morgan Drive in April 2001.

The P&Z did not start strictly enforcing its requirement for a special exception for commercial horse farming until several years ago, when some property owners living near some horse farms began complaining about the farms’ operation and sought the P&Z’s help to regulate nuisances at those facilities. Some residents living near commercial horse farms have complained that their proximity to stables poses quality of life, property value, environmental, and health issues. Those issues stem from concerns about stormwater runoff, odors, horse manure management, chemical use, noise, vehicular traffic, lighting, and hours of operation.

As local suburbanization increased, residential land uses moved into what had been agricultural areas. Residential uses and equine uses were not always compatible, considering that horse farming is an agricultural use that is industrial in nature.

In the motion approving the equine zoning amendment, P&Z members decided that the caring for, boarding, keeping and training of horses occurs at horse farms which have largely peacefully coexisted with their neighbors for 15 years or more without generating nuisance complaints. P&Z members also decided that the presence of horse farms contributes to the town’s character, provides recreational opportunities, and serves to protect open space and preserve property values.

P&Z Chairman Daniel Fogliano explained that granting the exemption to affected horse farms will spare the farm owners and the P&Z the time, expense and complexity inherent in the P&Z’s special exception process.

Opposing View

But P&Z member Meg Maurer did not agree with other P&Z members on approving the equine zoning amendment.

Ms Maurer lives on Stone Gate Drive in Sandy Hook. She was among a group of neighbors who had strongly opposed Annette Sullivan’s application for a special exception for Zoar Ridge Stables, a horse farm on nearby Morgan Drive. Ms Maurer recently became a P&Z alternate member.

In a discussion of the equine zoning amendment, which was held before the vote, Mr Poulin said “I like the concept of this, but I’m not sure we can enforce this.”

Mr Fogliano responded that enforcement will be possible through a P&Z review of past building permits, and various receipts, and also through sworn statements submitted by applicants for an exemption to the special exception review process. Affidavits provide a measure of personal accountability, which if shown to be untrue, would have serious consequences, Mr Fogliano said.

 Mr Fogliano said the number of horse farms affected by the zoning amendment would not be as large as is thought by some people.

It would difficult for the P&Z to start strictly enforcing its special exception review process for affected horse farms when that process has not been enforced for the past 15 years, he said.

By passing the equine amendment “We’re just going to be saving ourselves and the people who live here in Newtown a lot of time and trouble and money,” Mr Fogliano said.

Mr Poulin urged that an application deadline for coverage under the equine amendment be created to avoid regulatory problems in the future. P&Z members eventually agreed to give affected horse farm owners one year to comply with the terms of the equine amendment.

Ms Maurer urged, however, that affected horse farms be subject to some degree of regulation that would be somewhat less stringent that the special exception review process. She suggested that a site plan be required for horse farms.

Some horse farms have “grandfather clause” protection from being subject to horse-related regulations that were approved after the farms were already in business, she noted.

Many residents who live near horse farms attended May and June public hearings on the equine zoning amendment to express their various concerns about living near horse farms, Ms Maurer said. The P&Z has an obligation to honor their viewpoint, she said.

“When we grandfather this (amendment into the zoning regulations), we give away the town’s opportunity for oversight,” she said. “In certain cases, the (horse) activity has escalated and I think that’s part of the problem,” she added.

Some local horse farms may be still need to go through the P&Z’s special exception review process because they do not fit the criteria of the equine zoning amendment, Ms Maurer stressed.

Mr Poulin asked how the P&Z would know if a horse farm had expanded its operations since 1986 and thus would not be protected by the equine zoning amendment.

Mr Fogliano responded “If it hasn’t been a problem since 1986, then it isn’t a problem now. We’re not creating any (new) uses here…We’re not creating any environmental hazards. Anything that’s going on is going on now…The regulation has nothing to do with the environment. It’s a (land) use regulation.”

Of the equine amendment’s wording Ms Maurer “This is quite ambiguous.”

“Absolutely not. I don’t think so at all,” Mr Fogliano replied.

The equine amendment does not address the topic of minimum acreage for equine uses, she said. “I think this needs to be looked at a little more clearly by people on both sides. I think that both sides can benefit from some sort of compromise and some sort of regulation,” she said.

Mr Boylan suggested that people holding opposing views on the equine issue be brought together discuss their differences, urging that a decision on the equine zoning amendment be postponed.

“We have to make a decision on this issue here,” Mr Fogliano stressed.

Ms Dean said the P&Z needs to formulate horse regulations that are more explicit, but added that approving the equine zoning amendment would not prevent that from happening.

“We have the opportunity as government to do the right thing for the people…Let’s do the right thing,” Mr Fogliano said in urging passage of the zoning amendment.

The zoning regulations should include detailed requirements covering the escalation of equine activities at horse farms between 1986 and the present, in order to be fair to the horse farms and fair to the horse farms’ neighbors, Ms Maurer said.

 Ms Maurer urged that the P&Z delay acting on the matter for two months.

“I can’t just let this continue to play and play and play out. I think we need to make a decision now,” said Mr Fogliano.

On the recommendation of Mr Poulin, Mr Fogliano named a P&Z subcommittee to study creating new horse regulations, appointing Ms Maurer and P&Z member Anthony Klabonski to that panel.

During the coming year, the P&Z will fashion regulations on horses, Ms Dean said.

In formulating the language that specifies the one-year time period during which affected horse farm owners may apply for exemptions to the P&Z’s special exception process, Mr Fogliano encountered a wording snag.

“Where’s Heidi when you need her,?” he asked, referring to former P&Z member Heidi Winslow, a lawyer who left the P&Z earlier this year and who often had helped P&Z members navigate through legal waters.

“Sitting on the bench somewhere,” responded Ms Dean, noting that Ms Winslow has become a Superior Court judge.

P&Z members then voted on the equine amendment with Mr Fogliano, Mr Boylan, Ms Dean and Mr Poulin in favor, and Maurer opposed.