MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTY - The county’s subdivision and development appeal board (SDAB) has heard an appeal of an earlier municipal planning commission (MPC) denial of a development permit application for a commercial kennel with a setback relaxation to exercise yards on a 15.78-acre parcel in the Jackson area of Mountain View County.
“The reasons for the permit refusal cited by the MPC committee do not apply to our business,” said Karen Miller, applicant and owner of Baby Barks Kennel, which focuses exclusively on Bichon Shih Tzus dogs.
She called on the SDAB to overturn the MCP denial. Kennel commercial is a discretionary use in the agricultural district.
The property involved is located about one kilometre north of Twp. Rd. 303 east of Rge. Rd. 25 at NE 19-30-2-5.
The kennel has been in operation without a development permit and the application for the permit was not driven by a complaint, said Margaretha Bloem, Mountain View County director of planning and development.
The applicant had proposed a maximum of 59 dogs on site at any given time, with the 59 dog including adult dogs and puppies. The kennel facility is 3,800 square feet in size.
- RELATED: $850,000 kennel development approved in Mountain View County
- RELATED: Decision to approve $850,000 kennel development in Mountain View County appealed
- RELATED: Kennel development near Cremona withdrawn, new application for Carstairs area
- RELATED: Commission denies commercial kennel permit application near Carstairs
On Oct. 15, the MPC approving authority decided against permitting the development.
In making its decision the MPC cited four reasons: operation too large to meet with the welfare of animals involved – care of animal welfare; staffing may not be adequate given the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association recommendation of 10 minutes of interaction per day; concerned with the amount that the female could be bred per year, that it may be too strenuous on the animals; and unsatisfied with the fire evacuation plans.
The applicant appealed the MPC decision to the SDAB, with the hearing heard in council chambers and on Zoom on Dec. 7.
“In meeting the highest professional standards as outlined by the Canadian Veterinarian Medical Association and espoused by the Canadian Kennel Club, and verified by a licensed veterinarian in good standing, we meet and exceed the recommended animal welfare standards,” Miller said in a written submission to the SDAB.
“We meet and abundantly exceed the published standards and would like to provide more information to support this. Therefore, the municipal planning commission’s statement of ‘Operation too large to meet with the welfare of animals involved – care of animal welfare’ is not a statement based on the facts as they pertain to our business, or a reflection of the relevant standards provided by the animal experts in our industry.”
Regarding the MPC saying that staffing may not be adequate given the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association recommendation of 10 minutes of interaction per day, she replied, “We do have more than adequate staffing for number of dogs in our care. Our dogs receive well over the recommended CVMA time requirements for socialization, handling, training and human interaction per day. We would like to submit more info regarding our staffing and interaction practices.”
Regarding the concern with the amount of breeding, she said, “We have stated in our initial proposal documentation that our females will be bred once per year and it seems this information was missed, as possible breeding frequency was cited as a reason for refusal.
In a letter submitted during the hearing, Dr. Andy Mencarelli, with Didsbury Veterinary Services, said: “This letter is to verify that I have gone through the CVMA Code of Practice for Canadian Kennel Operations and I believe that Baby Barks is in full compliance with all of the required practices for each category. They also fully comply with all recommendations that I have made in regards to the health and care of all their dogs.”
The Dec. 7 hearing saw supporters and opponents of the appeal make brief addresses to the board, with written comments also submitted.
The county’s planning and development department called on the SDAB to uphold the MPC denial of the development permit.
The SDAB must make its decision on the appeal within 15 days of the hearing.
