Laserfiche WebLink
Amy Nelson stated that there are stray dogs in the area that could be attracted from the <br /> �- scent. <br /> Mr. Marohn stated that 60 decibels is a state standard but couldn't say if it was <br /> continuous or not over a period of time. This standard has been applied to dog kennels in <br /> the past. Sixty decibels is essentially a conversational level at about a meter apart. <br /> Public comment closed. <br /> The Planning Commission discussed the number of dogs to be out at one time. If <br /> allowed,the business needs to survive economically. A boarding kennel for our <br /> community would be a good thing; there seems to be a need for one. Conditions could be <br /> developed to make this work except for the property values in the vicinity. <br /> When asked, Mr. Garland stated he would possibly consider a solid fence. <br /> Mr. Habein stated the main concern seems to be noise. On page 4 (b) -3, 2 F he fails to <br /> see how noise in this instance can be controlled. The wishes of the residents should be <br /> considered because they will be affected and noise cannot be totally controlled. If the <br /> applicant can guarantee it, maybe I would change my mind. <br /> Mr. Woog stated that the noise is the most difficult issue. Noise is limited by Ordinance; <br /> we need to apply the tools so the standards can be met. The only way is to limit the <br /> number of dogs outside at any one time. Mr. Garland stated it would be limited to 3, 4 or <br /> 5 with a staff person. He also stated that the number may not be known until the kennel <br /> is in operation. <br /> When asked, Mr. Garland stated that the building will be insulated as they will heat and <br /> air condition the building. <br /> Mr. Woog stated that there is a mechanism for the City to remedy the noise if the <br /> applicants don't meet the Ordinance. <br /> Mr. Marohn explained that impaired value is when the value is substantially diminished. <br /> The neighbor would need a before and after appraisal by an appraiser. <br /> The business is not established; the residents are established. Mr. Pederson stated the use <br /> not be injurious to the residents in the vicinity. <br /> A motion was made by Bill Habein, seconded by Scott Pederson, to not approve the <br /> Conditional Use Permit request for a Dog Boarding/Daycare Business, based on the <br /> following Findings of Fact: <br /> 1. Adequate measures have been taken or will be taken to prevent or control <br /> offensive odor, fumes, dust,noise, and vibration, so none of these will constitute a <br /> MINUTES 6 <br /> Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br /> June 17, 2010 <br />