Vested Rights and Land Use Law - Newlin Township

[ASB_Stars]

I have been on both sides of this, since I used to work in Real Estate Development. I have to say that it was truly disturbing to me to watch over and over again just how some of these empowered individuals on Zoning Commissions, and Boards of Supervisors, will run rough shod over residents. Individuals with standing (residents) need to get serious as soon as they sense that their rights are being violated, and lawyer up. If you have a decent sized group, pitching into the pot becomes MUCH easier.

It is possible that this could be appealed, but I do not know enough about the process, and the particular townships regulations to be sure. However, quickly reviewing the Municipal Code show give some insight.

Ironically, I put together a homeowners group to fight a subdivision some years back, and we were successful. You need to get people motivated and an attorney who truly gets the process. There are a couple of fabulous land use attorneys who would be my go to’s- Joe Riper and Buck Riley would be top of the list.

My place is covered by a non-conforming use exception, and yet I still have to deal with just ridiculous things from idjit neighbors.

[pluvinel]

…Sounds like many farms were not in compliance with the Land Use regulations prior to and certainly not afterwards.
…

Actually, since the ordinance had never been enforced, most of the people with small farms were not aware that boarding required a “Special Exemption”.

…
I’m not happy with it. The acreage requirements now will favor only the very large farms held by the wealthy. It will discourage the smaller/mid size farmettes. Perhaps that is the point.
…

BINGO!!!

I had to change townships because the first land I had bought turns out there were issues prohibiting me from building a horse farm EVEN though the adjoining neighbor had a large boarding business. That was an expensive lesson.

And this is an example of the more rules, the less willing people are to jump thru hoops to keep horses…and more open land gets lost.

My farm IS under a commerical agricultrual easement…which defines horses as an agricultrual use. It is why I’m limited to only one homestead (which includes my barn appartment). This easement is what protected the land from being developed into mass houses…but didn’t exempt me from having to get the Land Use approvals of my township.

You were willing to jump thru hoops to get your permit…others just find it easier to sell to developers and move.

This is really NOT about the zoning…it IS about the attitudes of the Board of Supervisors. I was so disturbed by the behavior of elected representatives that after attending these meetings, I could not go to sleep those nights.

The BoS was asked and repeatedly refused to engage the residents, (including world-class horsemen) in the township to help draft an ordinance. Other townships have formed “community advisory panels” to help the Supervisors with input to ordinances…it was asked at the last meeting why couldn’t the Newling BoS do the same.

[kcmel]

[QUOTE=pluvinel;7807491]

This is really NOT about the zoning…it IS about the attitudes of the Board of Supervisors. I was so disturbed by the behavior of elected representatives that after attending these meetings, I could not go to sleep those nights.

The BoS was asked and repeatedly refused to engage the residents, (including world-class horsemen) in the township to help draft an ordinance. Other townships have formed “community advisory panels” to help the Supervisors with input to ordinances…it was asked at the last meeting why couldn’t the Newling BoS do the same.[/QUOTE]

I agree. IMO Pierson is the bad apple; I think Janie and Bill Kelsall really thought they were doing the right thing (although I could be wrong here). But Pierson has some sort of dictator complex.

[Equibrit]

Writeup; [URL=“http://unionvilleinthenews.blogspot.com/2014/10/newlin-controversial-new-ordinance.html”]http://unionvilleinthenews.blogspot.com/2014/10/newlin-controversial-new-ordinance.html

Baird;
http://chescotimes.com/?p=7361

[pluvinel]

[QUOTE=Equibrit;7808438]
Writeup; [URL=“http://unionvilleinthenews.blogspot.com/2014/10/newlin-controversial-new-ordinance.html”]http://unionvilleinthenews.blogspot.com/2014/10/newlin-controversial-new-ordinance.html

Baird;
http://chescotimes.com/?p=7361[/QUOTE]

What’s missing in this discussion is that the Board of Supervisors repeatedly…multiple times…declined (or ignored) requests to meet with the impacted farm owners. It was incredibly distressing to watch this evolve.

The uproar over the Newlin matter is all about elected representatives that refused to meet with their electorate in an open public meeting…not the details of the ordinance.

There was no “crisis” that needed to be resolved right now, so why did these supervisors have to vote this ordinance?

Why couldn’t the supervisors continue to engage their electorate so that questions could be hashed out and resolved?

[frugalannie]

Multiple letters to the editors of both those publications (on line or not) might get the other view out.

[JP60]

The board then voted unanimously to approve the new rules, and Mrs. Baird said to the audience, “We love you all.”

…she said as she gently shoved the knife into the backs of equestrian farm owners living in Newlin.

Out of curiosity I did read through the letter to the editor she wrote (Janie Baird) as well as the meeting minutes for the BoS meetings. In one sense she was correct that they did talk about this from at least Jan 2014 on and had mentioned that public notices were to be put out. Now putting a public notice in a local paper is not the most obvious way to get hte message out, but it does meet a sunshine (more like overcast) rule.

