Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Business Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sunbury tables Little Critters Pet Sitters home‑occupation request to gather neighbor feedback
Summary
The commission postponed a decision on a home‑occupation permit for Little Critters Pet Sitters at 125 Harrison Street to the March meeting and asked staff to contact nearby homeowners for written testimony or attendance; staff flagged potential noncompliance with the 20% floor‑area rule.
The Sunbury Planning & Zoning Commission on Feb. 23 tabled a request from Little Critters Pet Sitters LLC for an in‑home pet‑sitting certificate of use and directed staff to solicit input from several adjacent homeowners.
Applicant Shannon Fasching described professional credentials as a registered veterinary technician and said her business is intentionally small and residential in character. "Sunbury isn't just where I operate my business. It's home also," Fasching told the commission, noting she has lived in town, provided letters of support, and proposed mitigation for noise and cleanliness.
Staff raised two areas of concern: the home‑occupation rule that limits use to 20% of dwelling floor area, and the prohibition on activities that create a nuisance. Commissioners asked whether the applicant's pet‑sitting dogs would occupy more than the permitted floor area; the applicant clarified she limits pet‑sitting animals to two rooms (kitchen and dining area), while her personal dogs occupy more of the house.
Because the code contains criteria lacking much local precedent for such businesses, several commissioners asked staff to reach out to six nearby homeowners (including the address linked to the complaint) and invited written testimony or in‑person attendance at the March meeting. The chair moved to table the application and the commission agreed; no final vote on the permit was taken.
Staff advised that a certificate of use and any required inspections or third‑party approvals (fire/county) would be processed after local approvals and that some concerns (for example, a permanent authorization to exceed a code limit) may require a variance to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
The applicant was thanked for extensive supporting materials and told to return in March with any additional neighbor letters or information requested by commissioners.
