Good morning Chairman Horn, Supervisors, and staff. Oliver Smith, Chair, Valley Center Community Planning Group. Our Planning Group recommends that the Tiered Ordinance process be considered for updating the equine ordinance based on the following rationale:
1) It has been estimated that 80%+ of the horse properties in Valley Center are, in one way or another, technically noncompliant with the current ordinance.
2) In the 30+ years since the current set of ordinances was approved, significant changes have occurred in the region with regards to urban/rural limits and regulatory requirements (i.e. CEQA).
The equine ordinance revision should reflect the following:For property owners with horses on the property, reducing the county permitting and zoning requirements, particularly the cost and time involved, is needed to allow the reasonable foreseeable use of their properties. Addressing practical horse keeping aspects such as boarding of a limited number of horses along with personally owned horses should not cost tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Implementation of reasonable and effective management practices will protect neighboring property use, including animal care, vector control, waste management, and runoff control; tempered with recognition that areas like Valley Center are rural. Odors and other effects of nature are expected, and in some cases, prevalent.
The ordinance needs to provide a practical and simplified means for recreational horse organizations and clubs to exercise their benefits of education and of teaching responsibility, sportsmanship, and horsemanship for their members. These are an inherent element in culturally rich equine communities such as Valley Center.
1. A tiered approach to horse zoning and designators.
2. Clear, concise, and logical application to all properties, not an accident of history.
3. No conflict between the ordinance and animal health regulations. Applicable animal health regulations would preferentially apply.
4. Equestrian businesses should be considered agricultural businesses, not commercial. Many of the requirements for a commercial ZAP or MUP either do not apply or are detrimental to the horses, such as pavement instead of Decomposed Granite.
5. Livestock and horse shelters should not be considered the same as human dwelling facilities when being reviewed for appropriateness.
6. The formation of a voluntary equine technical advisory committee as a liaison between the County and the stable operator.
In summary, the current ordinance is antiquated and must be changed. The County is more built up and issues are arising more frequently. The adversarial and hostile environment between the equestrian community and the County should not continue.
This requires revamping of the ordinance at a basic level, and, along with practical changes to related ordinances, most likely will result in an EIR being needed. We are not here to debate specifics on horses per acre, tier level stable sizes, or what best management practices need to be incorporated. That is more appropriately part of the next step in development based on your direction.
We see the process of updating the ordinance being accomplished in a reasonable time frame that limits the resources and funding requirements placed on the County. If we want to resolve the problems and issues that we currently have, an EIR cannot be helped and, if done correctly, will take us forward for the next 40 years.
Thank you.
Staff had scheduled the Options for Updating Equine Regulations, POD 10-010 for the June 29, 2011 County of San Diego Board of Supervisors Meeting. However, due to issues encountered during the docketing process for the Board Letter, this item has been pushed back two weeks to the July 13, 2011 Board of Supervisors Meeting.
Therefore, we will not be presenting the Equine Options on June 29. We will be presenting the Equine Options on July 13 and the public is welcome to attend and speak to the options at that meeting. The Equine Options may still appear on the Board Agenda for the June 29 meeting, however it will be listed as being continued to July 13. I will send a follow-up email in early July when the Board Letter is available for public review on the Equine Ordinance Page: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/advance/Equine.html
Carl Stiehl
Land Use Environmental Planner II > Advance Planning
County of San Diego > Department of Planning and Land Use
5201 Ruffin Road | Suite B | San Diego | CA | 92123-1666 | Mail Stop O650
T.858.694.2216 F.858.694.2485
Attention Planning and Sponsor Groups:
On March 2, 2011 the Board of Supervisors directed DPLU to explore options for amending the County’s equine regulations. On June 29, 2011 we are scheduled to bring these options back to the Board. Once the Board gives direction on how to proceed with the Equine Ordinance amendment we will then initiate preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIRs typically take 18 months to complete. Based on this timeframe, it is likely the Equine Ordinance amendments and associated EIR will be presented to the Board for final consideration in the Fall of 2012.
One question we have heard from community groups and property owners is “How are you going to enforce the existing equine regulations while this amendment is being completed?” This is important because we presently have approximately 17 open code enforcement cases related to commercial equine facilities and there are also likely to be other facilities that are not legal but we have not had a formal complaint or no formal codes case has been opened. To answer this question, DPLU has prepared an Interim Policy on Commercial Equine Facilities. This Interim Policy will remain in place until the Board acts on a proposed zoning ordinance amendment in the Fall of 2012.
