August 14, 2013

Commissioner McCall

motioned to approve minutes from the July 10 meeting, seconded by

Commissioner McCall

motioned to approve minutes from the July 10 meeting, seconded by

Commissioner Koenig

would like to pull item #11. They are not ready to take action on the item, and stated later in the meeting he will ask for it to be placed on another agenda.

Commissioner Koenig

discloses he had a meeting with applicant and staff for item #9, to go over their concerns. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Application (Continued from July 24, 2013):

Commissioner Koenig

reviews questions he addressed to the DA’s office. Tynia Dickson, applicant.

Commissioner Hafen

asks the applicant if she has read the staff report and conditions if this was to be approved.

Commissioner Hafen

stated item #4 is invalid and would be stricken if this was approved, per legal opinion by the DA.

Commissioner Koenig

stated the CUP is transferrable and runs with the property not the applicant.

Commissioner Koenig

added two conditions; the first one being the pool will be covered when the business is closed.

Ms. Dickson

stated they have looked at various covers so that won’t be a problem.

Commissioner Koenig

stated the pool will not be emptied on the ground.

Commissioner Hafen

stated he just wants to make sure they understand that condition #6 will require paving or chip sealed and wants to know if the applicant is in agreement.

Ms. Dickson

asked for clarification if they can use the parking next to them.

Mr. Sutton

stated he doesn’t see the reference that Ms. Dickson stated earlier. Code does provide for shared parking but this isn’t shared parking.

Commissioner Koenig

stated they will have to have something done with the parking lot.

Ms. Dickson

asked if they are able to do a dust pallative or does it have to be asphalt.

Mr. Dahl

stated they haven’t had a lot of success in dust palliative in the past. Page 3 of 9

Mr. Osborne

stated the code states it has to be 2” of asphalt or chip seal.

Ms. Dickson

stated the reference she quoted for parking was 17.04.730.D in General Development Standards.

Mr. Sutton

stated the version Ms. Dickson has is an old version of the code. The most recent version is completely different and takes out the adjacent section of it.

Mr. Lacy

stated it also says unless otherwise specified.

Mr. Sutton

stated he isn’t’ sure what has been done in the past, but he is just reading the current code.

Commissioner Koenig

stated there is an agreement that doesn’t allow us to waive parking.

Mr. Lacy

stated that is correct our agreement with NDEP doesn’t allow us to waive that portion of the code.

Mr. Sutton

stated we don’t have a waiver application before us, just a CUP so we can theoretically talk about it but no action can be taken.

Mr. Lacy

asked Mr. Sutton if in the future we can hear a waiver request if she brings one back in the future.

Commissioner Koenig

stated we aren’t allowed to waive paving.

Mr. Lacy

stated a waiver to use adjacent parking.

Commissioner Koenig

stated we can hear anything that is brought to them.

Ms. Dickson

references 15.28.100 Unpaved Parking and Storage Areas, section C, states Waivers of variances of areas greater than 5,000 sq ft are not permitted, and is she to assume less than 5,000 sq ft are. There is also a section that says you can do two inches of gravel.

Commissioner Koenig

stated 2” of gravel is not acceptable.

Mr. Dahl

quoted a section of the code, stated it is dust pallative or eliminating dust from wind, traveling on vacant lots, and reviews Code section 15.28.090 Unpaved Parking section A.

Commissioner Carbone

asks the applicant if this will be a part time business.

Commissioner Carbone

asks Mr. Sutton if these requirements generated for part time or full time businesses.

Mr. Sutton

stated he is unaware of any distinction between a part time or full time business for most of the things we have discussed. Mr. Osborne and I had spoken about a different requirement for restroom facilities but as far as the parking and paving he doesn’t know of any difference.

Commissioner Dolan

asks Ms. Dickson if she still plans on filling the pool with the fire hydrant. Page 4 of 9

Ms. Dickson

stated they have been in discussion with Utilities in about that, but they haven’t heard from them. Their other option is to tap, put in a spigot and fill up with a hose.

Commissioner Dolan

stated he spoke with Wendy Barnett from Utilities Inc. and you will be required to hook up to water and sewer. And if this is approved he would like to make that a condition of approval that they hook up to sewer and water and the reason for the sewer is for when you dump the water.

Ms. Dickson

stated they don’t plan to dump the water.

Commissioner Dolan

stated you have gasoline and oil boats and asks if when you refuel them or check the oil do you take them out of the pool or do you leave them in?

Mr. Dickson

stated most of the time they are done in the pool.

Commissioner Dolan

stated under state regulations you must dump that water because it is now hazardous and you must have a filter on that drain when dump it for oil or gasoline getting in the water. That is a requirement.

Mr. Dickson

stated that is why it is filtered and treated.

Commissioner Dolan

reviewed the email with Whitney Taylor from the State and Ms. Dickson. You need to understand you must follow the Reg. 444 and you will be required to hook up to water and sewer.

Ms. Dickson

asks if she emails the Health Department will she give me the information.

Mr. Dolan

stated this is a regulated business and he can’t assume they will give you the information.

Ms. Dickson

stated she told her this was similar to Wet N Wild type rides and she hasn’t looked up 444.

Commissioner Dolan

stated he doesn’t remember there being a recreation boat ride that had gas or electric powered engines there.

Ms. Dickson

stated it is more of a water ride rather than a swimming pool.

Commissioner Dolan

stated that was a water park, you are more of a water course ride.

