The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2013-02-06 PACKET 08.A.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # DATE 02/06/13 ]. Community Development ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Jennifer Levitt STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Receive and place on file the Planning Commission's and Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission's recommendations not to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance or Animal Control Ordinance for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Accept the Planning Commission's, Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission's, Public Safety Department's and Planning Division's recommendations not to amend city ordinances for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. City ordinances will not be amended and the keeping of any farm animal will continue to require a minimum of five acres of land. BUDGET IMPLICATION $ N/A $ N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION: N/A FUNDING SOURCE DATE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ® PLANNING 12/19/12 ® ❑ ❑ ® PUBLIC SAFETY 01/15/13 ® ❑ ❑ ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ® MEMO /LETTER: Memo from John McCool date 01/31/13 Memo from Pete Koerner, Deputy Director of Public Safety dated 01/22/13 ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Cottage Grove's Facebook Comments November 7 —11, 2012 Cottage Grove's Facebook — Sharing Page Comments December 7 -11, 2012 Survey Monkey Summary Results Front Counter Survey Results December 7 -11, 2012 Survey Monkey Comments December 7 -12, 2012 Miscellaneous written comments from Bob Janicek, David Campbell, Autumn Carlson, and Angel Popowitz Ordinance Survey of 52 other Cif ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS a /l I City Administrator Date ***************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: [ ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE MINNESOTA TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator FROM: John McCool, Senior Planner DATE: January 31, 2013 RE: Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods — Advisory Commission Recommendations Introduction On November 21, 2012, the City Council requested that the Planning Commission make a recommendation on the idea of amending city ordinances to allow chickens and /or ducks on urban residential lots that are less than five acres in area. The Planning Commission, Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission, and Public Safety Department have all recommended that city ordinances relating to this matter not be amended. Advisory Commission and Department Recommendations Planning Commission On December 17, 2012, the Planning Commission voted 6 -2 to recommend to the City Council that the City's Zoning and Animal Control Ordinances not be amended for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. A summary of the ordinance regulations for poultry and fowl in the back yard of urban lots by 52 other cities, a copy of the emails received from property owners in favor and against ordinance regulations allowing poultry and fowl in the backyard of urban residential lots, public comments posted on the City's Facebook and the results of an opinion survey that had 237 responses presented to the City Council on November 21, 2012 was also presented to the Planning Commission at their meeting on December 17. General health concerns for allowing these types of animals in urban residential neighborhoods where single - family residential lots are generally 9,000 — 12,000 square feet in area (0.2 — 0.27 of an acre) was also discussed. On January 28, 2013, Planning staff reported to the Planning Commission that the Public Safety Commission reviewed the same materials presented to the Planning Commission on December 17. Information provided to the Public Safety Commission concerning potential health risks associated with raising chickens was also given to the Planning Commission. At this meeting, Bob Burtman, 9476 Harkness Avenue (owner of the ducks) requested that the ordinances be amended to allow ducks in the back yard of their urban residential lot. Mr. Burtman acknowledged that a neighboring property owner does object to the ducks in his back yard, but other neighboring property owners had previously signed his petition supporting his proposal to keep the ducks. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 2 of 10 The Planning Commission did not modify or change their December 17 recommendation to the City Council that city ordinances not be amended for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission On January 15, 2013, the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission voted 5 -0 to recommend to the City Council that city ordinances not be amended to allow poultry or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. The materials (i.e. ordinance requirements by other cities, emails from individuals in favor and against, public comments, opinion survey results, etc.) distributed to the City Council on November 21 and to the Planning Commission on December 17 were also provided to the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission. In addition, several articles and documents concerning potential health risks associated with raising chickens was distributed to the Public Safety Commission members. The Commission also had questions concerning potential city expenses for enforcement. Minutes for the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission meeting on January 15 and the Planning Commission meeting on December 19 and January 28 are not available at this time. The Public Safety Department has also recommended that the city's Zoning Ordinance and Animal Control Ordinance not be amended to allow poultry and fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. A copy of the Public Safety Department's memo dated January 31, 2013 is attached. Background At the April 4, 2012, City Council meeting, Councilmember Olsen requested information on the City of Minneapolis' recent adoption of ordinance amendments allowing "urban farming." A re- sponse to the City Council was prepared by Robin Roland and presented to the City Council at their meeting on April 18, 2012. The City Council received Roland's report and took no further action. Since that time, the City received complaints of chickens in the backyard of a residential lot and of four ducks in the backyard of another residential lot. The City's Code Enforcement Officer provided written notice to both property owners that farm animals are not allowed on their property. Several deadlines were set for compliance, but neither situation has been resolved. On September 5, 2012, the owner of the ducks presented a petition signed by homeowners surrounding his property that do not object