Minutes - Planning Commission - 09/04/2014

Home

the four (4) dogs owned by the applicant, they also provide regular care for one (1) other dog owned by a family member. As expressed during the August Planning Commission meeting, Planning Staff was unaware of this last dog regularly cared for but not owned by the applicant, as the applicant did not identify it and the nature of its care on the property. Planning Intern Olson explained that the incident that prompted this request was a community service officer (CSO) visiting the property to investigate a complaint related to dogs. The complainant expressed concern with the number of dogs on the property and the level of noise that was being generated. The CSO spoke with the applicant, who explained that there were more than three (3) dogs on the property. The CSO then informed the applicant that a conditional use permit for the operation of a dog kennel would be needed to board more than three (3) dogs, as outlined in City Code Section 10 -56 (Number of Dogs Permitted). Staff discussed the case further and recommended the Commission approving a conditional use permit to maintain up to seven dogs on the property. Commission Business Motion by Commissioner Bauer, seconded by Commissioner VanScoy, to approve a private dog kennel allowing the applicant to have four (4) dogs on the property located at 5520 140 Lane NW. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Levine, Commissioners Bauer, VanScoy, Brauer, Maul, and Nosan. Voting No: None. Absent: None. Commissioner Bauer requested further information from staff as to why seven dogs were being recommended for the commercial kennel permit. City Planner Anderson explained that after a site visit at the applicant's home, staff believed that seven small breed dogs would be a reasonable number for the commercial kennel permit. This would allow for the four current dogs to remain along with three other dogs to be onsite. Commissioner Brauer questioned if the dog breed allowed onsite should be addressed. He expressed concern with seven large dogs being located on the property. City Planner Anderson commented that the applicant has stated that boarding services would be provided for dog breeds 15 pounds or smaller. He did not recommend calling out specific breeds as this would be difficult to enforce. He reviewed the language in the findings addressing dog breeds. Planning Intern Olson explained the applicant has physical limitations and smaller breed dogs were more suited for boarding than large breed dogs. Tricia Drexler, 14060 Fluorine Street, did not object to the number or size of dogs. She expressed great concern with the noise generated by the dogs on the property. Planning Commission /September 4, 2014 Page 5 of 11