Agenda - Council - 08/14/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Further Discussion: Board Member Scottston noted that in the City Council meeting minutes of June 12, Councilmember Hendriksen suggests reinstating the words "enclosed roaming area" back into the ordinances. As a point of clarification, she stated that there is nothing to put back because nothing was taken out; the current regulations do not state that the additional acreage for additional horses must be 'enclosed roaming area'. The only reference to 'enclosed roaming area' in the current regulations is in Subdivsion 5 where it states that persons owning horses should file a sketch plan at the City and one of the pieces of information that should be on the sketch plan is the size of the 'enclosed roaming area'. Then Board Member Scottston referenced Councilmember Hendriksen's suggestion that the acreage requirements for keeping farm animals and horses be linear. Board Member Scottston recalled that during the Board's review of the farm animal and horse ordinances, they made a conscious decision to require more acreage to keep a mixture of farm animals than if you arejust keeping horses. When there is a mix of animal species on a parcel, housing and segregation needs for each species will require a larger geometric area than if only equines are being kept. Board Member Scottston also noted that if Councilmember Hendriksen is stating that ~A acre for each additional horse is sufficient if the t/2 acre is required to be enclosed roaming area, then she feels that establishing minimum pasture size requirements would be extremely difficult to enforce. Landowners that cannot meet the requirements can apply for a conditional use permit and part of the review criteria would be how much enclosed roaming area they have. IMotion failed. Voting Yes: Board Member Shumway. Voting No: Chairperson Shumway, Board Members Breu, Niles and Scottston. Abstain: None. Members Absent: None. Motion by Board Member Scottston and seconded by Board Member ShumWay to resubmit the farm animal, horse, and barns and stables ordinances to City Council as originally drafted. Further Discussion: Board Member Scottston reiterated that if increasing the acreage requirements to 1 full acre over 3 acres for every additional horse creates a particular problem for a land owner, they can apply for a conditional use permit to exceed the regulations. And, with respect to keeping the formula for number of horses versus number of domestic farm animals that can be kept on a parcel lineal, the Board intended to require more acreage to have a mixture of farm animals because the property will have to be able to accommodate a variety of housing, fencing, and specie segregation needs. Board Member Scottston further explained that she has been consulted on a few horse complaint cases and the Horse Care Board has to look at the good of the community as a whole when making recommendations on rules for keeping animals. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Shumway, Board Members Breu, Niles, Scottston, and Shumway. Voting No: None. Absent: None. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Board Member Breu and seconded by Board Member Scottston to adjourn. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Shumway, Board Members Breu, Niles, Scottston, and Shumway. Voting No: None. Absent: None. The meeting of the Horse Care Board adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sylvia Frolik Community Development Director -191-