Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
4. Adjourn the public hearing until October 18, 2011 in order to receive the Planning <br /> Board's recommendation and any submitted written comments. <br /> There was no public comment. <br /> Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 21 and the revision in Section 5 Kennel <br /> Class 1, which is a change to the text. She read the bullet point, "Kennel Class 1 can be considered <br /> a customary accessory use to a residential land use." She said that this change seems to be <br /> premature and going too far to say a kennel can be considered a customary accessory use to a <br /> residential land use. She said that currently Kennel Class 1 is listed as a commercial use. <br /> Michael Harvey said that staff added this in because the Class 1 Kennel is not considered a <br /> commercial operation. The animals are kept only for the purpose of showing competitions and sport. <br /> There is no boarding or breeding or commercial activity for a Class 1 Kennel. This is an attempt to <br /> make it more consistent with existing definitions and services. <br /> Commissioner Gordon said that 19 animals could make a lot of noise. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said that one of the biggest sore points in Orange County is the <br /> establishment of kennels in residential areas. He said that if it could be geared more toward density it <br /> would be better, but 20 dogs in a one-acre zoned area is too much. <br /> Commissioner Yuhasz said that the classification of whether it is a Class A or Class B Special <br /> Use Permit is not important, but the standards by which each case is judged are important. <br /> Judith Wegner said that there have been some contentious issues with kennels in recent <br /> memory that did not come through the Planning Board, so if the Board of County Commissioners <br /> know of any, she would like to be made aware of them. She asked Michael Harvey about his <br /> thoughts on these two cases and it was, "not in my backyard,"from the neighbors because of the <br /> presence of too many animals. <br /> Judith Wegner asked to have a summary to the Planning Board from Animal services about <br /> what is different about the aggregation of animals. <br /> Michael Harvey said that a Class 2 Kennel is related more to a commercial entity. <br /> Commissioner McKee said that he has his own concerns about the noise potential to <br /> neighbors. He said that these kennels should be based on density. He said that if limits are set, it <br /> will be arbitrary. <br /> Annette Moore said that she works with Animal Services directly and they are seeing some of <br /> these cases as rescue/foster homes; and they are seeing upwards of 50+ or more dogs. This is <br /> where there are problems. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said that there was an issue about ten years ago about a rooster that <br /> continued to crow and it was in a one-acre density, and people found it very intrusive but this is not <br /> regulated. He said that the County Commissioners need to remember that Orange County is <br /> becoming a more suburban community and there needs to be a more sophisticated analysis of this <br /> issue. <br /> Larry Wright asked Michael Harvey about the intent of this amendment. Michael Harvey said <br /> that the intent is to split the land use category into two separate uses, with no changes in standards. <br /> This will allow staff to do a comprehensive assessment of existing regulatory requirements for each <br /> use, which may lead to further discussion of the standards. <br /> Brian Crawford said that this issue would be referred to the Planning Board in September. <br />