Market Garden Ordinance Passes First Reading

The Committee passed an ordinance allowing qualifying property owners to conduct for-profit farming by a vote of 3-1 Thursday.

Committee Member Robert Gallop cast the sole dissenting vote against the ordinance at the first reading. Committee Member Kevin Tubbs, who has previously expressed disfavor of the ordinance, was not present.

The vote was done before the public had the opportunity to comment at the meeting. Residents both in favor and opposed to the ordinance have spoken at numerous meetings of the committee and the Chatham Township Planning Board for nearly a year.

The committee held an extensive discussion of the ordinance before the vote and decided to make several changes. The word "organic" was added to the ordinance's definition of a "market garden," and the committee determined that while contiguous lots may apply for the conditional use under a single operation, all lots of land must be at least 3 acres in area.

Also, the committee determined that any pest or weed control must be in accordinace with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National Organic Program under Section B-4 of the ordinance. The prior draft specified pest control needed to be in accordance with the USDA but did not specify the National Organic Program.

A separate section of the ordinance, B-8, also mentioned pest control and the application of fertilizeers and manure. Because pest control was already dealt with in B-4, that portion was removed from B-8.

The committee also specified farm stands will not be permitted. 

Public Comments

Two residents, Christopher Struening and Margy Capecelatro, spoke against the farming ordinance. Capecelatro took issue with certain parts of the ordinance, among them, the hours and days farming activities are permitted and equipment can be used.

Township Administrator Thomas E. Ciccarone said all activities outlined in the ordinance are already permitted in the township. "The only difference is you can't sell it," he said, and that was the only thing the ordinance would change.

Struening reiterated his opposition to the ordinance, saying he and his neighbors chose to live in a residential neighborhood and did not wish to have farming as a commercial business introduced into the area, and he felt the committee was changing the way things were done to please two families.

"I feel they're really cutting the town short by not putting this through any other kinds of scrutiny another development would go through," Struening said after the meeting. "Environmental impact studies, variance studies, traffic impact studies, financial impacts on our property values...that's what comes out in the Zoning Board variance process."

Struening said he wants the town to continue to have anyone who wants to farm get a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment. "If this is so good for the town, let people who want to do it accrue the financial burden rather than the town," he said.

Next Step

Because of the large number of changes made to the ordinance since the Chatham Township Planning Board first approved it in January, Township Attorney Carl Woodward said "it should go back" to the board for their approval once more.

Mayor Nicole Hagner said she would ask the Planning Board chairwoman, Lydia Chambers, to expedite the board's review of the ordinance and send it back to the committee again.

A public hearing for the ordinance is currently scheduled for Thursday, April 26. The next Planning Board meeting is Monday, March 19.

Thomas Bucuk, one of the two property owners along Green Village Road who started the process of asking the committee for a conditional use ordinance to permit farming, said he thought the meeting "went well." Going back to the Planning Board, he said, is "the process. It's fine."

"I really just like the way they're approaching this, in a very practical and realistic way," he said.

Daniel Miller, Bucuk's neighbor who also wants to farm his land, said, "I think all the facts are starting to bear themselves out in this case. ... Hopefully we're getting toward the end of the process."

Other Changes to the Market Garden Ordinance

Woodward had also made other changes before the committee met Thursday night. One significant change was to remove any mention of set-backs for temporary greenhouses or equipment storage. Instead, the ordinance prohibits property owners from putting those things "in any front or side yard."

Woodward said limiting the location of greenhouses or storage areas to back yards only "makes it, I believe, a bit clearer."

Temporary greenhouses are limited to 250-feet squared. Fences must meet preexisting township requirements and any other requirements of the Planning Board "as part of site plan approval."

The ordinance allows property owners to use "irrigation pumps and equipment, tractors, harvest aids and bird control devices (excluding those that create noise, such as sirens or explosive devices."

Farming activities, except for irrigation, are restricted to take place on weekdays and Saturdays between 8 a.m. and sunset, and on federal holidays and Sundays between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. The use of tractors, mowers, tillers, gasoline- or diesel-powered harvesting equipment is prohibited on Sundays and federal holidays.

Woodward also included a section prohibiting compost piles. Property owners can use an enclosed composter, remove the compost or immediately till the compost into the soil. 

Violations

Gallop asked Woodward if it would be possible to add language to the ordinance requiring it to be strictly enforced, and outlining that "serious violations should result in the conditional use being revoked," Gallop said.

When Woodward asked what should qualify as a "serious violation," Gallop said "planting something that is specifically prohibited in the ordinance."

Woodward said the township already has the authority to revoke conditional uses due to violations. In such a case, the township would have to take the violating property owners to court, and the municipality will have the burden of proof.

Woodward and Ciccarone cited three different township codes. One part of the general code specified violations can be punished by a fine of up to $2,000. Another section of general code allows up to 30 days for violaters to correct the violation and specifies fines of up to $1,250 if the issue is not addressed. The Land Use code specifies fines of up to $500.

These fines may be accompanied by up to 90 days in jail, and each day a violation takes place is a separate count.

Woodward said he wanted to research which of these codes would apply to the conditional use ordinance. Either way, he said, it was not necessary and could, he said, be more confusing to add such language to the ordinance.

Woodward said he would look into some language for the ordinance to specify that it should be strictly interpreted to reflect the intentions of the committee.

A draft of the changes to the ordinance made at the March 8 meeting may be found in the Photos and Documents area of this article.