Laserfiche WebLink
2. Non -Traditional or Exotic Animals: City Code definition; those animals that are not normally considered to <br />be domesticated but are not wild animals as defined by code. Commentary; this category is established for <br />those animals that are not traditionally considered as a domestic pet but do not necessarily possess the safety <br />concern as a wild animal. <br />3. Wild Animal: a mammal, large or poisonous reptile and bird that, in their uncaptured wild state, have the <br />physical capacity to be dangerous to the safety and welfare of any person or property. Note: this definition is <br />recommended to be revised as reflected in the current draft of the ordinance <br />Detailed performance standards and maximum number of animals allowed per parcel are included in the enclosed <br />attachments. <br />Alternatives <br />Alternative #1 - Introduce Ordinance #15-12. This ordinance is being brought forward based on Planning <br />Commission and City Council suggestion. Staff recommends that some form of ordinance modifying the approval <br />process should be adopted. <br />Alternative #2 - Introduce a revised Ordinance #15-12. Potential revisions to the draft ordinance could include <br />further modifications to the approval process. Other than minor language and typographical revisions, the Planning <br />Commission did not recommend any further modifications. Staff would support the elimination of the license <br />requirement for beekeeping if the City Council felt that there are adequate safety measures in the City Code <br />currently to provide confidence in administrative approval. Staff would not recommend the elimination of the <br />Conditional Use Permit process for wild animals. Due to the perceived subjective nature of the definition of <br />non-traditional or exotic animals, Staff would feel most comfortable with a City Council approval/confirmation of <br />Staffs analysis of these requests. <br />Alternative #3 - Table action on this recommendation and provide Staff with additional direction to provide further <br />modifications. As the ordinance is somewhat complex and this is the first time the City Council has considered the <br />ordinance, Staff would fully support this option as well. <br />Alternative #4 - Do not introduce Ordinance #15-12. Based on previous discussions with the Planning Commission <br />and City Council, Staff does not recommend this option. However, if the City Council desires to retain the <br />conditional use permit process and is solely concerned about current rates and charges for these requests, the City <br />could consider amending rates and charges to create thresholds of conditional use permit types and lower <br />application fees. This could have a minimal impact to the general tax rate. It is noted that cost is only one (1) factor <br />in feedback from residents. The time it takes to process a conditional use permit is also common feedback to the <br />City. <br />Funding Source: <br />This case is being handled as part of normal Staff duties. <br />Recommendation: <br />The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance #15-12 as currently drafted. A copy <br />of the minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting are attached for review. <br />Action: <br />Motion to introduce Ordinance #15-12. <br />Attachments <br />Summary of Proposed Changes <br />DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes dated June 11, 2015 <br />Ordinance #15-12 <br />