In a nutshell, the Interim Policy will suspend active enforcement on zoning violations related to commercial horse boarding uses established before March 2, 2011. However, active enforcement of any health and safety violations associated with the illegal commercial horse boarding will continue (e.g., building permit issues, noise, grading, dust suppression, storm water, vector control). Furthermore, in order to avoid this suspension getting out of control, this policy will only apply to equine uses started before March 2, 2011…. any commercial horse boarding facilities (or expansions of existing illegal commercial horse boarding facilities) established on or after March 2, 2011 will be given a cease and desist order.
Click here for the Interim Commercial Equine Facilities Policy: http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/advance/Equine.html
If you have any questions please contact Pam Elias, Chief of Code Enforcement Division, DPLU at (858) 495-5020.
For a copy of the Interim Policy, email salcobb@live.com
(from Oliver Smith, Chair, VCCPG & Equine Subcommittee)
VCCPG Equine Subcommittee Members and Interested Parties,
The San Diego County Planning Commission this morning heard the County presentation of the equine ordinance process alternatives. I was one of two speakers representing planning groups that spoke (San Dieguito voted for “no change”), along with about 30 individuals vigorously supporting (i.e. in violent agreement with) the tiered ordinance, one individual who was against any change, and two who spoke as “neutrals”. One of the neutrals was advocating allowing horses in areas now excluding them. The questions asked by the commission members included wanting to better understand the issues with asphalt paving vs. DG in horse areas, the realization that the horse of one of the members being boarded off his property basically was contributing to that stable’s noncompliance, and the need to include all affected county areas in the ordinance development. At the end they voted to accept the staff’s recommendation for development of a tiered ordinance. The presentation to the San Diego Board of Supervisors is planned for Wednesday 9am June 29, 2011 at the County building on Pacific Highway near the San Diego Airport.
****************************************************************
If you are interested in having an influence on the way horses stables are regulated and permitted in San Diego County, please attend the June 29 meeting and plan to speak. After the new ordinance is enacted it may not be changed for another 30 years so speak now or forever hold your peace!
March 30, 2011 - Today the DPLU held an External Stakeholders meeting with representatives from several community planning groups. The discussion included possible options to the Major Use Permit for horse boarding operations. Some of the concerns include manure management and fly control, as well as the number of horses and impacts that should be allowed.
March 23, 2011 - Today the DPLU held an External Stakeholders meeting with members of the equestrian community and others. The discussion included four possible ordinance options and the group agreed that the best option is a tiered system of permitting. Next, the DPLU will meet with the community planning groups, with Internal Stakeholders, and then a public hearing will be scheduled with the Planning Commission. Finally, the DPLU will present their findings to the BOS for direction regarding a new equine ordinance. This is to take place before the end of June 2011.
March 2, 2011 - Union Tribune article
March 2, 2011 - Union Tribune article
March 2, 2011 -
Watch the Board of Supervisor's meeting here:March 2, 2011 - North County Times article
********************************************************************************
Bill Horn (BOS Chair) and Supervisor Dianne Jacob write Board Letter to Board of Supervisors for March 2, 2011 Agenda:
Exploring Options for Updating Equine Regulations
Thank you, Bill Horn, for fulfilling your promise of writing this board letter, which directs staff to work with the equine community and any other interested parties to investigate options that would protect and promote equestrian operations while ensuring that we have reasonable permit fees and regulations.
Should the BOS approve this Board Letter in March, County Staff will gather information (there will be meetings and opportunities for equestrians to get involved and provide input) and report back to the BOS within 120 days.
********************************Read the Board Letter below******************************
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, LAND USE AGENDA ITEM
DATE: March 2, 2011 TO: Board of Supervisors
SUBJECT: Exploring Options for Updating Equine Regulations (Districts: All)
Overview: Equestrian facilities and activities have long been a significant component of our backcountry's culture. Recently, the equine community has approached the County of San Diego expressing frustration over costly and burdensome regulations in our zoning ordinance for equine operations. Our existing equine regulations appear to be out-of-date for the unincorporated areas of the County. It is important that the County of San Diego makes certain that the equine industry continues to have a vital role in our rural communities and operates under regulations that are appropriate and fair.
Today's board letter directs staff to work with the equine community and any other interested parties to investigate options that would protect and promote equestrian operations while ensuring that we have reasonable permit fees and regulations.
