.png)
Assembly agrees to hear appeal of permit allowing farm animals in Back Loop neighborhood
City attorney calls issues raised ‘appropriate subjects for an appeal’; Nano Brooks to serve as presiding officer, says dispute may help refine rules for others hoping to keep livestock
By Mark Sabbatini
Juneau Independent
The Juneau Assembly will consider an appeal by 22 residents protesting the Planning Commission’s approval of a non-commercial farm with more than 100 animals at a residence in the Back Loop area, with the city attorney recommending the elected leaders handle it directly rather than assigning it to a hearing officer.
"This seems like something that would be appropriate for the Assembly to handle," City Attorney Emily Wright told Assembly members at their meeting Monday night.
If the Assembly assigned it to a hearing officer, that person’s decision would still need to be viewed by the Assembly members, she added.
The farm unanimously approved by the Planning Commission on Sept. 8 allows Shawn Kantola to keep up to 100 chickens and ducks, plus 15 other farm animals, on his 2.2 acres of property at 10226 and 10228 Silver Street during summer months. The conditional use permit limits him to 50 chickens and ducks, and four other animals, during winter months.
Neighbors protesting his plans are citing concerns about odors, pollution, noise, intrusions by bears and other wildlife, and harm to property values. The Notice of Appeal to the Assembly lists 27 alleged "legal and factual errors" in the Planning Commission’s approval, such as "The record lacks written documentation researching or supporting the conclusion of ‘no impact’ on existing property values or how neighborhood harmony will be maintained."
Wright, in an email to the Juneau Independent on Tuesday, said she recommended the appeal be considered "because the applicants identified multiple issues which are appropriate subjects for an appeal."
"For example, due process, lack of evidence, and code conflicts," she wrote. "The Assembly needs to ‘liberally construe’ the filing and I would only recommend that no appeal be accepted if there were no grounds provided by the applicants. My recommendation should not be read as taking the position that one side or another would prevail, it is simply, the threshold information present."
A separate consideration, Wright added, is there "are also times where something is highly emotional for our community and there have been many Assembly meetings or discussions about an issue – in that instance I might recommend a hearing officer to provide an initial review. In this case, the Assembly has not had any conversations regarding the farm, and therefore there is no need to have that separation."
The Assembly unanimously voted to consider the appeal with little discussion on Monday night. Assembly Member Nano Brooks, who volunteered to be the presiding officer for the matter, said in an interview Tuesday, "there’s been a lot of community outreach on the topic" and the dispute may be a chance to resolve broader issues about residents keeping livestock animals.
"This is something that I see can lead to maybe a future refinement on guidelines for having livestock based on zoning areas of the community, because what I see is that this all helps play into food security," he said. "It might not be the perfect location to do it, and I want to help get all the facts out there so that we can mediate it properly, but it's something that I am personally interested in."
Kantola has said he hopes to start keeping animals on his property after he finishes construction of a home there next spring, and the plan is to start the farm small and grow it over time to meet many of the food needs of his seven-member family. Brooks said the timeline for resolving the appeal of the project is still to be determined.
"It's important to make sure that we rule in a way that works the best for all parties involved in the community as a whole," he said.
• Contact Mark Sabbatini at editor@juneauindependent.com or 907-957-2306.
.png)
