Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 01-26-09 CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DEPARTMENT REPORT January 26, 2009 5h. Esrael Kennel The applicant seeks the following use variance approval: Docket No. 08080009 UV Appendix A: Use Table More than three animals on residential property The site is located at 806 Alwyne Road and is zoned R2/medium-density residential. Filed by Trevor & Ann Esrael, owners. General Info: The petitioner is requesting permission to maintain an existing large number of animals, primarily dogs and rabbits. Surrounding uses are residential. Analysis: City ordinances define a commercial kennel as having more than three animals. Commercial kennels are not permitted on residential property, and are typically considered to be more appropriate in commercial districts. However, if the animals are properly managed, their living areas kept clean, and there are minimal impacts with regards to noise and odor on adjacent properties, maintaining more animals than pemlitted may be acceptable. In this instance, the request is threefold. The first is to allow the continued operation of a foster care program for dogs, with each dog staying at the residence for up to a month. The second request is to keep five dogs owned by the family, which are pennanently in residence. The final request is to allow rabbit-keeping in the attached garage. Department concerns regarding commercial kennels in residential areas are multi fold. The Departm'ent must consider the quality of life for adjacent residents, as well as the animals themselves. Residential areas are typically not equipped to handle large numbers of animals, unless there is a large lot with appropriate areas for those animals. In this case, the site is part of a subdivision, on a lot measuring approximately three-quarters of an acre, While a few animals more than the maximum three pennitted could be appropriate at this site, the current number of animals is very likely to have a negative impact on the overall quality of life of adjacent residents, and possibly the animals themselves. According to Code Enforcement, the rabbits are housed in the garage, in multiple cages. Approximately 50 rabbits arc estimated to be housed there, and are kept for educational purposes as well as sold, according to the petitioner. The dogs spend time indoors and in the back yard. At the time of Code Enforcement's most recent visit, there were nine dogs on the property. The Department cannot support this many animals on a subdivision lot of less than one acre. In particular, raising rabbits and fostcring rescue dogs are activities which would be better carried out on a larger lot, with more buffering from adjacent properties, in order to both protect neighboring properties and give the animals more room. The Department recognizes that finding new homes for animals is not something that is accomplished quickly, however, keeping the overall general health, safety, and welfare of the community in mind, we would recommend a limited time period to find homes for the rabbits, and other homes for the rescue dogs. The Department also recommends reducing the number of permanent dogs through attrition, and limiting the number of pennanent dogs on the property in future to no more than three. A year should be sut1icient to bring the total number of animals closer to compliance, recognizing that it may be some years before full compliance is attained. The Department recommends working closely with Code Enforcement as the animals are re-housed elsewhere. Findings of Fact - Use variance 1. The grant of this variance will be contrary to the public interest, due to the existence of special condition(s) such that enforcement of the zoning ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship because: tbe number of animals living on the property far exceeds wbat is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance and City Code, and the site measures less than one acre, in a subdivision. 2. The grant ofthis variance will be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: the number of animals living on the propeIty far exceeds what is pennitted by the Zoning Ordinance and City Code, and the site measures less than one acre, in a subdivision. 3. The use or value of the area adjacent to the subject property will be substantially affected in an adverse manner because: the number of animals living on the property far exceeds what is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance and City Code, and the site measures less than one acre, in a subdivision. 4. The need for the variance does not arise from a natural condition peculiar to the subject property because: The site measures less than one acre, and is located on a cul-de-sac. There is insufficient buffering from neighboring properties, and inadequate room for the number of animals. 5. The granting of this variance does substantially interfere with the CarmcUClay I. Comprehensive Plan because: any more than three animals is considered a commercial kennel operation, and requires licensing by the City. The site is within a residential subdivision, in an area indicated to remain residential by the Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation: The Dept. of Community Services recommends negative consideration of Docket No. 08080009 UV after all concerns have been addressed, with the condition that the petitioner be allowed a period of no more than one year.