Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates kennel definition after constituent asks about six dogs on residential lot
Summary
A constituent question prompted discussion about whether the city's rule that three or more dogs older than four months constitutes a kennel is appropriate for non-rural parcels; staff will include density-based options and definition changes in a future review.
Commissioner Kyle Jones raised a constituent inquiry about whether a resident could keep more than three dogs on an R-1-18 parcel. Jones cited existing code sections 1.04 and 1.08 stating that "any premises keeping three or more dogs older than four months constitutes a kennel," noting the constituent had six dogs and was considering relocating to a one-acre parcel in Enoch but was unsure of compliance.
City Manager Ryan Robinson acknowledged the complexity and suggested the Commission consider a density-based standard (for example, a number of dogs per minimum square footage) rather than an absolute cap. Commissioners also asked whether the presence of a basement apartment or multiple residents on a lot should affect how animals are counted. Robinson agreed to add the issue to the comprehensive definitions review for staff to propose options.
