Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rural Business topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves Greystoke Dressage riding-stable permit but removes staff hour restriction
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a conditional-use permit for a private riding stable at 1872 Chenar Road (Greystoke Dressage LLC) with staff conditions, but notably excluded a staff-recommended hours restriction after debate about animal welfare and practical training schedules.
The St. Charles County Planning and Zoning Commission on March 18 approved a conditional-use permit for a riding stable proposed by Jenna Butler, owner and head trainer of Greystoke Dressage LLC, but struck one staff-recommended restriction that would have limited training and lessons to 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Staff described the 16.17-acre proposal as primarily outdoor pastures with a 5,700-square-foot stall barn and an approximately 8,900-square-foot indoor riding arena. The application requests training by appointment, limited horse care and a mix of personal and client horses. Staff recommended approval subject to nine conditions listed in the staff memo, including a cap on the total number of horses and permitted operating hours.
Jenna Butler, sworn before the commission, said she intends a private, appointment-only training facility and described industry practice when explaining why strict daytime-hour limits would be impractical. "Horse care and exercise schedules are often dictated by animal welfare, weather conditions, client schedules, and competition schedules," Butler said. She asked the commission to remove or amend staff condition 6, which would have limited lessons and training to 7 a.m.–8 p.m.
County Public Advocate Arnie C. Denoff testified in support of the applicant and urged the commission to remove staff conditions 6 and 8 (the latter would have capped the total horses at 25). Denoff argued that restrictive hour rules and horse-count caps are onerous in agricultural areas and that the applicant has demonstrated professional experience and care.
Commissioners questioned how the operation would affect neighbors, noise, and the composition of personal versus client horses. Staff clarified that the condition limiting total horses to 25 reflected the applicant’s submission and that agricultural zoning already allows some horse-keeping by right. After discussion, the commission voted to approve CUP26‑02 with staff recommendations numbered 1,2,3,4,5,7,8 and 9 — explicitly excluding condition 6 (the hours restriction) from the approved package.
The permit includes limits and management measures (manure-management and site-management plans, fencing and setbacks) that staff said will mitigate impacts. The applicant will be required to meet the conditions included in the approval and comply with any applicable county code and environmental requirements.