to the four ducks. The owners of the chickens were also present at the Council meeting and requested that the City Council change City ordinances to allow chickens on their property. At that meeting, Council referred both matters to Community Development staff to research and respond to the City Council and also to share the information with the two residents. City staff's response and a copy of the materials regarding urban farming presented to the City Council on April 18 were distributed to the Council and the owners of the chickens and ducks Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 3 of 10 in advance of the Council meeting on September 19, 2012. A copy of the staff memorandum dated September 13, 2012, and the chicken ordinance requirements in 19 other communities in the metropolitan area were provided to the City Council and the owners of the chickens and ducks. At the September 19, 2012, City Council meeting, Council referred this matter to the Planning Commission for comment. The Planning Commission discussed this issue on October 22, 2012. At this meeting, staff reported to the Commission that the City Council requested that they comment on the idea of allowing chickens and /or ducks on urban residential lots that are less than five acres in area. The Planning Commission discussed the following issues relating to potential impacts and regulatory requirements: • Property values • Ordinance regulations required by other communities • Popularity of keeping chickens • Code enforcement issues (e.g. complaints by neighboring property owners, lack of ground vegetation, coop and pen design, etc.) • Minimum lot size requirements • Licensing requirements • Coop and exercise runs and enclosure requirements • Coop and pen setbacks • Licensing and inspection requirements • Number of poultry and fowl • Pigeons, pigmy goats, pot -belly pigs, miniature farm animals, honey bees, etc. The Planning Commission was informed that the City has received two complaints about chickens and ducks in the back yards of single - family properties. Enforcement of current ordin- ance requirements prohibiting farm animals on property less than five acres have been delayed because of the ongoing discussion if current ordinance regulations should be amended. Supporters for chickens and ducks in the back yard of urban residential lots attended the Planning Commission meeting and stated their reasons for amending city ordinances. The Planning Commission acknowledged that there are many issues that must be addressed if an ordinance amendment was to be prepared. The Commission generally agreed that other communities are changing their ordinances and that there might be some merit in beginning the process of evaluating this issue. By a 7 -1 vote, the Planning Commission believes there is a growing trend and will need to further discuss this issue. This action by the Planning Commission did not include the updated survey results showing that 67 percent of the communities in the metropolitan area do not allow farm animals in the back yards of urban residential lots. On November 21, 2012, a summary of the Planning Commission's discussion on this topic and the results of the updated survey of ordinance requirements by other cities were presented to the City Council. City Council requested that the Planning Commission make a recommendation on this matter. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 4 of 10 Ordinance Requirements Cottage Grove's ordinance regulations allow farm animals in all zoning districts, but the prop- erty must be a minimum of five acres. The number of farm animals allowed on property greater than five acres is limited by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's recommended animal units per acre. The City's Zoning Ordinance definition for "Farm Animals" reads as follows: "FARM ANIMALS: Horses, cows, sheep, bees, pigs, chickens, ducks and other commonly known animals normally associated with farms, but excluding customary household pets." The City's Zoning Ordinance provides the following regulations (highlighted in bold lettering) for residential lots with less than 40 acres of land: Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 7; Farming Operations in Residential Districts: 1. Parcels Less Than Forty Acres: The keeping of any farm animal on parcels of less than forty (40) acres in size shall be permitted, subject to the following conditions: a. The property must contain at least five (5) acres in contiguous ownership or leasehold. b. The property must contain at least one and one -half (1 1 /2) acres of land per animal unit. This number may be exceeded only by conditional use permit. c. All buildings intended to house animals shall be set back at least sixty feet (60) from all property lines and at least three hundred feet (300') from a dwelling other than the dwelling on the property in question. d. All pens, yards or other confinement areas, excluding pastures, where animals are kept shall be set back at least sixty feet (60) from all property lines. e. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency does not require that a feedlot permit be issued. 2. Parcels Larger Than Forty Acres: The keeping of farm animals on parcels larger than forty (40) acres in size is permitted, subject to the following conditions: a. All buildings intended to house animals shall be set back at least sixty feet (60') from all property lines and at least three hundred feet (300) from a dwelling other than the dwelling on the property in question. b. All pens, yards or other confinement areas, excluding pastures, where animals are kept shall be set back at least sixty feet (60') from all property lines. c. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency does not require that a feedlot permit be issued. The City's Animal Control Ordinance states that wild animals are prohibited as pets and that no person shall keep a wild animal (Title 5, Chapter 4, Section 6). Any game bird (including pheasants, ducks, geese, quail, and grouse) in included in the "wild animal" definition. This section of the City Code also states that a licensed peace officer is empowered to immediately Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 5 of 10 impound any wild animal found within the city and seek whatever legal process necessary to enter private property to carry out this directive. Survey of Other Cities' Ordinances City staff updated the survey regarding poultry and fowl ordinance requirements by other com- munities in the metropolitan area. This survey was originally prepared in April 2012 and listed 19 cities. The updated survey now includes 52 cities. Based on this updated information, one - third of the communities surveyed allow poultry/fowl on urban residential lots and the remaining two - thirds of the communities did not allow them on small urban lots, but