Laserfiche WebLink
t S <br />Zoning File #976 <br />October 15, 1985 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />Issues for discussion and resolution; <br />1. Does the fact that the goat is classified as a "house <br />pet" by a veterinarian or pet shop owner have any bearing on <br />this review? Your ordinances specifically discuss the <br />keeping of such animals or at least similar animals (sheep <br />vs goats). Review definition of animals and Section 10.20, <br />Subdivision 3(K). <br />2. Does the fact that the goat is maintained as a house pet <br />have any bearing on your decission making? <br />3. Does the fact that Korth is a renter not an owner have <br />any bearing on your decision making? <br />The complaint call did not reference a specific violation <br />only to claim that they did not want a goat in their <br />neighborhood. <br />If you wish to deny the conditional use permit/variance <br />consider the following findings; <br />1. Applicant is a renter and does not qualify for keeping <br />of domestic animals. <br />2. Too servere an area variance is sought at 1 2/3 acres. <br />3. The subject property is located within the defined urban <br />area of the City - beautiful downtown Navarre. Development <br />of the property at current density was applied for under a <br />special density credit (3 units per 1 acre). <br />Planning Commission should recommend date for removal of pet <br />from residence. <br />If you approve consider the following findings; <br />1. The pet is maintained as a house pet - housed within <br />existing residence. <br />2. Area requests not applicable in light of maintenance of <br />pet and food is not dependent on 1 acre of grazing area. <br />3. Surrounding neighbors have all approved the keeping of <br />the goat. <br />Planning Commission may wish to add special conditionSfor <br />keeping of the animal outside of existing schedule of care. <br />Photos of the pigmy goat have been provided by the applicant <br />and will be available for review at your meeting.