Agenda - 01-21-2016 - 5-a - Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment – Recreational Land Uses - Closure of Public Hearing and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted)

Browse Search

8 attempt to address complaints from property owners related to the discharge of firearms on neighboring properties while protecting an individual's right to engage in shooting activity and/or discharge a firearm on their property. • BOCC and Planning Board members suggested shooting ranges/facilities ought to have similar setback requirements. • A BOCC member asked staff to invite those individuals who had previously submitted complaints and concerns over the discharge of firearms to the October 7, 2015 Planning Board meeting to express their concerns. STAFF COMMENT: Staff sent notices inviting individuals who had submitted complaints to attend the October regular Planning Board meeting on September 28, 2015. One resident attended the meeting. • A BOCC member suggested revising Section 5.7.2 Recreational Facilities of the proposed text amendment to combine recreational uses played on a court into a single category. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will combine the uses as suggested. • A BOCC member asked why the proposed text amendments did not address the number of people discharging a firearm at a given moment or limit the number of times a firearm could be discharged in a given time frame. STAFF COMMENT: Staff indicated such regulations would be difficult to enforce and hard to verify as part of a land use enforcement investigation. • A Planning Board member expressed concern the amendment would overly restrict the use of private recreational accessory uses. Specifically there was concern over staff's statement a private recreational use could not be used by neighbors/friends in the owner's absence. STAFF COMMENT: The amendment is an attempt to develop a threshold making it easier to identify instances where a recreational land use is either a private or a public amenity. As indicated during the public hearing, staff is investigating complaints over the purported establishment of public recreational facilities without required permits (i.e. Class B Special Use Permit). As the ordinance is currently written it is difficult to make a determination either way. Our goal is not to overly regulate private recreational accessory uses but to ensure we have an appropriate methodology to identify those instances where such uses become, or are truly, a public recreational amenity requiring a heightened permit review and approval process. • There was a general discussion amongst Board members and staff outlining how they responses to complaints associated with the discharge of a firearm, including noise issues and concerns over the rapid discharge of weapons. Staff suggested the Sheriff's Office provide a response. STAFF COMMENT: Please refer to Attachment 3. 5