Commissioner McCall

motions to deny CU-13-0011 based upon the staff findings shown on page 2. Seconded by Commissioner Hafen.

Commissioner King

stated the Planning Commission has discussed this at great length and the memo from Mr. Shoemaker is a culmination of discussions. The goal was to eliminate the term kennel, and create a Multi-pet permit.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated there has been several hearing with the RPC where people have had over 10 cats and dogs and the only thing available is Commercial Kennel, and the public doesn’t understand that there won’t be a business with them, but they don’t fall into anything else.

Commissioner Koenig

states presently if you want a residential kennel there are conditions that go along with it and he asks Mr. Shoemaker if the same conditions apply to the new two tiers.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated yes, they would make adjustments to tile 6 to reflect this change if the board chooses to do so.

Commissioner Koenig

stated we just change the description and everything else remains the same?

Commissioner McCall

asks Mr. Shoemaker if they can still put an upper limit on the tier two also.

Commissioner Dolan

asks what happens if we strike the word kennel from residential, then someone wants to open an actual kennel in the residential area. Will they have to go open up a store front?

Commissioner Hafen

asks Commissioner Koenig if we could still allow someone to open up a commercial kennel because it would be a commercial business.

Commissioner Koenig

states then it would be a commercial kennel.

Commissioner Dolan

asks if it is out of their house they still need a CUP?

Commissioner Dolan

states it says Multi-pet permit tier one and two. Will there be conditions that are applicable?

Commissioner Hafen

stated yes and if they don’t follow them then they are in violation of their CUP.

Commissioner Dolan

asks if a CUP will be still required for Tier one and two.

Commissioner Koenig

stated yes. If it is a residential kennel and you are breeding and selling you are in violation and your CUP will be revoked. Page 6 of 9

Mr. Shoemaker

stated Tier one and two are designed to get the kennel out of the residential kennel portion. Right now 6-10 are residential and once you go over 10 you have no choice but to ask for a Commercial Kennel. You fall into the tier two multi pet.

Mr. Sutton

stated we want to remove kennel from residential kennel.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated it creates confusion. When people hear kennel they think it is a business.

Mr. Sutton

stated once you get into the 10 and above there is no other option other than a commercial kennel and you are defining it as a tier two Multi-pet permit. Are you proposing any guidelines or conditions on the tier two that would differentiate it from a 6-10?

Mr. Shoemaker

stated they would put the same conditions as for the other permits, they would be inspected by animal control and maintain sanitary conditions.

Commissioner Koenig

stated a commercial kennel will still remain.

Commissioner Dolan

stated that is anything over 10 animals.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated cats and dogs, and would be a tier two.

Commissioner Dolan

stated that would be classified as a commercial kennel.

Commissioner Koenig

stated if we go through with this residential kennel goes away, we add tier one for 6-10 total cats and dogs. We add tier two for over 10, those have conditions that you have to be inspected etcetera. Commercial Kennel remains, that is for the people that are really going to be a kennel and sell animals.

Commissioner Goode

asks if when they say 10 dogs and cats, you mean a total of 20.

Commissioner Goode

stated so you can have 5 and 5.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated any combination with a total of 10.

Commissioner Hafen

stated the agenda is agendized for the text amendment and we are looking at a memorandum and he suggests continuing the item so staff can prepare a text amendment to the zoning ordinance for the board to review based on Mr. Shoemakers memo and the conversations we had today.

Mr. Sutton

stated the board doesn’t have the authority to amend the code at all.

Commissioner Koenig

stated we can make recommendations.

Mr. Sutton

stated you can direct staff to make amendments to any portion of the code but Title 6 is the purview of the AAC.

Commissioner King

stated Mr. Shoemaker is the AAC chairman.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated these are the recommendations to zoning and planning to amend their code.

Mr. Sutton

asked if this is to amend Title 6 or Title 17 or both. Page 7 of 9

Mr. Shoemaker

stated he would amend Title 6 if they were to adopt the multi-pet permit to reflect what they accept. Title 17 would be amended to reflect what is on Title 6.

Commissioner Carbone

asks if we need to amend Title 6 before they do Title 17, or can they be done at the same time?

Mr. Sutton

stated you can amend them both, but do you want to put the burden on planning staff to do both?

Mr. Shoemaker

stated the AAC will amend Title 6 and Planning will do Title 17.

Commissioner Dolan

would like to see a document that will show what is being added in blue and removed in red.

Mr. Shoemaker

stated the AAC gave the recommendations on how to separate them, how to apply them and if you want them to one or two acres, that is up to Planning. We gave the recommendation on how to alleviate the problem with having a pet permit being commercial on only above 10, and getting the word kennel out of the definitions.

Commissioner Hafen

motions to continue item #10 the proposed zoning ordinance text amendment to the next meeting so that staff may bring forth amending Title 17 to reflect the recommendations by the AAC and incorporating the comments made today by the board. As well as under the Animals Special Conditions mimicking the Title 6 list of animals so that Title 6 and 17 match up. Commissioner King seconds.

Mr. Sutton

advises Commissioner Koenig to speak in generalities when addressing issues and individuals that aren’t here to speak on their behalf.

Commissioner Koenig

would like staff to check on the CUP conditions for CU-13-0010 and determine whether or not the conditions of approval have been violated and if they have initiate the revocation hearing. He has also been advised that there could be another business in town that has been in violation of their CUP. Page 8 of 9