Commission approves kennel and barn variances amid code‑enforcement controversy
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
After testimony about unpermitted work and neighbor complaints, PLDRC split its votes on an after‑the‑fact kennel variance (4–3) and approved an associated barn variance unanimously, while staff noted related code‑enforcement matters lie outside the PLDRC’s purview.
The PLDRC approved two after‑the‑fact variances on Dec. 18 for accessory buildings on a 22,000‑sq. ft. parcel in De Leon Springs: a 383‑sq. ft. dog kennel and a 763‑sq. ft. barn. Commissioners separated the two votes after public comment and staff discussion.
Planner Joseph Jaskula said the barn traces to an expired 1995 permit and subsequent unpermitted additions, while the dog kennel was built in 2024 and prompted an active code‑enforcement case related to breeding and sales. Staff recommended denial for both variances because the applications did not meet multiple variance criteria; staff nevertheless listed conditions in case the commission found sufficient competent, substantial evidence to approve.
Applicant Marilyn Rose told the commission the structures were intended to be humane and aesthetic and that five personal dogs occupy five enclosures. Opponents submitted statements and an attorney argued the property has operated as a breeding and sales location without a hobby‑breeder license; witnesses alleged dogs had bitten people and had been sold from the property.
Chair and staff clarified the PLDRC’s jurisdiction is limited to the buildings and setbacks; alleged breeding or licensing issues are handled by code enforcement and the contractor licensing authority. Member Costa said the kennel variance pertains strictly to where the building sits and that enforcement of breeding operations should be pursued separately.
The commission voted on variance 1 (the dog kennel) first; the motion to approve variance 1 with four staff conditions passed on a 4–3 roll call. The commission then voted on variance 2 (the barn) and approved it unanimously with the staff‑recommended conditions.
What happens next: The variances allow the property owner to pursue permits consistent with the approved setbacks; any code‑enforcement matters regarding breeding or unpermitted contracting were referred to the county’s enforcement processes.