9/8/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ANALYSIS: Staffs position regarding the application of the County's non -conformity provisions to the pot-bellied pig prohibition related to equity and fairness. Generally, the purpose of the non -conformity section of the county code is to ensure that people are not penalized because of a change in county code that makes a use or structure illegal, even though the uselstructure was legal when established. By applying the non -conformity rule to the pot-bellied pig prohibition, people who had acquired a Pot-bellied pig when such pigs were considered household pets by the county would not be penalized by the change in county rules. Also, since pot-bellied pigs do have a limited lifespan, the non- conformity would eventually be eliminated by the death of the grandfathered pigs. Even though applying the non -conformity rule to pot-bellied pigs would be consistent with the way the county addresses general uses and structures, there is precedent not to apply the non -conformity allowance in this case. In the past, the county has changed its commercial vehicle regulations and has not provided grandfathering allowances for non -conforming vehicles. A similar procedure could be applied here. Since applying the non -conformity provision to pot-bellied pigs is a staff interpretation, that provision can be changed without amending the LDR's. Therefore, the Board of County Commissioners could determine that applying the pot-bellied pig prohibition immediately and not grandfathering existing pigs would be appropriate. If the Board did take such action, staff could initiate code enforcement action in all cases where pot-bellied pigs are kept as household pets in residentially zoned areas. RECONEWENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: • consider staffs interpretation that pot-bellied pigs acquired and kept as household pets prior to May, 1998, be considered grandfathered and subject to the County's non -conformity rules; and • determine if that interpretation should be maintained or changed. Commissioner Ginn asked how many complaints there have been to Code Enforcement on pot-bellied pigs. Director Keating advised there have been two Code Enforcement cases on pot-bellied pigs, but stated that one of the reasons that staff undertook the change to the LDRs was because the Animal Control Department had problems with pot-bellied pigs in the past. The Humane Society has also experienced problems as well as neighboring residents who filed complaints. Nancy Errett, Animal Control Director, explained that the recently found six infant pigs were not pot-bellied pigs, but were believed to be offspring of a wild hog who had been killed. September 8, 1998 37 BooK106 ��u 0 7 L