04/12/89 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Council consensus was to amend the proposed findings of fact as follows: Add Item #20 to indicate that City records do not indicate issuance of any similar conditional use permits for hobby horse farms. Amend Item #11 to indicate that the proposed use will be unduly dangerous to persons residing in the area because of the close confinement of the proposed number of horses on the 4.2 acre site. Amend Item #12 to indicate that the proposed use will impair the use and enjoyment of some of the surrounding properties. Amend Item #14 to indicate that the proposed use will not be appropriate in appearance with the intended character of the area. Amend Item #15 to indicate that the proposed use will be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. Amend Item 447 to include that the barn is located approximately 10 feet from the north boundary line of the subject property. Mr. Goodrich referred to Item #18 which indicates that there have been at least two horses maintained on the property since it was developed. Mr, Goodrich stated that this fact could serve as reason to grandfather the right to keep two horses on the property. Mr. Swiggum stated that the quality of the fencing rather than the size of the property should be the determining factor in considering the number of horses that could be maintained on the property. Ms. Williams noted that Community Development Technician Lutmer inspected the fence and stated that it was an excellent fence. Councilmember Pearson stated that the chances of animals breaking out of their fences increases as numbers of animals in a confined area increases, Ms. Williams stated that she feels her pasture is adequate size for 5 horses; suggested that Council review her property for themselves; noted that there are man3' properties in the area that are not in compliance with the horse ordinance; the intent of conditional use permits is to allow for uses beyond the ordinance; that her case was brought to the City's attention as an act of revenge by a former neighbor. Mr. Terry Hendriksen, Planning and Zoning Commissioner, was present and stated that Ms. Williams' case is one of a neighborhood feud in which the City is being used to beat- up one of the parties. Mr. Flendriksen stated that Ramsey's current horse ordinance is not realistic and is not being uniformly enforced across the City. One of Ramsey's Councilmembers has stated that the current ordinance should be left in place even if it can only be selectively enforced. There is a need to have an entry level of acreage at which horses ma3, be kept but to use that same increment for each additional horse is unreasonable. Until the City has a horse ordinance that is realistic and enforceable, the City will continue to have these kinds of problems. City Council/March 14, I989 Page 8 of 13