Above: Nancy Parker Wilson, general manager of Greenvale Vineyards, discusses a Chardonnay with guests during a wine tasting in 2013. “The economy is not scaled in our favor. Everything that we do is costly,” said Ms Wilson, who supports the proposed amendment to the town’s zoning ordinance.
PORTSMOUTH — Proponents of a proposed amendment to the town’s zoning ordinance say the change is needed to help modern-day farmers maintain their livelihood, while critics charge it would unfairly expand commercial activities in residential neighborhoods.
The two sides will square off at a public hearing before the Town Council on Monday, June 8. The meeting begins at 7 p.m. at Town Hall.
One of the key elements of the proposed amendment is that it would allow certain accessory commercial uses of farmland by special use permit — provided that the ancillary use is secondary to the principal agricultural activity.
A section of the amendment that defines agriculture reads: “The mixed-use of farms and farmlands for other forms of enterprise including, but not limited to, the display of antique farm equipment, retail sales, tours, classes, petting, feeding and viewing of animals, hay rides, crop mazes, festivals and other special events are hereby recognized as a valuable and viable means of contributing to the preservation of agriculture.”
The proposed Portsmouth zoning ordinance amendment, which also addresses roadside stands and other matters, can be read here. To view the complete agenda for the meeting, including letters from citizens who are both for and against the zoning change, click here.
In written comments on the amendment provided to the Planning Board in March, Town Planner Gary Crosby said the proposed changes are an attempt to bring the ordinance closer in compliance with the town’s Comprehensive Community Plan as mandated by state law. (The Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend Town Council approval of the amendment in April.)
“There is currently no provision in the Portsmouth Zoning Ordinance that adequately manages an emerging and important aspect of Portsmouth economic life, the conduct of non-farm activities on lands principally used for agriculture,” Mr. Crosby stated in his letter. “It has become a widely accepted belief that farmers are increasingly relying on these non-farm activities to help their farms remain economically viable.”
(A phone message left at Mr. Crosby’s office was not returned before The Portsmouth Times’ print deadline.)
Hoping for weddings, more
One of the local farmers eager to see the amendment approved is Nancy Parker Wilson, general manager of Greenvale Vineyards at 582 Wapping Road. The farm, which sits along the Sakonnet River and has been in her family since 1863, produces about 3,000 cases of wine from the 27 acres of grapes grown there.
Ms. Wilson said wine sales are not enough to keep the business viable, however.
“The economy is not scaled in our favor. Everything that we do is costly and what we do is so labor intensive,” she said, adding that the vineyard needs to find other revenue sources.
Greenvale’s attempts to host ancillary activities such as weddings, receptions and rehearsal dinners are well known, and it has been the vineyard’s contention for years that they should be allowed under Rhode Island’s Right to Farm Act. Years ago, Greenvale hosted weddings before several neighbors objected, forcing the vineyard to seek a special use permit.
In 2010, however, the town’s Zoning Board of Review denied the permit in a 3-2 vote. In September 2012, a Newport Superior Court judge upheld the zoning board’s decision and Greenvale’s appeal was denied in October 2014.
Ms. Wilson pointed out that should the zoning amendment be passed, neighbors won’t immediately be seeing weddings and receptions popping up on the vineyard’s lawn. “It allows for me and other famers to approach the town to get the special use permit under the heading of an agricultural operation or farm,” she said.
Support from Preserve Portsmouth
Conni Harding of Preserve Portsmouth, a group that raises awareness of land use issues and “smart growth” initiatives, also hopes the amendment is passed. She said the zoning change would be good not only for local farmers, but for the community as a whole.
“Weddings and events bring people to town and they stay in the hotels. They go to the shops. It’s part of our economy,” said Ms. Harding, noting that caterers, tent companies and other businesses would benefit as well. “We need to do as much as we can to help (farmers) run their businesses. They are commercial operations.”
Rhode Island has so little farmland left, unlike in places such as upstate New York, she said. “You have to make the most of what you have,” said Ms. Harding. “We have very responsible farmers in Portsmouth from what I can see. I’d rather have special events with police and (firefighters) monitoring them, than more subdivisions coming in.”
Critics sound off
Not everyone in town, particularly residents who live near farms, support the proposed amendment.
Nancy Howard, of 16 Dianne Ave., was the sole member of the town’s Agriculture Committee who voted against recommending council approval of the amendment.
“This zoning change will not preserve farmland, increase food production or increase revenue. This zoning change will increase neighborhood traffic, diminish safety, increase noise and negatively impact our quality of life,” Ms. Howard stated in a letter to The Portsmouth Times.
In another letter, Diane Brown, a Middletown resident who recently lived on Dianne Avenue, agreed that the amendment would unfairly grow business and industry in residential neighborhoods.
“Why allow landowners of residentially zoned farmland to operate above the rules that govern the rest of us?” Ms. Brown stated in her letter. “This is not a minor change. It will put an unsupportable legal burden squarely on the backs of residents, to defend themselves against every non-farming special use application and to fight for any limitations in size, frequency and type of event or business venture.”
Ms. Wilson, however, maintains that allowing farmers to seek supplemental uses to make their business viable benefits the community as a whole.
“It’s been proven that farmland is better for the town than houses,” she said. “The state is becoming more outspoken about the fact that the towns need to do more to allow farmers to do things to survive.”