After extended public comment, Coventry planning panel forwards neutral recommendation on kennel ordinance and asks council for more study

The Coventry Planning Commission on May 27 heard more than an hour of public comment on a proposed zoning amendment (Ordinance 2026‑17) that would permit kennel operations in many zones and add rules on lot sizes, separation distances, enclosure standards and hours.

Residents from multiple neighborhoods urged the commission to tighten or restrict the proposal, arguing that noise, odor, waste disposal, impacts to private wells, traffic and the character of rural neighborhoods were not adequately addressed. Cheryl Kaine, an abutter, asked for stronger buffering, tighter setbacks and clear enforcement mechanisms, saying the draft could permit commercial activity that would degrade nearby residential properties. Zoom commenter Karen Molo described repeated delays in responses from animal control during past nuisance complaints and said she was not confident current enforcement capacity would protect neighbors.

Animal Control Officer Lome said a clear ordinance and licensing path are necessary because staff must have statutory authority to inspect and, when warranted, take action; she said Coventry has relatively few licensed kennels and emphasized the need for an evacuation and contingency plan for large facilities.

Commission discussion focused on whether the draft strikes an acceptable balance between creating a licensing path for kennel and boarding businesses and protecting residential areas. Several commissioners said they supported the concept of regulated kennels but felt the current draft lacked sufficient detail about where kennels should be allowed and whether the code should create gradations (small boarding/daycare vs. larger breeding/commercial kennels). One commissioner said the commission could not make the required zoning findings for approval as written.

After deliberation, a motion carried to forward a neutral recommendation to the town council. The commission stated it did not make the two required findings of consistency with the comprehensive plan and the purposes of zoning as written; it asked the council to consider additional study on appropriate zoning districts, gradations by scale (number of dogs and lot size), building/enclosure standards that reduce noise, and stronger enforcement and licensing clarity.

Planning staff will include the planning director's memorandum and the full public‑comment record with the transmittal to the council.