Recommendation - CHAIRMAN HORN and SUPERVISOR JACOB:
Direct the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to work with the equine community and any other interested parties to investigate options that would protect and promote equine operations throughout the unincorporated areas of San Diego County, including the potential development of a tiered equine ordinance, assessing the costly and burdensome equine regulations and exploring any other appropriate changes, and report back to the board within 120 days.
Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
SUBJECT: Exploring Options for Updating Equine Regulations (Districts: All)
BACKGROUND: Equestrian facilities and activities have long been a significant component of our backcountry's culture. Recently, the equine community has approached the County of San Diego expressing frustration over costly and burdensome regulations in our zoning ordinance for equine operations. Our existing equine regulations appear to be out-of-date for the unincorporated areas of the County. It is important that the County of San Diego makes certain that the equine industry continues to have a vital role in our rural cottununities and operates under regulations that are appropriate and fair.
In an effort to achieve this goal, the County should assess the costly and burdensome regulations in the permit process for equine operations and explore the development of a tiered approach similar to the boutique winery ordinance. County staff should also research state law and other jurisdictions to determine if appropriate changes and different approaches are needed. In addition to the Department of Planning and Land Use, other departments such as Agriculture, Weights and Measures, Parks and Recreation and Public Works should also be included in this effort.
Today's board letter directs staff to work with the equine community and any other interested parties to investigate options that would protect and promote equestrian operations while ensuring that we have reasonable permit fees and regulations.
BILL HORN Chairman, Fifth District DIANNE JACOB Supervisor, Second District
*****************************************************************************
County of Riverside deals with equine zoning issues:
08:51 AM PST on Wednesday, February 9, 2011
By JULISSA McKINNON The Press-Enterprise
After 25 years of giving horse riding lessons on their ranch, Sarah and Rusty Hill considered shutting down a few years ago when faced with a county code enforcement order to get a permit that could cost at least $9,400. Since then, Riverside County has put a hold on enforcing that law at the Hills' property and other horse stables as officials look at less costly ways to regulate horse boarding. But the conditional-use permit requirement for horse boarding is still the law in Menifee, which adopted all county ordinances when it incorporated two years ago. Menifee Councilman Tom Fuhrman is pushing for changes to the city’s restrictions on horse boarding that would allow people in rural areas to stable horses without getting a special permit. Some Menifee-area horse boarders, Vice Mayor Fred Twyman and recently elected Councilman Tom Fuhrman say the horse boarding requirement adopted from the county has got to go. Standing in a canopied stable recently, Fuhrman gestured to about 10 horses in individual stalls. "I'm illegally boarding horses," Fuhrman said in a mock dramatic tone. Part of the reason Fuhrman says he's so blasé about his apparent breach of a city law is city planning officials are considering changing that requirement. Fuhrman campaigned last fall partly on protecting rural areas from overregulation and encroachment by development. Menifee code enforcement is driven by complaints and, with two code enforcement officers, lacks the staff "to go door to door taking a horse census" or focus on horse boarding, Menifee Planning Director Carmen Cave said. Nonetheless, Fuhrman sees the horse permitting rules as a tool that could be wielded to push out horses at any time. "When someone comes in and puts a development with houses in a rural area this is a mechanism that can close down horse operations," Fuhrman said. "Even if it's not being enforced right now, the law is still out there hovering." Last September Vice Mayor Fred Twyman questioned the city's current permitting requirements for horse stables and the council directed city planners to re-evaluate the requirement. About a month ago, Cave said planners started pondering the question: Should the city require conditional use permits from all landowners that stable other people's horses or only those that charge a fee? Hill, who lives within strolling distance of the Menifee border, said she thinks the city is missing the mark. Even horse boarding operations that charge for their services clear a very small profit. Requiring a permit could threaten to bankrupt working ranches like her and her husband's -- The Riding Academy on Garbani Road. "It's not a career you get into to retire well on," Hill said. "It's a lifestyle and a passion." Though the Hills' ranch is on a dirt road in unincorporated Riverside County, Hill said the fact that Menifee is reconsidering restrictions gives her hope. Hill said their ranch lies within annexing distance of the city. Even with a county code enforcement citation "on hold," Hill said she and her husband are unable to sell or refinance their property until the county resolves their pending code violation. Twyman said he believes requiring a conditional use permit, which involves an initial $9,400 deposit, discourages horse businesses while Menifee should be easing restrictions on rural entrepreneurship. "To make people have to have parking lots and handicapped spaces and public restrooms isn't workable for a business that barely makes ends meet," Twyman said. "That's not encouraging, that's discouraging them and putting them out of business." Menifee Councilman Tom Fuhrman feeds one of the horses he boards at his ranch in Menifee. Twyman said he would like to see Menifee shed some of the red tape it inherited from the county. He said a $35 to $40 a year business license and other laws on the books addressing animal upkeep, the number of animals per acre, public nuisances and health and safety should give the city enough power to close "a place that's doing something heinous." Cave said she and city planners staff must balance the economic concerns of horse keepers with good planning. "People can complain about traffic if a business is creating additional traffic trips," she said. "It's never simple." Cave added that, traditionally, a conditional use permit gives officials a way to ensure businesses fit in with the surrounding area. "It's a tool that gives you the opportunity to look at a universe of issues rather than just a flat entitlement on the land," Cave said.
