Minutes - Council - 09/23/2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Councilmember LeTourneau asked whether there are violations with State licensing requirements. Community Development Director Gladhill stated the Police Department would have alerted staff if that had been the case. Councilmember Riley stated the Planning Commission discussed this at length and recommended approval for the four dogs owned by the applicant and also recommended approval of three additional dogs for a total of seven. The Planning Commission did not recommend approval of up to 12 dogs. Councilmember Riley stated he found that to be a good compromise that may not impose on the quiet enjoyment of other's properties. Mr. Mattsen stated when the 12 dogs first came up, they had just picked a number so they would be covered. He stated they agree with the recommendation of the Planning Commission for up to seven dogs. Motion by Councilmember Riley, seconded by Councilmember Tossey, to Adopt Resolution #14 -09 -174 Adopting Findings of Fact #0932 related to a request from Diane and David Mattsen for a Conditional Use Permit for a Private Dog Kennel to Maintain Four or More Dogs on a Parcel of Property, and to Adopt Resolution #14 -09 -175 Approving the Issuance of a Conditional Use Permit for a Private and Commercial Dog Kennel to Maintain a Maximum of Seven Dogs on a Parcel of Land at 5520 140 Lane NW based on Findings of Fact #0932, and contingent upon applicant relocating enclosure fence to be entirely on the Subject Property within 30 days of this adoption. Further discussion: Mayor Strommen asked about Item 9 relating to maintaining dogs licensed in accordance to City Code. Community Development Director Gladhill advised of the provisions contained within Chapter 10 regulating the keeping of dogs and enforcement of City and State regulations pertaining to keeping of animals. City Planner Anderson indicated the Police Department also enforces required vaccinations, which would apply to any dog on the property. Mr. Mattsen stated he will certainly get a copy of that paperwork. Mayor Strommen noted that part of the rationale used by the Planning Commission relates to the size of the dog, which is detailed in the Findings of Fact but not the CUP. City Planner Anderson explained the applicant had indicated that no dog would exceed 15 pounds; however, the Planning Commission suggested striking that specific condition from the CUP as it would be difficult to enforce. Mayor Strommen asked if the decision would have been the same for seven large -sized dogs. City Planner Anderson stated that point was raised before the Planning Commission and ultimately the recommendation was for any breed or size of dog. Councilmember Tossey noted the objection related to noise from the dogs, not size of the dogs, and he would not support a size restriction. Mayor Strommen stated she is not advocating for adding a size restriction but wanted to note that it was a point of consideration in the recommendation. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Strommen, Councilmembers Riley, Tossey, Johns, and Kuzma. Voting No: Councilmember LeTourneau. Absent: Councilmember Backous. City Council / September 23, 2014 Page 6 of 13