Complete Meeting Summary

[edward]

July 23, 2009 9:30 a.m.
Maricopa County Supervisors Auditorium at 205 West Jefferson
Be there or be prepared to CHANGE your rural lifestyle!
What began as an honest effort by horse groups to “legalize” certain Activities on R-43 property is being hijacked! TA2008006
For over 3 years horse groups have worked with Planning & Zoning to legally allow certain activities that most of us have done on our property. There have been NUMEROUS frivolous complaints. Maricopa County met with horse group representatives and came up with recommendations for a text amendment. The way the 1974 R-43 zoning law reads now, we can NOT have any horses other than those we personally own, we cannot have any small activities such as friends coming over for roping practice, having horseback riding lessons, etc. on our personal property. All of these “normal” activities subject us to some grumpy person who has decided they want an acre or more, but they don’t want the rural lifestyle that comes with it. They chose to buy this type of property but now wish to curtail all of the activities that brought most of us here.
The text amendment started out:
a. To allow boarding of up to 5 horses and/or other equine not owned by the private property owner…. Many of us objected to this specific limitation because a person with 20 acres vs. 1-1/4 acres certainly should not be limited to 5 boarded horses. Many of us have personal equine plus those of our friends or relatives (certainly not a money making venture when you’re dealing with friends and relatives!)

b. To allow riding lessons, team roping practices, and similar activities involving up to a maximum of 24 persons (including staff, participants and spectators.) This would cover most of the activities that we all do and we were told that once the number of 25 is reached there are federal laws that govern water supply, etc.
according to county employees.

c. All structures shall meet minimum setback requirements, etc. This is nothing different than regulations already in place for all county properties - so does it have to be restated?

d. Any public equestrian use that cannot meet these conditions will require a Special Use Permit in accordance with Article 1301.1.20 of this ordinance. Have you ever reviewed this??? It’s 22 pages! 15 pages of instructions plus a 7 page application with a minimum cost of $500 as near as I can tell…. asks for every tidbit of information except your blood type. See at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/planning/Pla...UsePermit.aspx

There were a couple people who voiced objection to passing this ‘minor use’ text amendment for R-43 zoning.

• Stephen Klein from Laveen was concerned about his neighbors having activities that would result in too many vehicles on his road.

• Noreen Hart and Hugh Kealer (from Twice as Nice Performance Horses at 3rd St. & Galvin in Desert Hills) were very self serving in that they own a commercial facility that is currently on the market for $1,685,357 and is being marketed as “TURNKEY HORSE BOARDING AND TRAINING FACILITY! PROPERTY IS LEGALLY CLASSIFIED AS MISCELLANEOUS COMMERCIAL. ONLY A HANDFUL OF PROPERTIES IN THE AREA ARE CLASSIFIED LIKE THIS. HAS THE BEST INCOME POTENTIAL OF ANY HORSE FACILITY ON THE MARKET IN THE NORTH VALLEY!”” They advertise 60 stalls. Both owners expressed concern that the water supply in Desert Hills would not be able to handle the demand if every 1 acre property owner brought in 5 boarding horses. Hmmm… how much water do you use with your 60 stalls? Are you afraid someone might price their boarding cheaper than you? Or are you afraid that your selling potential might be less if
people had other boarding options? To me this text amendment just says that I can LEGALLY have my niece’s horse, my granddaughter’s horse, and a good friend’s horse on my own property without someone being able to raise a fuss about it. I seriously doubt that every one acre property owner would run out and advertise to board five horses. #1 – it’s a lot of work and #2 – you surely are NOT going to make money with 5 horses even if you did charge a full boarding fee so it’s not much of a income incentive! She went on and on about the millions of gallons of water that would be consumed – when in fact what is already done would just be “legal” and water usage wouldn’t change. Blah… blah…. Blah…. Self serving – it seems to threaten the sale of their established business.

• Bruce Lunquist from Laveen spoke and addressed a loss of fees collected for zoning violations. The county has said they can’t follow up on all the complaints now because they don’t have the staff. So…. I guess it is income that ISN’T coming in now so it won’t be a loss. The county has even received complaints when someone has a website about their personal barn posting show results of their horses! He was concerned that people could give lessons every two hours – too much activity. He wanted a 10 acre minimum for any of the “normal” horse fun that we all enjoy. He wanted a parking regulation that would require all parking off the street. He figured the income potential for 5 horses was 5 x $375 to $475 and everyone would want to increase their income by $22,500 per year. I guess this guy doesn’t own any horses or he would understand that we certainly won’t be motivated by the extra $20K per year because the horses in his calculation don’t eat, drink, need supplements or use any electricity for lights, fans, etc. He stated the text amendment should not allow 24 people because that’s just too much for an acre. I had a party with 135 people and they all fit just fine – every one of 40+ kids got to ride, many for the first time in their life. I asked my neighbors about the parking issue for the day and they didn’t have a problem with it. After all it was an annual thing, not a daily event!

Neighbors can be quite accommodating if you talk to them instead of playing tattle tale to the county.
There have been additional attempts to add on things such as:

• Minimum property size for any type of equine activity to be 3 acres.

• Place a limit on the overall number of animals allowed per acre with a horse = 1 unit, cow = 1 unit, goat x 2 = one unit, chicken x 4 = 1 unit Oh how nice, I’ll trade you 1 horse for 4 chickens…. The kids should be able to ride those just fine.

• Require everyone to get Special Use Permits allowing one event per week such as 1 team roping, 1 day of lessons, 1 Charro competition, etc. - see previous details on the Special Use Permit.

• Limit use to daytime hours only – no riding in the heat of the summer after the sun goes down with arena lights. Laws are already in place for lights and MOST people observe those regulations (by the way – Twice as Nice Performance Horses has BRIGHT arena lighting 24/7. Dark Sky Ordinance: http://www.maricopa.gov/planning/Res...Ordinance.aspx

Don’t take this lightly and assume that everyone else will take care of it! The cities of Glendale, Goodyear, Gilbert, and Avondale have already presented letters in opposition to allowing these activities. They are concerned about complaints from their residents that butt up to county land. It doesn’t matter that they purchased their homes knowing that the horse properties were there first! Cities are also reviewing this test amendment as an issue for them because of their future plans to annex county properties.

We need an ARMY of horse people at the upcoming meeting to fight for the typical uses that equestrian people want! If you are interested in reading through the emails and letters (for and against) that have been received by planning and zoning go to http://www.maricopa.gov/planning/Pub...s/reports.aspx. Click on TA2008006 - Equestrian Uses.pdf
6/10/2009 10:15:28 AM .pdf 352466 TA2008006Attachments.pdf 6/10/2009 10:15:03 AM .pdf 2160737

If this text amendment does not pass in some form many “complainers” will use the issue to file more complaints and your activities could become victim to the technicality of the 1974 law which does not allow these activities.

Author unknown. If anyone knows who wrote this, please ask them to contact me at: info@allabouthorses.com