generally do allow them on large rural and agricultural lots. An interesting fact to note on the updated survey results is that some cities allowing poultry/fowl in residential zoning districts generally have a minimum lot area requirement that is larger than a conventional single - family lot. Examples of the minimum lot area requirement are shown below. Andover also stipulates that the lot must not be served with city water and /or sanitary sewer utilities. City Minimum Lot Area Andover 2.5 acres Brooklyn Park 5 acres Chanhassen 2.5 acres Cottage Grove 5 acres Elk River 5 acres Forest Lake 5 acres Inver Grove Heights 1.75 acres Lakeville 10 acres Lino Lakes 10 acres Maple Grove 1.5 acres Minnetonka 1.0 acre West St. Paul 5 acres Woodbury 5 acres The table below shows the minimum side and rear yard setbacks and the minimum setback between the coop /pen and any neighboring dwelling: City Coop/Pen Minimum Side Yard Coop/Pen Minimum Rear Yard Minimum Setback Between Coop/Pen and Other Dwellings Anoka 5 feet 10 feet Bloomington 50 feet 50 feet No Requirement Burnsville 10 feet 10 feet 50 feet Duluth Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. 25 feet Eagan 5 feet 10 feet No Requirement Fridley Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. 50 feet Maplewood 5 feet 10 feet No Requirement New Brighton No Requirement No Requirement No Requirement Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 6 of 10 New Hope Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. No Requirement Northfield Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. 25 feet Oakdale Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. No Requirement Ramsey 10 feet 10 feet No Requirement Rosemount 10 feet 10 feet 75 feet Roseville 5 feet 5 feet No Requirement Shoreview Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. Minimum setback for zoning district property is located in. 30 feet Stillwater 3 feet 6 feet No Requirement Chanhassen's City Council has discussed this matter several times and each time concluded that farm animals should not be permitted on urban lots that are generally less than 15,000 square feet in area. The City of Columbia Heights had prepared an amendment to their city codes to allow chickens on urban lots seven years ago, but the amendment has not been sup- ported by their City Council because a few residents have asked to allow other farm animals (i.e.; pigmy goats, pot - bellied pigs, miniature horses, honey -bees, pigeons, etc.) on residential lots. Within the last couple months, Eagan and Stillwater have both adopted ordinances allowing poultry and fowl on urban residential lots. Both of these City's ordinances are similar to each other. Each requires a city license for keeping chickens and requires a coop with an attached run area that are both completely enclosed. Stillwater and Eden Prairie have both been asked to adopt ordinances to allow honeybees on urban residential lots. Forest Lake, Brooklyn Park, Golden Valley, Richfield and Crystal have recently started their discussions about backyard chickens. Most cities generally agree that the number of homeowners wanting poultry and /or fowl in their backyard is relatively few. A few cities reported that they still occasionally receive complaints about chickens in the backyard and most of the time found the owner of the chickens is com- pliant with city ordinance requirements. In these situations, city staff and elected officials have dedicated additional time to find compromises that both property owners can agree to. Some cities collect a license fee to cover the administration and initial inspection of the coop and pen, but reported that this fee does not cover city staff time for code enforcement or responding to complaint issues. Some cities have not adopted or amended their ordinances to allow poultry and fowl in backyards because of staffing limitations within animal control, code enforcement, or public safety departments. A copy of the updated survey is attached. Regulatory Considerations Keeping poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots may occasionally create conflicts between small lot owners or between tenants of a multifamily housing complex. Of the 33 percent of the communities that allow poultry and /or fowl in urban neighborhoods, staff time was still necessary to resolve conflicts between property owners, even if there was no Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 7 of 10 code violation. Therefore, staff does not support farm animals in urban residential neighborhoods and only allow them on acreage sized parcels of land. Most of the discussion has been primarily about keeping chickens in the back yard. Are three chickens any different than three ducks or one pot - bellied pig? A few communities have adopted regulations for pigeons, miniature farm animals, honeybees, pigmy goats and pot- bellied pigs. Even though the number of people wanting to care for a small farm animal in their back yard is few; city resources to license, inspect, and enforce could be significant if there are code violations or conflicts between property owners. Including a "Neighbor Approval or Notice Provision" does not always guarantee there will not be problems in the future. Enforcement In addition to city enforcement, some neighborhoods have homeowner association covenants that may restrict homeowners from keeping farm animals. Homeowner Associations have authority to enforce their restrictive covenants via fines and /or court action if necessary. If certain types of farm animals are allowed on Cottage Grove urban neighborhoods, the Council will need to determine licensing, inspection, enforcement procedures that a particular City department will be responsible in managing. Enforcement for poultry and fowl will take away from other code enforcement priorities. Animal Control Ordinance Chapter 4 of the City Codes establishes a license requirement for dogs and cats over six months of age. The annual license fee is $15 for spayed /neutered dogs and cats. A site inspection is not required for dogs or cats. If city ordinances are amended, Chapter 4 of the City Code will also need to be amended to address the wild animal definition and if licensing requirements are imposed for poultry and fowl. Some communities require a permit or license for keeping poultry /fowl and an inspection of the site is typically necessary to insure coop setbacks, fencing, coop structures, sanitary conditions, etc. are in compliance with ordinance requirements. If an amendment to the City's Zoning Ordinance is recommended to allow certain farm animals on urban lots, the City's Animal Control ordinance must also be amended. The Public Safety staff will be consulted in this process. Public Comment and Survey Results On October 8, Robert Janicek submitted a letter supporting chickens in the backyard of urban residential lots. Included with his letter was a variety of materials supporting chickens in the backyard of residential neighborhoods. One of the documents was a summary of chicken ordinance regulations from 15 cities in Minnesota. A copy of that document is attached. David Campbell has sent an email message supporting the idea of allowing chickens in the back yard and suggested five recommendations that the owner of the chickens must abide with. A copy of his email message is attached. Autumn Carlson has sent three email messages expressing her concerns for poultry in the back yards of urban residential lots. Copies of her messages are attached. