Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />October 24, 2000 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />their dogs sleep in the entry at night, so they will not be spending a significant <br />amount of time in the kennel. <br /> <br />Steve Eckholm, 14199 202nd Avenue NW, neighbor to the south of the applicants, <br />expressed his concern that there would be excessive barking if the applicants <br />decided to have more dogs. <br /> <br />Commissioner Baker asked the applicant how often he anticipated there would <br />be litters of puppies on the premises. Mr. Tomlinson stated that they would likely <br />be breeding no more than every two years. <br /> <br />Ms. Peck stated that she has never heard the applicants' dogs barking. <br /> <br />Chair Mesich felt that the conditions of the kennel license are very strict and <br />would cover issues such as noise or odor. He noted that barking of dogs could <br />also be addressed under the nuisance ordinance. <br /> <br />There being no further comments from the public, Vice Chair Chambers closed <br />the public hearing. <br /> <br />Chair Mesich stated that he felt a definite number of feet should be stated in <br />Condition No.4, regarding the area which is setback from the west property line. <br />Ms. Peck stated the area is already defined by the fence that the applicants <br />recently put up. She stated that the distance varies from 15 feet to 25 feet from <br />the property line, due to the angle of the property line. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Chair Mesich expressed his concern that the applicant be limited to the number <br />of dogs he may have, stated in Condition NO.5. He stated that he felt it was <br />questionable if placing a limit on the number of dogs in a private kennel was <br />allowed under the law. He stated that circumstances may sometimes warrant <br />having more than the number allowed, such as when a dog becomes old and <br />can no longer be shown or bred. <br /> <br />The Commissioners discussed whether or not the condition should be changed. <br /> <br />Ms. Peck asked if the applicant were allowed to keep more dogs, would he be <br />allowed to expand the kennel. Mr. Tomlinson stated that he did not feel this was <br />an issue, since he did not intend to have more than 4 dogs. <br /> <br />COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY <br />LINDA ALLEN AND JOHN TOMLINSON FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A <br />PRIVATE KENNEL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1. THAT THERE BE NO ON-SITE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES SUCH AS BREEDING, <br />BOARDING OR SELLING. <br />2. THAT THE ANIMAL WASTE BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AS REQUIRED BY CITY <br />ORDINANCE. <br />3. THAT THE APPLICANT OBTAINS A PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE FROM THE CITY. <br />4. THAT THE DOGS BE LIMITED TO AN AREA ON THE PROPERTY THAT IS SETBACK A <br />MINIMUM OF 15 FEET FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. <br />5. THAT THE THERE BE NO MORE THAN 4 ADULT DOGS KEPT ON THE PROPERTY. <br />6. THAT THE APPLICANTS COMPLY WITH THE ANIMAL ORDINANCE. <br />