Reach Julissa McKinnon at 951-375-3730 or jmckinnon@PE.com
**********************************************************************
Update February 2, 2011
Chairman Bill Horn's 2011 State of the County Address (the portions relative to equine land use are printed here)
Chairman Bill Horn presented the 2011 State of the County Address at the County Administration Center on February 2, 2011.
....I have always been a staunch defender of private property rights and believe our economy works best when government gets out of the way. As Ronald Reagan said, "Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem." That is why I have been such a vocal critic of our General Plan Update. I believe there is no greater stakeholder in this process than the property owners. I have and will continue to fight for their Constitutional property rights. I want to make sure that after 12 years of work that we are not kowtowing to political expedience to get it done faster, but not better. We have come a long way, but there are still important details we need to focus on, so that we have the right plan, not the right now plan. I personally feel government does not have the right to devalue your land and leave you with the crumbs. The government already owns more than half of the land in this County - Enough is enough!
I believe that too often our County suffers from TMG - Too Much Government. I want to provide regulatory relief to our customers. We had great success with our Boutique Winery Ordinance and I will be asking staff to take a look at our equine ordinance in the next few months. We have many resources in our backcountry and I want our neighbors to be able to enjoy hiking, local wines and food, and horses among others without excessive government regulation.
We have a dedicated and able staff in our Department of Planning and Land Use. They have made great strides under Director Eric Gibson's leadership, and I want to continue to do more. In this tough economy where building is largely at a standstill, I believe it is the right time to review our current policies and figure out new ways to help our customers navigate the bureaucracy. Too often our regulations discourage improvements to property. We need to cut the red-tape. To aid in this endeavor, I will be calling for a commission to be formed, made up of building industry and land use experts. This commission will work with the County to clean-up our regulations and to find ways to streamline how we do business.
I would like to see reduced wait times and fewer redundancies with the goal of improved customer service. I believe there are things we can implement today to achieve these goals without raising fees and I challenge DPLU staff and our commission to work together on these improvements. There's an old saying that "The Customer is Always Right." In this case, "The Taxpayer is Always Right" and as Sir Colin Marshall once said, "The customer doesn't expect everything will go right all the time; the big test is what you do when things go wrong."
This will go a long way toward putting our local businesses back to work.
There is no doubt about it, we are in a recession. And, while I remain optimistic and believe in this County and indeed our great Nation, it is my duty to both plan for the realities of today and prepare for the promise of tomorrow.
One of the greatest honors bestowed on me was the opportunity to lead 270 Marines in combat for a year. I will never forget their courage and dedication to our freedom.
I am also honored and humbled to serve as Supervisor of the Fifth District and Chairman of this dedicated Board and I am extremely proud of our team and its determination to do the right thing.
Thank you for being here tonight. God bless you all.
You can also see the video at:
http://cww.sdcounty.ca.gov/portal/page?_pageid=59,1&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
******************************************************************************************
Update December 14, 2010
Carl Stiehl, Land Use Environmental Planner II, Advance Planning Department with the County of San Diego DPLU, stated that he has received the Surveys and appreciates the information. So thanks again to those of you who participated in the Survey. He recently posted a website page to the County's website, pertaining to the Equine Policy and Ordinance Development Project. They have posted some of the DPW BMP information and all of the Animal Designator Maps that they recently shared with some of the planning groups. This page will be expanded over time with additional information as it becomes available for posting. http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/advance/Equine.html
*******************************************************************************************Update November 5, 2010
Carl Stiehl, DPLU planner stated today that Bill Horn is writing a Board Letter for the new ordinance, to be presented to the other Supervisors for a vote in January/February. Carl plans to have the new ordinance outline written by then and ready to go. Equine subcommittees should be formed within each planning group by then. Even with the County being preoccupied with the GPU 20/20, the new equine ordinance is NOT JUST ON THE BACK BURNER!!! Carl tells us that a new Equestrian website page will be on the County's website soon. We will post the link here when it is ready.
