ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW
________________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT (S): KHAELAN LAMBERT
DATE: December 11, 2007
FILE NO: 2007-26
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AT L0T: 28
ASSESSOR’S MAP: 61
WHEREAS, a meeting of the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review was held on November 13, 2007, wherein the instant matter was considered .
WHEREAS, KHAELAN LAMBERT: Applicant(s), and Leon & Elizabeth Laliberte, Owner(s) of property on 60 Iron Mine Road, Pole # P15-5, in the Village of Nasonville, Town of Burrillville, Assessor’s Map: 61 Lot: 28 in the F-5 Zoning District has/have filed an application for a special use permit to have a dog kennel. Zoning Ordinance 30-71 Zoning district uses – Section 1 #2.
WHEREAS, all members of the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review viewed the property on or before the public hearing
WHEREAS, the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review held a public hearing on this application at its November 13, 2007 meeting after due and public notice as provided under the Burrillville Zoning Ordinance and Rhode Island General Laws;
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those whom desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded;
WHEREAS, the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review finds as a fact that:
1. Khaelan Lambert, applicant, testified that she wanted to amend her application for a special use permit from 12 dogs to 8 dogs, as 4 Staffordshire Bull Terrier mix puppies she expected to keep on her property have been adopted. She testified that all the dogs she proposes to have are dogs her relatives own and the 3 dogs Ms. Lambert owns. She testified that she was not starting a boarding kennel and was not planning on breeding any dogs as all these dogs are spayed or neutered. She listed the dogs as follows:
i. 2 Staffordshire Bull Terrier mixes (pit bull type dog)
ii. 2 Miniature Pinschers
iii. American Bulldog mix (pit bull type dog)
iv. Boxer
v. Australian Cattle dog
vi. Great Dane Pointer mix
2. Ms. Lambert stated that if her grandparents, Leon and Elizabeth Laliberte become ill or pass away she would like to care for their dogs. When questioned by Raymond Cloutier, Zoning Board Chairman, Ms. Lambert stated that she does not need to build any additional structures to house these dogs. They are all very social dogs, and get along with each other.
3. The public portion of this case opened and Debra Boltrushek came forward to testify in favor of the granting of this application. She stated that Ms. Lambert is a veterinarian technician, and a dog trainer and a friend of hers. She noted that her children play with Ms. Lambert’s animals, and that she is a very responsible pet owner.
4. Marc Kell came forward to testify in favor of the granting of this application noting how socialized her dogs are. He stated that the dogs all get along and are very friendly with adults and children. He added that Ms. Lambert is a very responsible person and this is an appropriate use of her property.
5. Paul Litotte came forward to testify against the granting of this application stating that he has been disturbed by dogs barking on quite a few summer nights.
6. Rick Paul came forward to testify against the granting of this application and entered Exhibit A – a petition containing 37 signatures. He stated concerns with noise, traffic, safety of the children, and decreased property values.
7. Marc Cardin came forward to testify against the granting of this application due to noise and quality of life issues.
8. Roger Paul came forward to testify against the granting of this application and stated that he would hear dogs barking from his house.
9. Lisa Roy came forward to testify against the granting of this application and stated concerns with unpredictable pack behavior and barking.
10. Chris Simpson came forward to testify against the granting of this application and stated that noise and safety were his concerns.
11. Ron Woods, Animal Control Officer, testified against the granting of this special use permit. He noted that though the applicant is well educated about animal care, he had a concern with the number of pit bulls residing there. He listed noise, pack behavior, and neighbors’ resistance as issues for concern. He stated that it would be acceptable to him if Ms. Lambert were limited to 6 dogs on her property, the 3 dogs she can have by right, and 3 of her relatives’ dogs.
12. When questioned by Michele Carboni, Ron Woods stated that he has had no complaints on Ms. Lambert.
13. Carol Paul came forward to testify against the granting of this application stating concerns with safety and noise. She stated that this was not the right location for so many dogs.
14. Deena Lovell came forward to testify against the granting of this application and stated that she likes to walk her 2 dogs in the neighborhood and now fears for her nephew’s safety.
15. Roger Paul came forward to testify against the granting of this application stating that he was sick of dogs barking.
16. Marc Kell came forward to add that there is no traffic issue with this application, and that the Zoning Board should give consideration to the land owners’ rights.
17. When questioned by Raymond Cloutier, the applicant answered that she would be willing to limit the number of dogs to just three family members dogs as well as her own 3 dogs. She stated she hoped to keep her mother’s Miniature Pinscher, her grandparents’ Australian Cattle dog and Boxer, and not the take her grandparents’ Staffordshire Bull Terrier mix and her cousin’s Great Dane.
18. Raymond Cloutier questioned Ms. Lambert on the barking issue, and Ms. Lambert stated that her dogs stay in the house with her at night, and that she takes most of them to work with her, leaving the Miniature Pinscher in her house when she is away.
