Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Livestock Setback topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves variance to keep horse in accessory barn amid neighbor environmental objections
Summary
The Board of Adjustments approved a variance allowing an accessory barn to remain 30 feet from the property line to house a medical support horse; neighbors objected over manure, odor and potential canal contamination, and two board members voted no.
The Pembroke Pines Board of Adjustments on a 3‑2 vote approved ZVR 2025‑000053, allowing the continued existence of an accessory building used to house a horse at 541 Southwest 199th Avenue despite the structure being closer to the property line than local code would typically permit.
Staff told the board the accessory building had been inspected and the building permit finalized on July 11, 2024, and that structural review had been approved in 2023. The variance request sought a 30‑foot side setback instead of the 50‑foot side setback specified in the code for structures housing horses or larger livestock uses.
Orlando Dagger, the property agent, said the barn was constructed about 12 years ago and that the owner had worked to legalize the accessory building. "The barn was constructed approximately 12 years ago…we rehomed his horse that he had for several years…we went ahead and applied for the variance," he said.
Owner Clauddio (spelled in the record variously) and his supporters told the board the horse serves as a medical support animal for a disabled veteran and that removal would create hardship. Support letters, including documentation referenced from the Department of Veterans Affairs, were submitted to the board.
Several neighbors spoke in support, but affected party Tim Wilder strongly opposed the variance, saying manure had been dumped and left in piles near the canal and alleging environmental harm. "The odor was ridiculous…nowhere of proper disposal…you’re talking upwards of nine tons of manure…where did all this tonnage of manure go?" Wilder said, urging the board to consider water‑quality impacts.
The board noted manure disposal and canal contamination concerns fall under other jurisdictions and agencies (for example, water‑management and environmental authorities) rather than the zoning board’s narrow authority over setbacks. Mr. Zamora and other staff urged neighbors and the property owner to coordinate with the appropriate agencies and with city permitting and code compliance to address environmental conditions.
Chairman Crawl called the roll for ZVR 2025‑000053; the board recorded three yes votes and two no votes and the motion passed. The board did not impose additional conditions in the variance itself but directed the parties to pursue outstanding issues with relevant departments.
What happens next: the owner may need to continue to work with building and permitting staff to ensure the accessory structure complies with construction and safety requirements and other agencies may follow up on environmental/manure‑disposal complaints raised by neighbors.