Update September 28, 2010
The County is seeking input for the new equine ordinance from each of the 26 county-wide Community Sponsor & Planning Groups. Please do your part and get involved as an equestrian advocate with your Community Planning Group.
I got involved and made a difference and so can YOU! Email me and I will help you get started. Click on this link to find your group:
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/PlanningGroups.html
~ Sally Cobb (salcobb@live.com)
Update September 27, 2010
VCCPG members and Interested Parties,
1) Pursuant to the direction given by the Board of Supervisors, DPLU is working on developing an equine ordinance anticipated to be along the same lines as the recently approved tiered winery ordinance. The county plans to work with all of the planning and sponsor groups to create an ordinance appropriate for the entire San Diego County area. That being said, they are very interested in having Valley Center representation based on our efforts up to this point.
2) Valley Center continues to be very interested in participating with the county in the development of a fair and practical equine ordinance. Disbanding of the previous VCCPG subcommittee simply indicates that the subcommittee goal, to get the county to develop a revised equine ordinance, has been achieved based on formal direction given by the Board of Supervisors.
3) The current effort on an equine ordinance at the county is being carried by a limited group of people. They are working more or less in their spare time as no additional funds have been allocated for the effort. A key task in the ordinance development is the generation of an EIR (Environmental Impact Report). The EIR is a formal, required document for just about every county project and requires dedicated personnel and resources to complete. It is anticipated that in about 6 months DPLU will need to go to the Board of Supervisors with a request for funding to develop the EIR. Until then, we need to work with the county resources as they are today. Towards this end, the county has requested that there be a single, formal contact from Valley Center. Based on past activities like this, they anticipate the focal point to be the Valley Center Community Planning Group.
4) The first major effort being undertaken by DPLU on the equine ordinance development is generating a list of stakeholders, both internal and external to the county. From these lists, invitations will be sent out for participation in an organizing meeting, tentatively planned for sometime October or November, 2010.
5) Many equine facilities in Valley Center have been in place for many years. However, over the same period of time, the county has passed multiple equine related ordinances. The consequences of these activities made many of the equine facilities technically noncompliant in one or more areas. The risk to the property owners is that all it takes is one irritated neighbor to call in a complaint to start a whole code compliance issue. County management recognize this as a significant issue and would like it to not interfere with the ordinance development. However, they have said they cannot just grant amnesty as individual facilities have differing issues that may or may not be specifically affected in a final ordinance. I hope to have more responses from the county with regard to this issue in the near future.
I plan on proposing the formation of an Equine Ordinance Subcommittee at the next Planning Group regular meeting, scheduled for 7pm October 18, 2010 at the Valley Center Community Hall, 28246 Lilac Rd, Valley Center. The purpose of the subcommittee is to work with the county in the development of a practical and effective ordinance covering equine facilities in San Diego County, with specific interest regarding issues in Valley Center. The group would recommend nominees for VCCPG nomination to the planned Stakeholder Working Group at the county and develop formal input and feedback commentary to be voted on by VCCPG for submission to the county. I anticipate a normal subcommittee makeup from the VCCPG and members of the public. I volunteer to be Chair of this subcommittee.
Oliver Smith
Chair, Valley Center Community Planning Group
The Tiered Winery Ordinance
is a system of permitting that is based on levels of impacts. Prior to
this ordinance, a person who made 100 gallons of wine per year was
required to obtain a Major Use Permit.
This
system of permitting seems to be the best solution for the
equestrian who wants to board a few horses, or a small equestrian
training or breeding facility. The very large equestrian facilities will
still be required to obtain the Major Use Permit, which is understandable due
to the level of impacts according to CEQA (California Environmental
Quality Act).