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 8 of 10 Angel Popowitz has sent an email objecting to the ducks in the back yard of her neighbor's yard. A copy of her email message is attached. Planning staff prepared an opinion survey about keeping poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. Survey Monkey's services to post the survey were used. The announce- ment of this survey was posted on the City of Cottage Grove's Facebook page on Friday, December 7, 2012, and a link to access the survey was provided. The survey consisted of 13 questions and was an opportunity for the general public to comment on this topic. From December 7 to December 13, there were 237 survey responses. A copy of the survey was also available at the front counter of the Cottage Grove Public Safety /City Hall. Fourteen surveys were completed at the front counter. The survey responses generally favored poultry and fowl to be only allowed on acreage parcels. A copy of the 237 survey results, the 100 comments received through Survey Monkey, and the survey results from the front counter are enclosed. Staff recognizes that this type of self - selection survey does not accurately represent the opinions of all the citizens in the community. The keeping of chickens in the back yard of urban residential lots in Cottage Grove has received some media coverage (Pioneer Press, Star Tri- bune, KSTP and South Washington County Bulletin). Aside from the five City Council meetings and one Planning Commission meeting where this matter was discussed, there has been little dialog from property owners in urban residential neighborhoods. Posting this topic on the City's Facebook page and announcing that the Planning Commission will discuss this matter at their December 17 meeting was an attempt to inform the general public that they have an opportunity to participate in this discussion and at the same time provide some general feedback about this issue. Decision Resources was contacted to obtain a cost estimate to prepare a survey that would provide quantitative data results about this topic. Decision Resources has recommended that a telephone survey would work best for this type of community issue. The minimum survey sample is 250 calls and 15 questions. Once the survey questions have been prepared, com- pleting the survey and preparing a report on the survey results will take approximately two and a half weeks. The cost for this type of telephone survey is about $4,000. If the survey sample area increased to 400 calls with additional questions, the cost is about $6,000. Service Pig Request In December, the Planning Department received a request from a Cottage Grove resident to have a small pig in their home to help address some of their son's disabilities. The son is autistic and has epilepsy. They are unable to consider other therapeutic pets (e.g. dogs) be- cause of allergies. This resident explained that the pig will be trained and registered as a thera- peutic pet and kept inside of their home. City ordinances do not provide an exception to the farm animal requirements. Because of the recent discussions on chickens and ducks, this resident is requesting that the City also consider amending city ordinances to allow a therapeutic a pig in their home. City staff checked to find out service animal or service companion certification requirements for pigs, but no information was found specifically for pigs. Most service animal or service Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 9 of 10 companion certifications pertained to canines. There were some certification requirements for horseback riding and swimming with dolphins. The purpose of certification is to ensure that a service pig is trained to perform specific functions and tasks that the individual with a disability cannot perform. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a service animal is individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. Examples include alerting persons with hearing impairments to sounds, pulling wheelchairs or carrying and picking up things for persons with mobility impairments or assisting persons with mobility impairments with balance. "Comforting" or "giving love ", although clinically proven to be beneficial for people is generally not acknowledged as a trained "task" by the Department of Justice, which enforces ADA regulations. A therapy animal is a generic name given to an animal once it has been specifically evaluated and registered with a national organization. All of the national organizations' evaluations require some basic obedience skills. This is designed to ensure the owner has the proper control over the animal to keep it safe in the environment it might encounter. City staff has informed this person that their request is a slightly different issue than the poultry/fowl matter. If they want to pursue an ordinance amendment, they will need to file a zoning ordinance amendment application with the Planning Division and include with the application submittal the service animal or service companion certification requirements for a pig. No action was taken by the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission or Planning Commission concerning this matter. This person has indicated that they plan to attend the City Council meeting on February 6 th Options 1. Accept the Planning Commission's, Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission's, Public Safety Department's and Planning Division's recommendations not to amend city ordinances for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. City ordinances will not be amended and the keeping of any farm animal will continue to require a minimum of five acres of land. 2. Contrary to the recommendations by the Planning Commission, Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission and city staff, direct city staff to prepare amendments to city ordinances for purposes of allowing certain farm animals in urban residential neighborhoods. The City Council shall provide direction concerning the topics listed below so that preparing an ordinance amendment will address all the issues the City Council wants addressed. • Which farm animals will be permitted on urban residential lots? • Are their specific zoning districts to allow certain farm animals and what should the minimum lot area be? Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods January 31, 2013 Page 10 of 10 Is there an expectation that surrounding property owners /tenants must provide written permission to allow a property owner to keep certain farm animals in the back yard of an urban residential lot? If so, what should the minimum distance from the hosting property be for purposes of notifying surrounding property owners? Is there a minimum percentage of surrounding property owner /tenant supporters before a license can be issued? • What are the licensing requirements? How much should the licensing fee be? • What are the coop and /or pen requirements? ® What is the maximum number of poultry and /or fowl that can be kept on an urban residential lot? Is the maximum number of animals based on a graduated scale so that an owner of a one acre parcel can have more animals than a property owner with only one - quarter of an acre parcel? • Can the property owner sell eggs from their urban residential lot? • Can the property owner butcher any farm animal on their urban residential lot? Does it matter if butchering is allowed inside a building but prohibited outside? • What should the maintenance of coops and /or pens be? 0 Should there be regulations how feed and animal fecal waste is stored? Will animal feces be permitted to be applied as a fertilizer on the lawn or gardens? • Are roosters allowed? • What are the minimum setback requirements for coops and pens from property boundary lines? What should be the minimum setback between coops /pens and adjacent residential dwellings? Action Requested Accept the Planning Commission's, Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission's, Public Safety Department's and Planning Division's recommendations not to amend city ordinances for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. City ordinances will not be amended and the keeping of any farm animal will continue to require a minimum of five acres of land. Cottage J Grove Department of Public Safety Police • Fire • EMS h ere Pride and frosPeri Meet To: John McCool, Senior Planner From: Deputy Director of Public Safety Peter J Koerner Date: January 22 " 2013 Subject: PSHW COMMISSION REVIEW OF POULTRY /FOWL ORDINANCE Introduction At the Planning Commission's meeting on December 17 th , 2012, the Planning Commission decided not to proceed in drafting any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance or Animal Control Ordinance for this matter. Some of the Commission members expressed concerns for health risks that these types of animals might pose in urban neighborhoods. They requested that the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission also have an opportunity to review and make recommendations. At the January 15 th , 2013, Public Safety Health and Welfare Commission, Senior Planner John McCool did a presentation to the Commission. At the conclusion of the presentation, the Commission was asked to make a recommendation whether or not amendments to the City Code should be drafted for purposes of allowing poultry and /or fowl in the backyard of urban residential lots. Discussion Throughout the presentation and after the presentation, Senior Planner John McCool was open to questions or clarification. At the conclusion of the presentation, Commission Chair Brian Hagen did open for discussion. The following is a brief summary of their discussion. The Commission's main question and concern was how the City would enforce the ordinance if amended and what would be the challenges. They were advised that none of the cities surveyed were able to estimate a dollar amount for time spent on enforcement. If asked, Law Enforcement could do a review of calls for service pertaining to complaints on poultry /fowl in their cities but this would provide a number only. John McCool did note that the amount of people wanting poultry /foul would be a small percentage. Another Commission member did ask who from the city would enforce? I did advise the Commission that enforcement would need to be a coordinated effort. The animal control portion would be handled by the Community Service Officer and anything pertaining to the coop would be handled by the Planning Department. A similar comparison is that with a dangerous dog, the Community Service Officer works with the City Clerk to ensure proper CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE • 12800 Ravine Parkway • Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottage - grove.org • 651 - 458 -2850 • Fax 651 -458 -2820 • Equal Opportunity Employer registration and compliance. We do coordinate the kennel inspection with the planning department /code enforcement. The Commission was concerned about the type of coop and how we could enforce the upkeep and to keep it clean. Commission members felt that if the coop did not receive routine cleaning that it would create a health hazard. In regards to coop locations they were concerned about setbacks from neighboring yards. He felt that if there were an amendment that the license fee would need to be set high to ensure the person would maintain the coop. One Commission member was aware of "urban farming" however would not want to see the chickens slaughtered on site. In regards to lot sizes, a concern was that if allowed in a smaller lot, how much of the lot is actually taken from the home /structures and driveway. A comment was made that at least 3 acres would be needed. The Commission also commented about having one hundred percent of the neighbors being In agreement with a homeowner being allowed. Commission members felt this would be very difficult to get one hundred percent. Recommendation After an opportunity to ask questions and have discussion, the PSHW Commission did make a motion to not proceed in drafting any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance or Animal Control Ordinance for this matter. Further Discussion Senior Planner John McCool also asked that the Public Safety Department review the information provided in regards drafting any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance or Animal Control Ordinance. The Public Safety Department did have an opportunity to review. After our review, we did have similar concerns that the PSHW Commission brought up. The following are some of the concerns: ■ Enforcement —The department is concerned on how much time enforcement would take with our Community Service Officers. One area in particular is that even if poultry /fowl were allowed and the homeowner was in compliance, we may still get calls. Often these situations become a neighborhood dispute and do take additional resources to mediate and resolve. Efforts would need to be coordinated with the planning department /code enforcement. Health Hazard - As the PSHW Commission brought up in their discussion, it is a concern how much enforcement /monitoring would be needed to ensure the coops were maintained and kept clean. If it were in fact a health hazard we would need to coordinate with planning as well as the County Health Department. Licensing /Permits — Who would manage the licensing /permits of poultry /foul and how often inspections would be required? Animal licensing is already time consuming and how much more would this add? Public Safety believes that the PSHW Commission had a good discussion and identified many of the concerns that we have in regards to enforcement and licensing. We concur with their recommendation to not draft any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance or Animal Control Ordinance at this time. City of Cottage Grove's Facebook Comments December 7 -11, 2012 o Dave LeVake, Terri Tufte, Kim Smrstick Beaton and 9 others like this. Kali Taylor Amanda Kowalski December 7 at 1:48pm via mobile - Thomas Carlson Here is an article about chickens in the city. http : / /www.chici(enrunrescue.org/ collective %2Ostate %20111809.pdf December 7 at 1:51pm mobile Kevin Johnson I say.... If you wanna be a farmer buy a farm December 7 at 2:34pm via Jeff Rothecker City of St. Paul allows it and most of their lots are smaller than the ones here in Cottage Grove. December 7 at 2 :49pm Kevin Johnson Well there you go.... Go live in st Paul .... lol December 7 at 3:12pm via mobile Elspeth Atkinson GREAT article link above! December 7 at 3:17pm Kelli Jankovich- McDaniel Chickens (Not roosters) make a lot less noise and mess than most dogs do! A few birds would do no harm. December 7 at 7:36pm t j Becky Fox I grew up on a farm raising chickens, ducks and geese -I left for a reason and sure hope my neighbors don't get to raise them in their backyard which is really close to mine! Believe it or not, you really wouldn't need to drive far to buy them from a local farmer and they are more work than most people realize. December 7 at 8:28pm via mobile Jean Jacobs Glaraton Glad to have the opportunity to voice my opinion through the survey. December 7 at 9:28pm L' Jill Eriksen Sheppard If anyone is concerned about the inhumane treatment of chickens then they really need to consider where the grocery store chickens come fromhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enwUSjIXSIU Saturday at 4:48am Thomas Carlson Last summer we had a chicken fly into our yard in Cottage Grove. Its legs were bound together tightly with string so it was unable to walk correctly. My daughter caught the chicken and removed the string and found a place in Minneapolis that would take the chicken and find it a home. It took a month or two before the chicken was big enough to determine that it was a rooster and not a hen. Saturday at 7 :02am Dennis Breisler I want a goat. Saturday at 8:29am Im Lewis Stein Noll Saturday at 10:32am via mobile 12:20pm Gene LeVake I don't think you want to open "THIS CAN OF WORMS "!!!!! Saturday at Will Hohenstein Green acres is the place for me. Farm livin' is the life for me. Land spreadin' out so far and wide Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside. Saturday at 3:58pm ti Angel Popowitz really ?? ! hope this survey on Facebook is not your deciding factor for this problem that has been sitting on the city council for more than 4 MONTHS!!! are you sending this survey out with our water bill so it can be seen by EVERY person who lives in cottage grove ? ?? Saturday at 5:20pm W2 - Susan Farr Make sure to charge a license fee for each person who wants to do this who lives in urban CG because you will need to accumulate enougth income to offset the cost of constant calls to the police for animal noise disturbance caused by roosters. Sunday at 12:06pm ]en Peterson Roosters would not be allowed. Sunday at 8:58pm via mobile Lwi --' Natalie Seim Oltman Jr. High had baby ducks that they hatched in science. Daughter brought one home. We raised them (2) from babies, and it imprinted with us. It walked around the yard with me when I watered the garden. It turned it's heads when the jets flew over. They were fun. We made a cage for them, had a small round pool for water, and like others we knew that had them from Otlman, they get too big to keep in our yard. They poop a lot, and that needs to be taken care of. You need to keep them safe because we do have fox around here (so they needed a cage at night). It was a lot of work. I know some people released the ducks to the ponds, we took ours to a friend's hobby farm. I think if they have a proper place for chickens and they weren't noisy I would agree. Ducks, more work! Other cities have these. Would have to address their waste /poop disposal. As long as the parties surrounding the home agree with a signature, I would agree. ( I think that is what some cities do). Sunday at 11:11pm Citv of Cottage Grove Facebook — Sharing Pages December 7 -11, 2012 Jen LeVake Heriot I would love to have chickens in MY back yard. With the right rules and regulations (no roosters) it can be a great thing!! Many cities are now considering this; just passed in Stillwater. Hoping Hudson will do the same some day. Now having cows, goats or other "farm animals" is a whole other story - hal I'll have to pass this on to my family living in CG. Saturday at 2:35am via mobile Nicole Tennis I do have farm animals in my neighbors backyard. Don't remind Jesse of the wild boar. Too soon! Saturday at 7:57am via mobile Jill Eriksen Sheppard Jennifer Schottmuller Bierma Here's the survey link.:) December 7 at 9:47pm Jill Eriksen Sheppard via Amelia La Casse Please give your input to the City of Cottage Grove in favor of allowing backyard chickens!!! December 7 at 5:09pm Elspeth Atkinson Amy ... good to knowll This is all new to me. I love the idea of fresh healthy eggs. I am just too wary sometimes and assume the worst of what some people would do. December 7 at 9:58pm Jill Eriksen Sheppard I think the chicken industry as a whole are the worst offenders of treating chickens inhumanely and those that want to raise a few in their backyards are in a different category http://wvvw.youtube.com/watch?v=enwU5jlXSIU Food, Inc. - Industrial Chicken Farmers Clip from Food, Inc. in which small southern farmers are beholden to large corpo... See More Saturday at 6:51am Anita Morrill I posted the survey link to our local Urban Chicken Farmers group, too. The questions on the survey continue to bother me, though, in terms of private property rights. You shouldn't really have to ask "permission" of any level of government to do as you see fit on your own property..... Saturday at 9:21am Anita Morrill As an example, Des Moines code: http : / /library.municode.com /HTML/ 13242/ level3/ MUCO_ CH18AN_ ARTIINGE .html #MUCO_CH 18 -4AG NOAN EXAM Sec. 18 -4. - Agricultural nondomestic animals and exotic animals.