Laserfiche WebLink
y <br />TO: James E. Chandler <br />County Administrator <br />D ON HEAD CONCURRENCE: <br />obert M. Keating, P / <br />Community Develo ent D' / r <br />THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP <br />Planning Director <br />FROM: Eric Blade <br />Staff Planner, Current Development <br />DATE: March 18, 1998 <br />SUBJECT: Appeal By Mr. & Mrs. Riddle of the Planning and Zoning Commission's Denial of <br />an Administrative Permit Application for a Non -Commercial Kennel <br />It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County <br />Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 24, 1998. <br />BACKGROUND AND CONDITIONS: <br />At its regular meeting of February 26,1998, by a vote of 5-0, the Planning and Zoning Commission <br />denied an administrative permit request submitted by the Riddles for a non-commercial kennel at <br />7970 79' court. The Riddles applied for approval as a result of code enforcement action, in an <br />attempt to legalize an existing, unpermitted non-commercial kennel. The kennel consists of outdoor <br />pens and cages for pigs, rabbits, and dogs. Via the administrative permit process, the Planning and <br />Zoning Commission was authorized to consider the impact of the proposed project on surrounding <br />properties. It was the Planning and Zoning Commission's determination, after much discussion, that <br />the subject property was of insufficient size to adequately mitigate the impact of a non-commercial <br />kennel upon surrounding properties. <br />The Riddles have appealed the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial. The Board of County <br />Commissioners is now to consider the appeal and either uphold the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission's decision or overturn that decision in part or in whole. <br />•Site Plan Review and Decision <br />In accordance with the specific land use criteria of LDR section 971.04 and 971.08(8) (see <br />attachment #5), the subject site plan application was processed as an administrative approval site <br />plan requiring administrative permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staffs <br />report to the Planning and Zoning Commission (see attachment #3) noted that the minimum <br />standards set forth by specific land use criteria for a non-commercial kennel had been satisfied by <br />the site plan. Staffs recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission included a condition <br />that potbelly pigs not be allowed outdoors, as proposed, since keeping such animals outside would <br />constitute the keeping of livestock (which is prohibited in residential areas) rather than the keeping <br />of household pets (see attachment #7). <br />It is the intent of the specific land use criteria governing administrative permits that certain activities, <br />such as non-commercial kennels, may be allowed if the scale and nature of the activity would not <br />generally have an adverse impact on surrounding properties. During its presentation of the proposal <br />to the Planning and Zoning Commission, staff noted that the size of the subject site is only .3 of an <br />acre and is surrounded by parcels of equal or smaller size. Staff noted that two previously approved <br />non-commercial kennels within an 1/8 of a mile of the subject site were approved on parcels 5 acres <br />in size. Use of such large parcels lessened the impact of those non-commercial kennels. <br />Even though the specific land use criteria for non-commercial kennels do not specifically stipulate <br />a minimum parcel size, the Planning and Zoning Commission took issue with the potential number <br />of animals and small size of the lot and the proximity of the proposed kennel pens to surrounding <br />properties. In attendance at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting were several surrounding <br />property owners that voiced their opposition to the kennel based on the noise of the dogs and smell <br />of the potbelly pigs. Based upon the reported nuisances and small size of the site, the Planning and <br />Zoning Commission denied the request. Following the Planning and Zoning Commission's vote to <br />deny the Riddle's request for a non-commercial kennel, the Commission directed planning staff to <br />research a change to the LDRs to specifically define a minimum parcel size in relation to the number <br />of animals allowed. <br />MARCH 24, 1998 <br />