**********************************************************************
Click on this link to read the Tiered Winery Ordinance:
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/POD_08-012_Final_Ordinance.pdf
California Riding Magazine • August, 2010
by Judy Duncan
What has the San Diego County Board of Supervisors been doing for the past 15 years? And what happened to the equine-friendly Department of Planning and Land Use that existed 15 years ago as evidenced by a kind-spirited Variance letter granted to a “non-conforming use” boarding stable in Bonsall? The goal of the Department of Planning & Land Use (DPLU) is “full revenue recovery,” and based on the costs for a discretionary permit, it is some recovery! Does it make sense to over-regulate, over-administrate and over-burden business owners with unreasonable fees and requirements, closing down businesses and eliminating jobs? Why not encourage responsible enterprise, generate revenue and create jobs?
It is no surprise that wealthy horse business
owners are leaving San Diego to purchase land
in other counties.
San Diego County’s exorbitant regulations and permit fees are 1,000 times greater than other California counties. The public stable permitting process includes outlandish fees, over-the-top CEQA studies, extensive road improvements, never-ending rules and regulations, paving of horse ranches, and continued government interference for the life of the permit. The permit applicant must be willing to offer themselves up as a cash cow on the altar of the DPLU, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars without any permit guarantee, and without a cap on fees or requirements. The cost of an initial “pre-application meeting” where a prospective applicant hopes to get their questions answered costs $11,000 and is “mandatory.” Contrast this with other counties’ pre-app meetings, which are applicant-friendly and free. It appears that the Board of Supervisors, who oversees the DPLU and hires its staff, is keeping the County out of debt through over-administration and increased government, the opposite of what we need.
The cost of the permit required for a horse business (boarding, breeding, sales, training, camps, clinics, lessons, etc.) has gone from an average cost of $3K in 1982, to $15K in 1994, to $300K in 2010. These permit fees and requirements make money for the County in the short term, however, this is not “smart revenue planning.” I know of three wealthy investors who have turned their backs on San Diego County due to these costly and oppressive regulations. We have county staff sitting in their offices making up laws about an industry with which they are so disconnected they don’t understand why a stable needs to park horse trailers on the property, nor do they know the definition of a farrier.
Other California Counties have solutions. Their permit process is not difficult (the applicants can do the paperwork themselves) nor lengthy (three to five months as opposed to six to nine years in San Diego County), nor costly ($6K as opposed to $300K). All California counties must comply with CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act), so how do other counties keep permit fees and requirements inexpensive when San Diego County continues raking in huge permit fees?
San Diego has the largest number of horses per capita in the country. The San Diego horse community has the largest economic impact to its county in the country. The horse industry contributes approximately $7 billion to California’s dynamic economy, with horse racing being the largest sector ($2.5 billion). Accounting for off-site spending of spectators would result in an even higher dollar figure. The California horse industry produces goods and services valued at $4.1 billion, which is more than the state of Texas producing $3.0 billion. There are 698,000 horses in California, over 70 percent of which are involved in showing and recreation. California is only exceeded by Texas, which has 979,000 horses. 311,100 Californians are involved in the industry as horse owners, service providers, employees and volunteers. Even more Californians participate as spectators. The California horse industry directly provides 54,200 full-time equivalent jobs. Spending by suppliers and employees in California and other states generates additional jobs in California for a total employment impact of l30,200 jobs.
Several San Diego County Equestrians have joined together to work for positive change in the reduction of the Equine Zoning laws and permit fees and requirements. Send your suggestions to equinezoning@gmail.com and please read & sign the petition at www.equinezoning.com.
Author Judy Duncan is a trainer with 60 years of experience in the equine community.
******************************************************************************************The Valley Roadrunner - July 7, 2010 by David Ross
DPLU chief offers to meet with planners on equine zoning
The director of the Dept. of Planning & Land Use (DPLU), Eric Gibson has offered for DPLU staff to meet with members of the VC Planning Group and the group’s Equine Zoning Subcommittee over the issue of requirements put on horse owners who want to board horses on their property.
Currently the County is requiring that property owners who want to board even three horses go through an involved and expensive process to get a major use permit, which can cost over $100,000. Recently Gibson wrote to Oliver Smith, chairman of the planning group, and Paul Herigstad, chairman of the subcommittee.
“We understand the different permitting issues with Animal Regulations and the problems some property owners have with the ‘L’ designator in Valley Center.
He noted that staff had met with Herigstad in December and that the subject also came up during the General Plan Update Subcommittee meeting. At that time the GP Update Subcommittee was encouraged to look at Animal Regulation issues and discuss them further with planning staff.
