My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-26-2012 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
09-26-2012 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/8/2012 9:27:21 AM
Creation date
10/8/2012 9:26:56 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 <br />zoned property. The location proposed is approximately 90 feet from a <br />mobile home park; however, that property is zoned industrial, not <br />residential. The Planner reported that there appears to be adequate parking <br />at the facility given that the animal day care /kennel will occupy half of the <br />property. The Planner noted that the Planning Commission recommended <br />approval on a 6 to 1 vote, with some discussion relative to location issues. <br />Jeff Young appeared before the Council and indicated that the dog day <br />care /kennel would be his first business venture. He indicated that the <br />location is convenient to the freeway, and noted that it is near a quarry as <br />well as Dock 86. Young reported that while there are similar businesses in <br />the metro area, there are none in the north metro. <br />Keis asked the size of the fenced -in outdoor area. Young estimated it to <br />be 90 feet by 10 feet. McGraw asked the building length. Jeff DeBace, <br />building owner, replied that the building is 200 feet long. McGraw asked <br />about the size fenced -in space at the west end of the building. DeBace <br />estimated it to be 60 feet wide by 15 to 20 feet. <br />McGraw asked if there would be an attendant with the dogs when they <br />were outside. Young replied that some times there would be and others <br />not. McGraw asked about waste removal and odor control, noting the <br />comment in the agenda materials that waste would be composted on site. <br />Young reported that there are odor deterrents that can be used. McGraw <br />asked about odor control when the dog run areas get saturated with urine. <br />Young replied there are means of controlling these odors. Young also <br />pointed out that there will be employees cleaning and treating areas all the <br />time. <br />Keis pointed out Young's statement to the Planning Commission that there <br />will be no employees on site overnight. Montour stated that he was not <br />sure what the appropriate staffing levels should be. Young reported that <br />there would be 3 to 5 staff members on site during the day, but none <br />overnight. Young also pointed out that under the standards proposed, he <br />would be allowed a maximum of 45 dogs on site. Young indicated that he <br />would expect to have more dogs during the day than at night. <br />McGraw pointed out the Planning Commission's recommendation that if <br />there are noise issues at the facility, either noise abatement measures be <br />taken or the CUP will be reopened. McGraw felt it would be better to <br />have language spelled out on the front end so that the building owner and <br />tenant know the process should there be noise problems. <br />Keis asked about the business license. The Planner indicated that the <br />business license could be used as an enforcement tool if it is determined <br />there are noise violations. McGraw pointed out that license renewals only <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.