(a)No horse, cow, calf, swine, shee library. municode.corn No person, while herding or driving any animals mentioned in section 18 -4 of thi... See More Saturday at 9:30am Francisco Gonzalez via City of Cottage Grove, MN - City Government mmm ... can I keep an nandu too? See Translation December 7 at 3:34pm Keeping Chickens in the Back Yard Ordinance SurveyMonkey 1 of 5 4. Do you object to your neighbor keeping fowl (e.g. wild ducks, geese, turkeys, etc.) in their back yard? Response Response Percent Count 5. Would you object to your neighbor keeping a rooster(s) in their back yard? Response Response Percent Count 6. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be allowed to butcher the animal on an urban residential lot? Response Response Percent .... . ..... Count ........ --------- -- ----------- ......... ......... . .. ... .. . . ...... YES 38.6% 90 No 61.4% --------- - - ----- 143 answered question 233 skipped question 4 2 of 5 8. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be allowed to sell eggs from their urban residential lot? Response Response Percent Count ..... . ...... .......... .... -------------- - - ----- . ..... . .... . ...... . ..... ........ .... ..... YES 47.0% NO 53.0% 125 answered question 236 skipped question 9. Should keeping poultry and/or fowl in the backyard of an urban residential lot require a minimum lot area? Response Response Percent Count 3 of 5 10. If you answered YES to question No. 9, what should the minimum lot area be? Response Response Percent Count 6,000 square foot lot area 0 11.4% 21 12,000 square foot lot area 0 13.0% 24 .......... -_ -- One -half acre (21,780 square feet) 0 10.3% 19 One acre (43,560 square feet) 0 13.0% 24 Two acres (87,120 square feet) 15.8% 29 Five acres (217,800 square feet) 36.4% 67 answered question 184 skipped question 53 11. Would you support an ordinance amendment that allows residents on an urban residential lot to keep other small farm animals (e.g. pigmy goats, pot - bellied pigs, honeybees, pigeons and other wild game) in their back yard? Response Response Percent Count 4 of 5 12. Assuming the photograph of a coop and pen as shown above complies with all ordinance regulations; would you accept its placement on the urban residential lot next to your property? Response Response Percent Count YES 41.4% 98 NO IAMMMV-w--�. 58.6% 139 answered question 237 .. ......... . ... .. . skipped question 0 13. Do you have additional comments you would like to say regarding a homeowner keeping poultry and/or fowl in the backyard of their urban residential lot in Cottage Grove? Response Count 5 of 5 Poultry and Fowl Opinion Survey Cottage Grove, MN The definition for "farm animal" in Cottage Grove's City Code includes chickens and ducks. City ordinances allow farm animals in any zoning district, but a minim of five acres of land is required. ®, �( Vr _ The City has been asked to consider allowing poultry ar r Ike back yard of urban residential lots. An urban residential lot i§.NJ I 0 -100 feet wide lot with a lot area of 7,500- 11,000 sq. ft. (0.17 — 0. re). l NOW The City of Cottage Grove ar your opinio on 1 and fowl in backyards. Q YES N® e you a Cotta meowner in an urban residential 14 0 neighborhood 2. Should people living in an apartment or townhouse complex be 0 14 allowed to keep poultry or fowl penned -up outside? 3. Do you object to your neighbor keeping chickens in their back 13 1 yard? 4. Do you object to your neighbor keeping fowl (e.g. wild ducks, 14 0 geese, turkeys, etc.) in their back yard? 5. Would you object to your neighbor keeping a rooster(s) in their 13 1 back yard? 6. Should the owner of poultry and /or fowl be allowed to butcher the 0 14 animal on an urban residential lot? 7. Should the owner of poultry and /or fowl be required to provide 11 1 coops and fences for the poultry and /or fowl in their back yard? 8. Should the owner of poultry and /or fowl be allowed to sell eggs 4 8 from their urban residential lot? 9. Should keeping poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of an urban 11 1 residential lot require a minimum lot area? 10. If you answered YES to question No. 9, what should the minimum ` lot area be? Select only one option below: Responses: 0 6,000 square foot lot area 1 12,000 square foot lot area 4 One -half acre (21,780 square feet) 1 One acre (43,560 square feet) 0 Two acres (87,120 square feet) 5 Five acres (217,800 square feet) OVER QUESTION: YES NO 11. Would you support an ordinance amendment that allows residents on an urban residential lot to keep other small farm animals (e.g. 0 14 pigmy goats, pot - bellied pigs, honeybees, pigeons and other wild game) in their back yard? 12. Assuming this photograph of a coop and pen complies with all ordinance regulations; would you accept its placement on the urban residential lot next to your property? 0 13 13. Do you have addit omments you would like to say regarding a homeowner keeping poultry and /or fowl in the back yard of their urban residential lot in Cottage Grove? RESPONSES: 1. No chickens, poultry, pigs ... Move- 2. Buy rural land for all livestock on 5 acres. 3. 1 can see a lot of tension amongst neighbors, stink, noise, attracting other animals. These people need to live on acreage to do such a thing! 4. This should not be allowed. 5. Should not be allowed. 6. Don't allow anv farm animals in the citv. Rats will come. Thank you for participating in this Opinion Survey. Some of the results from the survey may be presented to the Cottage Grove Planning Commission on December 17, 2012. The Planning Commission will meet in the City Council Chambers at the Public Safety /Fire and City Hall; 12800 Ravine Parkway at 7:00 PM. This meeting is open to the public. If you have questions, contact John McCool, Senior Planner at 651- 458 -2874 or jmccooICa_)cottage-grove.orct I Survey Monkey Comments 2 December 7 -12, 2012 4 Poultry stinks. Unless you are a poultry farmer, you should absolutley NOT be able to 5 keep anything like that on your property. Who the hell wants to wake up to roosters in 6 the city!! 7 12/12/2012 10:32 AMview Responses 8 9 If this is allowed all neighbors should have the right to say no. The property should 10 have had zero justified City complaints (tall grass, trash cans...) in the past 3 years. The 11 property owner should be required to have a 6 foot privacy fence installed to the 12 standard of a professional installer. 13 12/1112012 4:49 PMview Responses 14 15 1 think that is good, as long as the coop is clean. 16 12/11/2012 12:01 AMview Responses 17 18 a neighbor of mine had some wild one and then move on to rabbits and stinks and then 19 where do they put the droppings? If you open this it will be a disaster. 20 12/11/2012 11:44 AMview Responses 21 22 If I wanted farm life, I would move to the country. I want my neighborhood to be clean. 