A colleague of mine, an architect, recently encountered a situation where her client was being pursued by a planning enforcement officer who alleged that the client was unlawfully housing a horse on their property. The officer contended that the client lacked the requisite planning permissions to maintain the animal within the premises.
She inquired, “What should I advise him?”
In response, I provided the following guidance:
In this instance, the enforcement officer sought to assert that the use of the property had undergone a “change of use,” thereby necessitating a planning permit. However, upon reviewing the Development Planning Act, it becomes evident that certain land uses, including animal husbandry, do not require a permit. Specifically, Article 70 of the Act stipulates:
“The use of land for agriculture, animal husbandry, and forestry (including afforestation), except where such use consists of: (i) the erection of buildings or amounts to the intensive raising of crops or animals…” does not necessitate a permit.
All in all, since the term “land” under the Act encompasses both land and buildings, as well as land formed through reclamation, there are no planning-related issues in this case, so far as the Planning Authority is concerned.
However, to further clarify the situation, I advised my colleague to consult the Police Code, Chapter 10, which governs the regulations for the keeping of animals, including horses, within buildings. Under this code, the keeping of certain animals—such as horses, mules, goats, sheep, and pigs—clearly requires a license from the sanitary authority. This license is subject to specific conditions and is valid for no more than one year. Indeed Article 126 of Chapter 10 provides:
‘126. (1) No person shall, without a licence from the sanitary authority, the duration of which shall not exceed one year, keep on any premises within the limits mentioned in sub-article (2) of the last preceding article, any animal of the bovine species, or any pig, goat, sheep, horse, mule, or donkey.
(2) The sanitary authority shall not grant any licence for the keeping of any such animals in any cellar within the said limits; or for the keeping of any such animal in any other place within such limits, unless the floor thereof is of hard stone, asphalt, or any other impervious material, and is connected with the public sewer in a manner approved by the sanitary authority, and unless such place is provided with such ventilators as the sanitary authority may consider necessary.
(3) The Superintendent of Public Health may refuse to grant or renew any such licence whenever, in his opinion, the keeping of any of the said animals may cause a nuisance’.
Thus, according to the Police Code, the client would need to obtain a license from the sanitary authority to house the horse within the building. The license, valid for a period not exceeding one year, is contingent upon meeting specific sanitary conditions, including the use of impervious flooring, proper sewer connections, and adequate ventilation.
Having said this, it is crucial to emphasize, however, that the Planning Authority does not have jurisdiction in this matter. The responsibility lies solely with the Superintendent of Public Health.
