Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Animals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies suburban‑agriculture rezoning after neighbors raise odor and noise concerns
Summary
The Planning Commission denied a rezoning request by Guillermina (Guilermina) Parr to change 689 Dantzler Circle from R2 to Suburban Agriculture (SA). Neighbors cited existing dogs, potential odors from chickens and runoff concerns; staff explained SA rules and allowed animal counts tied to acreage.
The Whitfield County Planning Commission denied a request to rezone a 3.17‑acre parcel at 689 Dantzler Circle from R2 (low‑density single‑family) to Suburban Agriculture (SA).
Ethan Calhoun presented the request and explained that SA (suburban agriculture) would allow small farm animals that R2 does not permit, and that the parcel meets SA minimum acreage. Calhoun also described differences between suburban agriculture and general agriculture (GA), noting SA has additional restrictions compared with GA.
Petitioner Guillermina Parr said she sought the rezoning to keep chickens, rabbits and to allow family activities with small animals for her 12‑year‑old son. Two neighbors spoke in opposition. Rosa Rodriguez, who lives directly in front of the property, requested limits on animals because of concerns about odors and gatherings. Mark Joyce, who lives on adjacent larger acreage, said he already experiences odor and barking from about a dozen large dogs on the neighboring properties and opposed adding chickens or additional animals near his house.
During rebuttal Parr said dogs on the property are Australian shepherds, that some are being bred, and that the animals would be kept behind the house. Staff confirmed that under the SA/GA rules the parcel size would allow up to 10 chickens and other large animals (examples given on the record were up to six horses) and noted there is no county numeric limit on dogs in that zone district.
After discussion, commissioners cited proximity to R2 neighborhoods, existing concerns about dogs and odors, and uncertainty over whether the parcel’s back yard could accommodate the number of animals raised on the record. The commission moved to deny the rezoning and the motion passed by voice vote. The denial means the property remains zoned R2; the petitioner retains the ability to pursue other lawful options within R2 or seek another application.
