Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise And Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission continues Grateful Dog kennel authorization to April 23, directs compliance checks
Summary
After staff reported missed conditions and neighbors raised noise and enforcement concerns, the Planning Commission continued the Grateful Dog conditional‑use authorization to April 23 and directed the sponsor to hold a staff‑attended neighborhood meeting, arrange an interior sound study, and permit unannounced inspection(s).
David Weisglass, planning department staff, summarized a one‑year review of the Grateful Dog kennel at 1769 Lombard Street and told commissioners the establishment has adhered to many conditions but has not met others required by the prior motion. Weisglass listed specific shortfalls: required interagency consultation and a neighborhood meeting were incomplete, unannounced inspections of the rear yard occurred but staff were not allowed full access, and the artificial turf in the rear yard has not yet been replaced with concrete. He also reported the sponsor logged complaints, installed enzymatic odor treatment and volunteered a rear‑yard limit of eight dogs when in use.
Project counsel Tuya Catalano and sponsor Ernie Cervantes said the business has operated at the location since 2009, described steps they have taken to minimize nuisances and disputed some neighbor claims that barking originates from their facility. “We have been operating here since 02/2009,” Cervantes said, and stressed the business’s community role and financial strain from ongoing disputes.
Neighbors and some commissioners urged stricter compliance and verification. Commissioners questioned why unannounced inspections had been refused and why a staff‑attended neighborhood meeting had not occurred as required. Several commissioners said adherence to the original conditions was necessary before allowing use of the rear yard. Commissioner Johnson moved to continue the item to April 23 and to require the sponsor to satisfy the original conditions, including a staff‑attended neighborhood meeting, a sound engineer study focused on the premises interior, and unannounced inspections; the commission voted unanimously 6‑0 to continue with those directions.
What’s next: the item was continued to April 23 with explicit direction that staff verify compliance with the original conditions before the commission takes further action.
