Nixa first reads zoning change to combine pet grooming and kennel classifications

NIXA, Mo. — The Nixa City Council on July 8 held the first reading of Council Bill 2025‑22, an ordinance to amend Chapter 117, Article 4, Section 117‑90(2) of the Nixa City Code to clarify how the city treats pet grooming and kennel uses in its zoning table.

Planning and development director Scott Gabbi told the council staff discovered a discrepancy between the code’s definitions and the table of approved uses: "We decided, in our way to fix this is to combine them," Gabbi said, adding that the proposal would treat grooming without outdoor runs as an approved use in Neighborhood Commercial while requiring a special‑use permit for operations with outdoor runs.

The proposed amendment would also remove pet grooming/kenneling from the M‑1 (light industrial) district to preserve industrial‑zoned land for manufacturing and similar uses. Gabbi said the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the matter and voted unanimously to recommend approval to council.

Why it matters: Council members expressed concern that without limits, certain kennel or "dog hotel" operations could create noise, traffic and nuisance issues if located adjacent to residences. Several members asked staff to identify options — such as limits on the number of animals, setback requirements, or other conditions the city could attach through the special‑use permit process — to address those concerns.

Council and staff also discussed home‑based business rules. Staff said whether the city can regulate a grooming operation conducted entirely inside a residence depends on whether activities occur outside the dwelling and on parking/traffic impacts; they committed to research how recent updates to the home‑based business code interact with the proposed zoning amendment.

Councilmember Kelly Morris and others noted the city’s animal ordinance includes limits that might apply to certain home operations, but staff cautioned some animal regulations reference specific residential zones and may not cover neighborhood commercial uses, so the special‑use permit remains an important enforcement tool.

The mayor opened and then closed the public hearing on the bill; no public testimony on the item was recorded. Because the item was read for first reading and discussed, no final vote on the ordinance was taken. Staff said they will return with suggested conditions and any clarifications about limits for home‑based businesses and outdoor runs before the council takes further action.

The record: Planning and development director Scott Gabbi presented the bill; council identified potential noise, traffic and animal‑count issues for staff to address. The proposal as presented would: • Combine the code entries for pet grooming and kennels to match the definitions section. • Allow pet grooming without outdoor runs as an approved use in Neighborhood Commercial. • Require special‑use permits where outdoor runs are proposed. • Remove pet grooming/kenneling from the M‑1 zoning district.

Next steps: Staff will research how the home‑based business changes interact with the proposed amendment and return with draft special‑use permit conditions (setbacks, animal limits, hours or similar restrictions) for council consideration. No vote was taken at the first reading.