Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

SE-03-03-017 — June Lynn Ruge

Request: Special Exception in A-1 (agricultural) zone to operate an in-home canine training facility to include veterinary, boarding, and grooming services and Variance to allow unpaved parking in lieu of paved. (NOTE: No outdoor kennels are proposed and the site will be owner occupied).

Decision: Denied

Hearing: The Staff Report and Recommendation is located on Pages____. The applicant was cited by the Code Enforcement Division for operating a boarding facility without zoning approval. Since then the case has been cleared because the applicant has ceased the operation and is pursuing the use via the special exception process. The applicant wants to convert the residence into an in-home canine training, grooming, and boarding facility with some veterinary services. She indicated a maximum of 20 dogs was proposed. Staff presented its analysis. Staff concluded the request was not compatible with the surrounding uses in the area and would establish a precedent of additional non-residential uses in the area. Staff indicated the proposed use is typically permitted in the commercial zoning districts. The applicant stated she is partnering with the buyer of the home to operate the facility. At some point in the future the buyer of the residence will be the sole operator and will reside in the house. The applicant indicated he had support from the surrounding neighbors. Staff informed the BZA that 23 commentaries were submitted in opposition and 1 in favor. Some of the opposed parties originally supported the request but changed their position to opposed. The adjacent neighbor to the east spoke in opposition. He had concerns about odor and the possible noise impacts. The BZA had concerns relative to introducing a business in a country-like residential area. In addition, they felt approval of such a request would open the door for additional quasi-commercial businesses in this area. They were concerned about the potential of noise impacts by the barking of dogs. The BZA concluded the proposed use was not appropriate for this specific area. Staff received 1 commentary in favor and 23 commentaries in opposition to the special exception request.