19. Ms. Lambert testified that the entire 45 acres has a border fence, the back yard has a 6’ fence and there is a fenced-in kennel area. She also noted that she has a gated driveway.
20. George Keeling noted that the applicant has over 45 acres of land in a Farming Zone.
21. Pauline Paul came forward to testify against the granting of this application stating the applicant should not be allowed to have any more than the allowed 3 dogs.
22. Rhyley White came forward to testify against the granting of this application. She stated that she plays in the neighborhood and testified that she is fearful of her safety, though there has been no problems yet and she does play on the Lambert’s property.
23. Ms. Lambert testified that Rhyley White has played with her dogs, and Carol Paul’s child has been on her property.
24. Upon questioning by Michele Carboni, Ms. Lambert stated that she has special liability insurance, and testified that her dogs never roam free in the neighborhood.
25. Norman Roy came before the Zoning Board to question why the applicant needed a kennel license.
26. There was no other public comment from the audience.
27. Zoning Board Members discussed the case. Sandra Cooney stated that the Staffordshire Bull Terriers are quite social animals, all the dogs are spayed or neutered, there is no traffic issue, and there will be no breeding of dogs. George Keeling stated Ron Woods has had no complaints on Ms. Lambert, that she takes her dogs in at night, that between the 3 fences and her not leaving her dogs outside unattended the safety issue has been addressed. Ed Hochwarter, Jr. noted that this is country living, the applicant has plenty of land, and has a penned in area for her dogs. John Patriarca stated that even if this special use permit is denied, the
applicant can have 3 pit bull dogs on the property by right.
28. Ms. Lambert came before the Board and stated that along with her 3 dogs (Staffordshire Bull Terrier mix, Miniature Pinscher, and American Bulldog mix, she would be willing to take just her mother’s Miniature Pinscher, her grandparents’ Boxer and Australian Cattle dog, and not keep her grandparents’ Staffordshire Bull Terrier mix nor her cousin’s Great Dane.
WHEREAS, THE BURRILLVILLE ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW has determined, based on the testimony presented at the hearing, the observations of the Board Members in viewing the property, and the findings of fact as set forth above:
1. That the public convenience and welfare will be substantially served.
2. That the granting of this special use permit will be in harmony with the general purpose of this chapter and with the comprehensive plan as the property in question is in the F-5 Farming/Residential Zoning District, where farming/agricultural uses are allowed, and kennels are allowed by special use permit.
3. The granting of this special use permit will not result in or create conditions that will be inimical to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community as it has been demonstrated by the applicant that efforts have been made to secure public safety with the border fence, with a gated driveway, rear yard fence and kennel area fence; as the applicant’s dogs are not left in the yard unattended; and as there will be no boarding or breeding of dogs on her property.
4. The granting of this special use permit will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of the property in the surrounding area or district as the Applicant lives in a farming district.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review that the application as filed by the Applicant is GRANTED by a vote of 4 - 1 with 2 conditions.
Ed Hochwarter, Jr. made a motion to grant a special use permit to have a total of 6 dogs, with the following 2 conditions - that Ms. Lambert obtain a Kennel License from the Town Council and the additional 3 dogs be limited to these specific dogs:
1. Grandparent’s Australian Cattle dog
2. Grandparents’ Boxer
3. Mother’s Miniature Pinscher
George Keeling 2nd the motion.
George Keeling, Michele Carboni, Ed Hochwarter, Jr., and Raymond Cloutier voted to pass the motion with the 2 conditions.
John Patriarca voted to deny the motion.
George Keeling voted to pass the motion based on the testimony given, due to the size of this parcel in question, and that the property is in the Farming Zoning District, and as the complaints of dogs barking could be anyone’s dogs. Michele Carboni voted to pass the motion based on the 2 conditions imposed. Ed Hochwarter, Jr. voted to pass the motion as the applicant has demonstrated her dogs do not run loose, and as only the 3 specifically noted dogs would be allowed on the property besides her own 3 dogs. Raymond Cloutier voted to pass the motion based on the applicant having demonstrated her ability to handle these animals, as the dogs are in her house at night, and as they are not left outside unattended.
John Patriarca voted to deny the motion based on the neighbors’ concern of noise due to the number of dogs.
The Zoning Board shall set down a record of findings of fact and shall make its decision in writing. No decision shall be final until it is filed in the Zoning Enforcement Office. All decisions shall be recorded in the land evidence records of the Town.
A variance or special use permit shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of approval by the Board, unless the applicant who has been granted relief obtains a building permit and is actively engaged in the project’s construction, or in case of “use variance” has actually put the subject property to said use.
BY ORDER OF THE BURRILLVILLE ZONING
BOARD OF REVIEW
_____________________________________________
Raymond Cloutier, Chairman
THIS DECISION WILL BE PUBLICLY POSTED IN
A VISIBLE LOCATION IN THE TOWN HALL FOR
A PERIOD OF TWENTY DAYS COMMENCING:
_______________________________________________
APPLICATION GRANTED
Vote 4-1 with 2 conditions
| 
