SPANISH FORT, Ala. — Citing the lack of a permissible use, the Planning Commission unanimously denied a resident’s request to allow the keeping of a horse in a residential district during Monday’s regular meeting.

“We could really be opening a Pandora’s (Box) issue,” said Commissioner Tom Montgomery. “Looking at the Table of Permitted Uses, I just don’t see anything that suggests it would be appropriate.”

Commissioners Mary Brabner and Kevin Diamond as well as Building Official Bruce Renkert were not present at the meeting.

The decision to deny the request was not made hastily, with commissioners poring over any and all permitted uses in which the keeping of a horse would be allowed, and the body even considered whether the measure could be allowed if certain caveats could be worked into the wording of the decision.

Chairman Carl Nelson asked City Attorney David Conner whether an exception could be made that specifically limits the number of horses allowed and sets a timetable for their removal from the property. Conner said such protections would have to be clearly defined, so as not to be abused in future requests.

“It’s the kind of thing (no one) thinks about until the request is made,” Conner said, addressing the unusual item’s omission from the city’s Table of Permitted Uses.

The commission also discussed a previously awarded variance that allowed for the keeping of horses for a displaced resident following Hurricane Ivan, but the body agreed that concession was made because of the emergency and temporary nature of the request.

Because the city’s zoning ordinance in no way allows for the practice in the single-family, low-density residential district, however, the measure submitted on behalf of a renter failed.

The commission also discussed a proposed amendment to the city’s zoning regulations that clarifies the procedure for obtaining a hearing before the regulatory body.

Specifically, the commission has been reviewing Section 11.46 of the regulations in order to more clearly define the amount of time petitioners must wait between seeking approval for requests once an initial request has been denied.

Conner said that upon review the amendment is being proposed because the original language might be deemed “too heavy handed.” The original intent, he said, was to keep people from coming back repeatedly with the same requests and tying up both development and the commission’s time, but timing has actually become the issue.

As written, the section requires petitioners to wait 12 months before seeking additional action once a request has been denied, but it is not clear on when the year-long clock begins ticking.

The revised language sets the starting point for that time frame to begin once the original application for consideration is filed, and the commissioners present voted unanimously to approve the change.

In other business, the commission:

The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held at 6:30 p.m. April. 12, following a 6 p.m. work session at the Gathering Place in the Prodisee Center. An informal work session is slated for 6 p.m. March 29 in the conference room at City Hall.