NK planners narrowly reject equestrian-based proposal

By a narrow 5-4 vote, New Kent’s Planning Commission is recommending that county supervisors turn thumbs down on a rezoning proposal that would pave the way for an equestrian-themed housing subdivision in Quinton.

The commission’s March 17 decision came after the group defeated a motion by another 5-4 vote recommending supervisors take favorable action.

At issue is an application to rezone from agriculture to single-family residential just over 95 acres owned by the Gooden family on the north side of Route 249, flanking Topeka Road. Developers Pete Sweet and Dennis Mouncastle propose to develop 16 lots with each having a minimum of five acres for horse pasture. Houses would be 1,800 square feet or larger with a starting price in the $400,000 range.

Under county zoning law, five acres of pasture in a residential area carries a limit of two horses. There is no limit under agricultural zoning.

Commission members held a public hearing on the proposal during their February meeting, but postponed action until last week citing a need to review results of a soil study and determine potential horse waste impact on nearby Black Creek.

During last week’s meeting, Mountcastle told the commission that plans now call for prohibiting pasture and horses on land designated as Resource Protection Area. Doing so will alleviate pollution concerns over Black Creek, he said.

Mountcastle also said a deep well is planned for the development, thus there should be no adverse impact on nearby shallow wells or aquifers below ground.

But opponents reiterated their stance with a petition signed by 38 neighbors who oppose the development. Vicki Raynor, who lives on Kenleigh Drive across Route 249 from the proposed development, said pollution and water contamination remain as major concerns.

“There’s no absolute assurance that the developers or the homeowners are going to handle waste properly,” she told commission members.

Jeff Ellett, another Kenleigh resident, complained that vehicle traffic on Route 249 is already on the increase from other subdivisions now under development.

“Sixteen lots won’t be the end of it,” he said, hinting that vacant land around the proposed development could eventually sprout houses.

Paul Davis, a county Extension agent brought in by planning staff to comment on the proposal, said a pasture/manure management plan is necessary, but any such plan would have to be a homeowners’ association requirement since New Kent has no law governing nutrient waste.

Davis said as long as pastureland is properly maintained, there should be no waste runoff problem. Land that is overgrazed and allowed to lose its grass surface is highly susceptible to erosion, he said.

Sweet told commission members he is open to creating a management plan. But county attorney Jeff Summers said the plan must be included in the developers’ application as a proffer so that the county has some means of enforcement.

Commission member Jack Chalmers, meanwhile, spearheaded opposition to the proposal, saying, “If a homeowners’ association is put in charge of pasture management, it’s like putting the wolf in charge of the henhouse. I don’t think it’s enforceable.”

Chalmers said the bottom line is that Black Creek is a fragile ecosystem. He also labeled proffers advanced by developers as a joke, adding that some are already required by county law and others would be done anyway as the land is developed. The county’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan does not designate the land in question as a subdivision, he added.

“That’s rural land, and that’s the way it should stay,” he said.

Commission members Eddie Pollard, Brenda “Sam” Snyder, David Smith, and Steve Rocha sided with Chalmers. Board of Supervisors representative Jimmy Burrell abstained, opting to cast his vote when the matter comes before the board, as did George Gregory who cited business dealings with Mountcastle.

(Meeting with supervisors during the board’s work session yesterday (Tuesday), Mountcastle said a pasture/manure managment plan is being drafted with the help of Davis. Developers, he said, are also proffering $3,000 per lot to the county.)

In another matter, commission members deadlocked 5-5 on a motion to send a favorable recommendation to supervisors for a set of performances standards for temporary land uses in the county as proposed by the county’s Zoning Ordinance Rewrite Committee (ZORC).

The commission’s vote, however, means the motion failed. Thus the standards head for supervisors’ consideration with no recommendation from the commission.

A controversy arose at the commission’s February meeting during which a county businessman, Bill Jennings, claimed that if the standards become law, he could be forced out of business.

Jennings operates Bill’s Hot Dogs out of a mobile food trailer, but his business has been in the same Providence Forge location for the past four years. As proposed, the standards would require mobile food units to return to a “commissary” for servicing on a daily basis and prohibit permanent structures such as carports and pole barn structures at mobile food sites.

Last month, Jennings told the commission that his food and other supplies are delivered directly to his business, thus he has no use for a commissary. Jennings, meanwhile, has erected a carport in front of his hot dog stand to shield picnic tables and customers from the weather. His business cannot be grandfathered since New Kent currently has no law on its books governing mobile food operations.

By a unanimous vote, commission members postponed making a recommendation, instructing planning staff to explore ways to rewrite the proposal.

For last week’s meeting, staff introduced separate classifications for “mobile transportable self-contained food service units” and “stationary transportable self-contained food service units.”

Jennings’ business would fall under the latter, which would allow a food trailer to remain on site and permit carport or pole barn structures that meet building codes and setback requirements.

One commission member, however, confessed to having second thoughts about revising the ZORC proposal. Pollard said standards as proposed by the rewrite committee may be best. Allowing for a second classification appears to favor one business, he said.

Afterward, county planning manager Rodney Hathaway said standards as written by the committee will be sent to supervisors along with the staff-proposed food unit classifications “for information purposes.”

The proposed standards also cover carnivals, circuses, fairs, festivals, craft sales/shows, flea markets, truckload sales, and construction and business trailers/offices.