What was also interesting and still muddling was that it seems all this started from a small group of people who filed a suit to get the current laws enforced.

The issue surrounding the allowance of horse boarding and riding schools in Newlin has been on the regular monthly meeting agenda of the Board of Supervisors for 14 straight months (after a number of residents threatened a lawsuit to enforce the existing ordinance).

Would be interesting to know who those parties were (if I were local) and discover why they initially filed. Activist farmers could try a suit of their own to ask for a stay until the law can be reviewed against impacts they new law could have on the community.

What a mess.

[spade]

“He said that the supervisors must represent the whole township and speculated that the majority of the township residents were at home watching “Monday Night Football” rather than speaking up at the meeting”

Was that a joke? If the “majority” of the township would rather watch the St. Louis Rams and the San Francisco 49ers, then maybe JUST maybe they don’t really care about the decision.

I can’t imagine that comment went over well to the people who showed up are impacted greatly by this choice.

[kcmel]

[QUOTE=JP60;7810009]

Would be interesting to know who those parties were (if I were local) and discover why they initially filed.

What a mess.:([/QUOTE]

It is well known who the instigating parties were. It all began when Laurel Hill was sold, and the new owners leased out part of the property to a H/J trainer. This resulted in increased traffic, including truck/trailer traffic, on a small narrow road. This is what led a group of neighbors to threaten to sue the township if the current ordinance was not enforced. How that ended up with a completely new ordinance I have not seen explained.

[pluvinel]

double post

[pluvinel]

[QUOTE=kcmel;7810157]
It is well known who the instigating parties were. It all began when Laurel Hill was sold, and the new owners leased out part of the property to a H/J trainer. This resulted in increased traffic, including truck/trailer traffic, on a small narrow road. This is what led a group of neighbors to threaten to sue the township if the current ordinance was not enforced. How that ended up with a completely new ordinance I have not seen explained.[/QUOTE]

And THAT is the crux of the matter…

• Why was a question/concern about local traffic turned into a major zoning revision?
• Why didn't the Township deal with the original traffic question?
• Why did the Township expand a simple local traffic concern (on one road) into a change to a zoning ordinance that impacts a large number of land owners?
• Why did the Township supervisors take a "road use issue" and turn it into an "equine use problem" and bring it before legal and political entities?

If you read the township meeting minutes chronologically (dating back to 2012), one can infer why.
http://www.newlintownship.org/minutes.html

Which behooves eventers and equestrians everywhere to keep their pulse on local politics and not take the status quo for granted.

It was depressing that hardly anyone spoke up at the last Newlin township meeting. The silence was deafening.

[ASB_Stars]

If the horse community is going to attempt to do anything, they need to lawyer up, as a group, if they haven’t already, and file an appeal within 30 days of the decision. I have no idea how successful it will be, but it is only the Court of Common Pleas in West Chester, and it cannot be that difficult for them to throw some $$ into the kitty, and take a shot. It sound like they should have adequate grounds to at least try and get some traction, and if they start the wheels moving, perhaps they can get the rest of the people down there to wake up.

[JP60]

[QUOTE=pluvinel;7810199]
And THAT is the crux of the matter…

• Why was a question/concern about local traffic turned into a major zoning revision?
• Why didn't the Township deal with the original traffic question?
• Why did the Township expand a simple local traffic concern (on one road) into a change to a zoning ordinance that impacts a large number of land owners?
• Why did the Township supervisors take a "road use issue" and turn it into an "equine use problem" and bring it before legal and political entities?

If you read the township meeting minutes chronologically (dating back to 2012), one can infer why.
http://www.newlintownship.org/minutes.html

Which behooves eventers and equestrians everywhere to keep their pulse on local politics and not take the status quo for granted.

It was depressing that hardly anyone spoke up at the last Newlin township meeting. The silence was deafening.[/QUOTE]
To help people along (interested parties outside Newlin for I figure they all know this) this meeting minutes is where it starts to surface

http://www.newlintownship.org/images/7.8.2013_Approved.pdf

Then the next month I found the most telling moment was when I read that the Newlin Planning Commission rejected the proposed amendment and the dancing of words by all three BoS to denounce it while not offending the planning board (“they just don’t understand”). I noticed that by Jan 2014 the PC had “changed” and soon came on board with the BoS so … how convenient to wait till sympathetic ears were available to get everyone board.

While it seems legal, boy it stinks and I never did see them get the County Review, what happened there (or did I miss it in the meeting minutes). As stated, it behooves us to actually pay attention to these local rulers for without good oversight by the public they can certainly run amuck.

Gosh I hope the horse community there can find someone to help them get this better balanced cause ya know ‘Jane love’s y’all’.

As a side note Jerry McCormick seemed to pop up a bit as an interested party, but I could not place whether he was pushing for or challenging the proposal.

[pluvinel]

Update…
http://pennsylvaniaequestrian.com/news2014/november/Newlin-Township-Ordinance-Passes-Equestrians-Mull-Options.php#/