However, Gibson’s letter warned that there are significant issues involved in lifting or altering the requirements of the ‘L’ designator. “We also indicated to the subcommittee that allowing horse boarding by right, even if limited in size, may have significant implications and could result in substantial environmental review. “That said, DPLU staff is available to meet with the VCCPG or the Equine subcommittee to discuss this issue and possibly develop strategies on how to address cost concerns associated with a major use permit as well as explore different processing options,” Gibson wrote.
Valley Center resident Sally Cobb, owner of Tapestry Meadows horse ranch in VC, who has spent $100,000 and counting in the pursuit of a major use permit, and whose plight caused the planning group to create the Equine subcommittee, recently said that the subcommittee should “continue to work on the draft new equine ordinance for the county, ensuring that the existing rights of landowners with A70-L zoning are preserved.
The group is somewhat short-handed in its efforts to research what other counties in California do. She wrote recently, “I suggest that the VC Community Plan include the right for A70-L property owners to board one horse per acre on the property they occupy, as long as they own at least one horse kept at that same property. I suggest that a small number of mares could produce foals - such as one foal per two acres of land per year, which could be sold. I suggest that a limited number of riding lessons be allowed by right, such as one lesson per week per acre of land during daylight hours, but no amplified equipment.”
She added, “I think this is reasonable and will make most VC residents happy including neighbors, who always have the right to complain about flies, manure and urine odors, dust, noise, traffic, etc., regardless of whether or not an activity is allowed by right.”
Recently horse owners countywide have started to recognize that they have a common interest in getting county zoning laws changed to accommodate them.
California Riding Magazine • May, 2010
Code Red! San Diego County requires Major Use Permit to board one horse.
by Stephen Garofolo
Seven years ago, Tapestry Meadows Equestrian Center (TMEC) opened its doors for business. Six months later, following the departure of a disgruntled business associate, TMEC was visited by Code Enforcement.
Like most rural properties in San Diego County, this 10-acre property in Valley Center is zoned A70-L, which allows 14 cows, six sheep or hogs, goats, llamas, emus, ostriches or alpacas, 25 peacocks, 25 chickens and roosters, dogs, cats and an unlimited number of horses and donkeys.
The property is also zoned for a large or small animal clinic or veterinary hospital. The environmental impacts (noise, odors, air quality, traffic, etc.) of these allowed uses that do not require a permit would be far greater than the impacts of a private facility with 25-boarded horses, for which the county requires a Major Use Permit (MUP).
With only two boarded horses in September 2003,
the owners were prepared to close the business, but Code Enforcement
convinced them to continue operating their boarding business while
simultaneously processing their Major Use Permit. The County’s DPLU
(Department of Planning & Land Use) told the owners that their
property was in an excellent location for a boarding stable, and that
the MUP fees would be less than $9,000. However, the owners soon learned
that this is only a small fraction of the total costs involved.
After spending $40,000 on engineering costs and deposit fees
to submit the 100-page MUP application, the owners received a 30-page
Scoping Letter from the DPLU, detailing the permit requirements and an
$18,000 county fee estimate “through to hearing and decision.” Based on
this fee schedule, the owners decided to continue processing the MUP.
Four years later due to changes in Traffic Impact Fee rules, Stormwater Management rules, the fire code (which now requires onsite and offsite paving of horse ranches), and additional requirements added to the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) studies, the owners have spent $100,000 and are only one third of the way through the MUP process. The CEQA studies cost an average of $10,000 each, and include Traffic, Fire Planning, Air Quality, Noise, Manure & Stormwater Management, Landscape, Vector Control, Agriculture, Biology, Archeology, and Environmental Site Assessment. There are grading plans, site plans, project descriptions, septic system expansion design plans, land surveys, drainage studies, aerials, elevations, and topographical studies (all of this just to board one horse).
In 2008, at the owners’ request, county staff
visited the TMEC property. During the tour, the DPLU planner waived the
Visual Analysis Study and led the owners to believe they would soon be
granted their permit. However, seven months later, the County increased
their fee estimate by 400 percent with no cap and no guarantee. Read the
full story at http://www.tapestrymeadows.com/about.html
Zoning Deck
Stacked Against Horses
While the TMEC owners struggled through years of the arduous MUP process, a 20-acre nearby commercial orange grove was replaced with a plant nursery without any requirement for a permit or an Agricultural Impact Study. Exempt from CEQA, the plant nursery owner is not required to complete a Noise Study (although the noise from the nursery all hours of the day and night is equivalent to an airport), nor a Traffic Study (although the heavy nursery trucks damage the roads and create other traffic impacts), nor an Air Quality Study (although the nursery fills the air with diesel fumes, dust, compost odors, pesticides and fungicides).
