HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-06 PC Staff ReportCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #11-06
Dawson & Robann Riggleman
Staff Report for the Planning Commission
Prepared: October 24, 2006
Staff Contact: Eric R. Lawrence
This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in making a decision on this
request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter.
Reviewed Action
Planning Commission: 11/15/06 Pending
Board of Supervisors: 12/13/06 Pending
LOCATION: This subject property is located at 120 Longcroft Road.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64-A-44
PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT` USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance)
Land Use: Residential
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE:
North: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Residential
South: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Residential
East: M-1 Land Use: Light Industry
West: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Residential
PROPOSED USE: Reestablishing a Discontinued Legally Nonconforming Use ( to enable
horses on the property)
REVIEW EVALUATIONS:
Planning & Zoning:
The applicants seek to enable the ability to keep horses on their 8.86 acre property. The
subject property is located at 120 Longcroft Road, and is zoned RP (Residential
Performance). The applicants reside on the property. Horses are not permitted in the RP
Zoning District. As such, the applicants have sought to reestablish the legally
nonconforming use (the agricultural rights for the property) based on historical knowledge,
CUP #11-06 Dawson and Robann Riggleman
October 31, 2006
Page 2
providing a notarized affidavit that the property had historically been a farm with animals.
Article XX of the Zoning Ordinance addresses Nonconforming Uses. More specifically,
Chapter 165-150 establishes the process by which a legally nonconforming use may be
reestablished. The applicants have requested that their agricultural rights (specifically rights
to maintain horses on their property) be reestablished as a legal nonconforming use.
Section 165-150 of the County Code states:
Any use that was legally nonconforming under the provisions of this article and that was
discontinued due to abandonment may be reestablished by obtaining a conditional use
permit. Such conditional use permit shall be granted only for a use that is of equal of lesser
nonconformity than the original use in relation to intensity, type of use, dimensional
requirements or other requirements. Such request to reestablish an abandoned use shall be
considered following the procedures for conditional use permits in the chapter.
Property’s Zoning History
The original Zoning Map for Frederick County (U.S.G.S. Quadrant) depicts the vicinity
of the subject property as the R1 (Residential Limited) Zoning District. This area was
reclassified as RP (Residential Performance) District on September 28, 1983 when this
zoning district replaced the R1, R2, R3, and R6 zoning districts. Horses were not
permitted in either the RP or the R1 Zoning Districts.
Recent Actions by the Applicant
In 2000, the applicants contacted the County, spoke with various departments, and
determined that horses were permitted on the property. The building official documented the
proposed agricultural improvement and authorized the construction of a stable with electric
service. Staff would note that no zoning approval is associated with the building official
determination that an agricultural use is appropriate; the decision is based solely on
building code compliance. Proceeding with the understanding that the horses were
appropriate, the applicants have improved their property to accommodate their horses: stable
has been built, fields have been fenced, and a riding ring is under construction.
In the summer of 2006, the planning staff received a complaint regarding horses on the
applicant’s property. Upon inspection of the property, horses were observed, and the
applicant was notified that the zoning applicable to the property prohibited the horses.
In response to the violation, the applicants contacted staff and advised of the actions which
led them to believe the horses were permitted. The applicant further advised that having
lived in the vicinity of the property since 1959, the property has had animals on the property
as evidenced by a barn and various sheds. The property has been in the immediate family
since 1979.
CUP #11-06 Dawson and Robann Riggleman
October 31, 2006
Page 3
Proposed Uses on Property
The applicants are seeking the Conditional Use Permit for a horse operation consisting of
five horses or ponies that will take place on a property identified as 120 Longcroft Road.
They have already established various fenced fields, constructed stables, and are in the midst
of constructing a riding ring.
Surrounding Land Uses
Similar to other areas within the County’s Urban Development Area (UDA), the properties
surrounding the applicants' property have transitioned from agricultural uses to suburban
residential developments. In fact, the applicant’s property shares property boundary lines
with the Red Fox Run and the Bufflick Heights residential subdivisions, both single family
detached residential developments.
The applicants’ property also shares a property boundary line with an undeveloped five acre
parcel zoned RP (Residential Performance), the Airport Business Center (zoned M1), and
Bufflick Creek.
It is noted that the applicants have solicited and secured the support to maintain horses on
their property from sixteen (16) of the adjoining property owners. The petitions are included
in the CUP file for reference.
Potential Impacts
Recognizing the existing land uses in the vicinity of the applicants’ property, efforts should
be extended to minimize the impacts horses may place on the existing adjacent residences.
The initial complaint in regards to the horses was based on excessive manure odor and
insects (mostly flies). Therefore, it may be appropriate to establish minimum setbacks and
expectations that the horses are rotated amongst the fenced areas in an effort to minimize
these foreseeable impacts.
STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 11/15/06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:
Should the Planning Commission find this use appropriate, Staff would recommend the following
conditions:
1. No more than a total of five horses or ponies shall be on the property at any given time.
2. The horses and/or ponies shall be rotated between fenced areas in an effort to minimize odor
and insect impacts on the adjacent residences.
3. Horse and/or pony manure shall not be stockpiled nor spread within 40 feet of any property
boundary line.
4. Any modification or expansion of this use will require a new conditional use permit.
Following the requisite public hearing, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to
offer a recommendation concerning this application to the Board of Supervisors.