2010-11-03_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, November 03, 2010 Page 3 any separation anxiety before accepted for daycare or hotel stays; with 101 clarification that hotel suites located in a separate area the farthest away from 102 adjacent residential properties to avoid any potential noise issues. 103 Public Comment 104 Margaret (Molly) Redman, 1455 Rose Place 105 Ms. Redmond and her husband, Steve Ring, had provided an e-mail to 106 Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon dated September 29, 2010 107 (Attachment E in the RCA), and verbally expressed her main concern with 108 barking and waste disposal, based on her personal experience in dog ownership. 109 Ms. Redman expressed concern with the due diligence done by staff in making a 110 recommendation for approval of this business so close to adjacent residential 111 properties; and while expressing appreciation for the improved communication 112 between Mr. Trudgeon and residents in their neighborhood, given the 113 neighborhood’s past experience with City staff and their perception of a lack of 114 interest or lack of timely responses to nuisance concerns related to adjacent 115 business operations along County Road C, particularly related to screening, she 116 remained hesitant that interests of those residential property owners would be 117 given immediate attention if problems arose with this proposed use. Ms. 118 Redman provided a history of code enforcement issues since 1982 and the lack 119 of response from the City and its Code Enforcement staff during that period. 120 At the request of Chair Doherty, Mr. Lloyd reviewed the code enforcement or 121 nuisance process of the City, with the Police Department as the initial recipient of 122 dog barking nuisance complaints consisting of an on-site visit to the property as 123 soon as an officer is available to determine if there is evidence of a dog barking; 124 followed by a citation to the pet owner in typical circumstances. Mr. Lloyd 125 advised that, there was a parallel process by which a property owner can contact 126 Code Enforcement Officers through the City’s Community Development 127 Department, and they will contact the business owner to initiate additional 128 soundproofing for indoor noise, or other restrictions if outdoor noise is indicated. 129 Molly O’Brien, 1433 Rose Place 130 Ms. O’ Brien concurred with the previous speaker, noting similar issues and the 131 ongoing history of ineffective code enforcement; and the residential property 132 owners desire to be heard upfront with this proposed use prior to being subjected 133 to reactionary issues in the front. Ms. O’Brien noted that the major concern was 134 with the proximity of the subject property to their residential property line; and 135 past impressions that the nonconforming code issues would be alleviated when 136 the property was vacant. Ms. O’Brien advised that this promise has been 137 ongoing for 15-20 years with no satisfaction. Ms. O’Brien expressed the major 138 concerns related to odor, even though the applicants had gone door-to-door in 139 the residential neighborhood to provide an explanation of their operations; 140 however, as a long-term dog owner, she was not convinced that they would be 141 able to manage odor from multiple dogs. Ms. O’Brien questioned the proposed 142 material (Astroturf or pebbles) for the outdoor play area, opining that it would be 143 better to have flat surface for cleaning and disinfecting the play area. Ms. 144 O’Brien noted that another major concern was with noise, opining that dogs 145 couldn’t get together without the result being a lot of noise; and remained 146 unconvinced that, no matter where the overnight suites were located, it would not 147 address noise during the night, particularly with no on-site staff during that time. 148 Ms. O’Brien further opined that no amount of training would address the multiple 149 issues with so many dogs housed together. 150 Matt McLeod, 1433 Rose Place 151 Mr. McLeod expressed disappointment that staff had already made a 152 recommendation to the City Council prior to hearing public comment from 153 concerned citizens, or receiving input from the City’s Police Department. 154