This illustrates how the Zoning Ordinance is slanted against horses. The fault lies with the equestrian community for failing to be involved politically. Equestrians need a political voice like the Farm Bureau. Several years ago at a hearing for a horse barn permit, the Planning Commissioner stated, “We have not heard from the horse community since the 1960s. We need you to form a group and have two or three representatives tell us what you want.”
The Valley Center Planning Group appointed an Equine Subcommittee to improve the equine zoning laws throughout San Diego County. The public is encouraged to attend these meetings on the first Wednesday of each month, 6-8 p.m. at the Valley Center Library. See www.equinezoning.com.
They hope to obtain 10,000 signatures from
residents of San Diego County on their petition
for a new equine ordinance with reasonable
permit requirements.
Be sure to stop by the Creekside Veterinary Services booth that will be shared with the Equine Subcommittee at the Valley Center Rodeo & Western Days, May 28-30. See www.vcchamber.com/westerndays2010.html for the VC Western Days & Rodeo details.
April 21, 2010 - from The Valley Roadrunner
Planners ask county for horse boarding zoning
by David Ross
The VC Planning Group at its April meeting voted to send a letter to Dept. of Planning & Land Use director Eric Gibson asking him to assign staff to work with the group to address the problem of people who want to board horses having to apply for expensive major use permits.
Later in the week the group’s Equine Zoning Subcommittee approved of the wording of a petition asking for a new “equine zoning ordinance” for the County.
The subcommittee will again meet on May 5, 6–8 p.m. at the VC Library’s Community Room. That will include a brainstorming session of what to include in the new ordinance. The public is invited to attend, as well as other meetings held the first Wednesday of the month.
Sally Cobb, owner of Tapestry Meadows Equestrian Center, whose plight (detailed in the Sept. 23, 2009 Roadrunner) inspired the planning group to get involved in this issue told The Roadrunner that she joined the subcommittee, “that was formed after I went public…and the [planning group] became educated about the horrendous zoning requirement of a MUP (major use permit) to board even one horse and that horses are no longer considered ‘agricultural’ or ‘livestock’ by the County of San Diego.”
The planning group’s letter to Gibson, signed by its chairman, Oliver Smith, and the Equine Zoning Subcommittee Chairman Paul Herigstad, expresses concern over “the extreme financial impact the current permitting process imposes on uses that are otherwise consistent with the community and neighborhood. We are also concerned with the structure of the regulations when they conflict with historically accepted land uses within our community.”
VC planners are concerned that an activity long practiced by many Backcountry residents is being excessively penalized.
The letter adds, “The existing major use permit process can require tens of thousands of dollars in fees, studies and engineering costs, and is suited to larger developments or commercial uses that will justify the costs of the permit. However, it does not work in Valley Center where many land owners want to board a limited number of horses for the local equestrian community.”
The letter goes on to say that the care and training of small numbers of horses “is not like a large commercial development.” For one thing, such enterprises are not highly profitable. Their scope is limited to providing space for the animals’ training and exercise, and to feed them.
“Present requirements of ten or fifteen costly studies, including traffic impact studies, and the associated costs of DPLU review, cause even the most committed applicant to doubt the wisdom of pursuing these permits. But at the same time, Valley Center is a community where many people own animals and places where those animals may be kept are valued and needed, and can be difficult to find,” says the letter.
The “one size fits all” and the “excessive burdens of our existing permitting policy have forced property owners into non-permitted use of their lands, and this serves neither the community nor the DPLU,” says the letter.
The petition that the Equine Zoning Subcommittee approved of opens with these words: “Horses are being squeezed out of San Diego County because the current zoning ordinance requires a major use permit (MUP) to board even ONE horse on Agricultural property. By-right, the current zoning on the same property allows an unlimited number of occupant-owned horses and even an animal hospital.”
Also, according to the petition, “The Major Use Permit process requires $11,000.00 for a pre-application meeting, a $16,000.00 application fee, an average of $100,000 for engineers and County-approved consultants to complete the required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) studies, and hundreds of thousands of dollars to complete the required onsite and offsite improvements. The County frequently raises the permit fees and offers no fee cap and no permit approval guarantee. All this to legally board ONE horse!”
Petitioners hope to get horse owners and supporters from all over the county to sign.
A downloadable petition supporting this effort can be found at www.petitionvoice.com/we-the-people-want-a-reasonable-petition.html
