Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

SE-04-05-125 — The Paw Spa, Inc.

Request: Special Exception in A-2 (agricultural) zone to operate a dog grooming, training, day care and boarding facility and Variance to allow unpaved parking (shredded tire surface) in lieu of paved. (NOTE: Applicant proposes to convert existing residence into a dog grooming salon and dog day care for up to 15 dogs per day. During holiday season up to 25 dogs per day may be boarded. No outdoor runs are proposed).

Decision: Denied

Hearing: The Staff Booklet and Recommendation is located on Pages_____. The applicant is presently operating a dog day care, grooming and boarding facility in a strip center on Aloma Avenue. She wants to relocate on a 3.92 acre parcel on Rouse Road just north of Lakonatosa Trail. The facility will board up to 10 dogs on weekends and up to 25 dogs during the holiday season. The applicant gave a presentation. She informed the BZA this would serve the area residents. Her engineer spoke about the land use compatibility issues. He felt the area is not residential but agricultural. Therefore, the proposed use was similar to agricultural uses. Staff informed the BZA the development trend of the area was single family housing. The proposed use is not similar in noise characteristics as the single family uses in the area. Although some of the properties in the area were zoned agricultural, the county's Future Land Use Map designates the area for single family housing. Four (4) persons spoke in favor, three of which were employees of the applicant. An adjacent neighbor indicated he would welcome the use. An attorney representing an adjacent homeowner spoke in opposition. She submitted a petition containing 106 signatures of area residents who were in opposition to this request. She submitted photos of existing animal clinic facilities and those were located in commercial zoning districts. She informed the BZA that agricultural zoning does not permit commercial facilities. This proposed use was a commercial facility that advertises on the internet. Two other persons spoke in opposition including an adjacent neighbor to the north. She made it clear that she was opposed to this use. The BZA concluded the area was changing towards single family use and the proposed use was not compatible with the existing and future uses in the area.