1 23 don't want a stinky set -up next door. I don't want to noise pollution from poultry or other 24 fowl. And I don't want chicken. feathers in my yard. It might be fun for someone for the 25 first month or so, and then it would become work. Would there be setback regulations, 26 and other regulations, that would be STRICTLY enforced? Would there be a limit on 27 how many poultry are allowed? Will structures be taken down if not in use or will they 28 be allowed to sit there and rot? If and when they are taken down, will it be strictly 29 enforced to get decent grass growing there or will the owner be allowed to let the 30 weeds take over? Would the fowl be allowed out of their cages? Would this type of 31 thing bring more birds of prey to the area and make it dangerous for small pets to be 32 outside? My husband and I worked long and hard to get what we've got as have lots of 33 other people. I believe it would bring down the property values. We had a former 34 neighbor here in Cottage Grove who, shortly after we moved into our house, tried 35 raising pheasants in his backyard behind, and in, his shed. It was out of his sight, but in 36 plain view of us. The cage was two feet from the property line. The smell was 37 sickening. After failure, everything just sat there for twenty years. It turned into a junk 38 pile. There was erosion on the site and the hillside. No grass has ever grown there and 39 over the years the dirt area has expanded along with some weeds that I have a hard 40 time keeping out of my yard. I know you would have the ordinances in place, but if the 41 fowl owner is in violation, then it most likely would have to be a neighbor who calls and 42 reports them. If the neighbor asks the fowl owner to take care of something, the fowl 43 owner would most likely get defensive (from my own experience), or worse. Why allow 44 something more to create conflict in neighborhoods? If I were looking to buy a home in 45 CG, I would not buy next to a chicken coop property. And if one of my neighbors Page 1 46 decides to go the chicken route, I will regret the day that we decided to buy a home 47 here. 48 12/11/2012 1:17 AMview Responses 49 5o Keep them like a dog in a kennel, this really puts a green stamp on your home. 51 12/10/2012 7:15 PMview Responses 52 53 1 have kept chickens and my neighbors never knew about it. 54 12/10/2012 6:45 PMview Responses 55 56 DO NOT WANT IT AT ALL. 57 12/10/2012 4:39 PMview Responses 58 59 There needs to be a maximum allowable ratio of animals to acreage. A five acre lot 60 can't support a hundred chickens for example. 61 12/10/2012 2:08 PMview Responses 62 63 1 would be more concerned that it would be smelly and people would not maintain 64 things as they should. If I wanted to live by a farm I would have purchased near one. It 65 would be hard to regulate. 66 12/10/2012 12:47 AMview Responses 67 68 1 would be up at every City Council meeting C O M P L A I N I N G! 69 12/10/2012 11:56 AMview Responses 70 71 My parents used to purchase a dozen or so live farm raised chickens from a country 72 farmer, and bring them to our residential home and chop their heads off in our back 73 yard, and boil them and pluck their feathers downsstairs in our home. No thought was 74 ever given to the the legality of it back in the 1950s. We had easter chickens that my 75 siblings and I got for easter when we were small children, and we intended to raise 76 them in a residential back yard pen made out of screens on old wood window frames 77 nailed together or hinged, and the neighbors around us never complained, but a dog 78 broke through the screening and had a pleasant meal out of our easter chicks that we 79 had planned to raise and eat ourselves after they were grown. I hate to deny someone 8o else that we did ourselves in a time that doesn't seem so long ago. 81 12/10/2012 11:37 AMview Responses 82 83 Farm animals belong on a farm. 84 12/10/2012 11:35 AMview Responses 85 86 Just looking at that photo doesn't say much, how close is it to the houses surrounding, 87 what's the smell like, noise? Not muc to decide on from that photo! I wouldn't want that 88 anywhere I could see, hear or smell it! 89 12/10/2012 9:51 AMview Responses 90 91 Provides organic eggs! Page 2 92 12/10/2012 9:31 AMview Responses 93 94 If you pass the ability to keep poultry then I'm getting a miniature pony. 95 12/10/2012 9:07 AMview Responses 96 97 1 would not want this messy, smelly, animal attracting nuisance near by home. I would 98 be upset and emberassed to live in a town that allowed this. I BEG of you to NOT 99 ALLOW TH IS! !!!111! 100 12/10/2012 8:34 AMview Responses 101 102 The picture example is not the style I would find acceptable in town. There are plenty 1 103 would. This looks like it is for more birds than I would feel should be accepted. 104 12/10/2012 6:34 AMview Responses 105 106 Charge a license fee for each person that does this. Also, when I owned a dog in the 107 past, my neighbors called the police at barking constantly, could neighbors call the 108 police on rooster noise as well, how would that work? Some questions to consider here 109 as each noise disturbance call to the police costs the taxpayer money.... 110 12/9/2012 2:00 PMview Responses 111 112 the only concern is sicknesses that have been associated with chicken coops including 113 respiratory illness emitted from dried poultry/ fowl feces. If the city should allow 114 expanding the ownership of poulty /fowl, they have a responsibility to ensure that all 115 people applying for a permit are educated on the handling and care of poultry /fowl. 116 There should also be high fines if one is caught not adhering to the guidelines. 117 12/9/2012 12:15 AMview Responses 118 119 Gross 120 12/8/2012 10:46 PMview Responses 121 122 i would support it as long as there were rules requiring the pen and area around the 123 coupe were kept clean. that also would require that the POO is disposed of properly 124 12/8/2012 8:02 PMview Responses 125 126 1 would be OK with "a few" animals. my neighbors lots (including mine) are roughly 1/2 127 acre lots. If he wants a goat and 2 chickens or something I wouldn't be ecstatic about it 128 but he pays his taxes and he has to put up with my monster drum set. 129 12/8/2012 5:56 PMview Responses 130 131 My property my rights as long as I comply with reasonable common since standards 132 12/8/2012 4:55 PMview Responses 133 134 How on earth do honeybees get lumped in with goats, pigeons, pot bellied pigs and 135 other wild game? I would be all for neighbors keeping honeybees, they help our 136 gardens and flowers! No thanks on the neighbors having pigs or goats. 137 12/8/2012 3:27 PMview Responses Page 3 138 139 1 am certain that most chicken owners would have much more attractive chicken coops 140 than the one shown in the picture, but I think that the novelty of having neighborhood 141 chickens outweigh the potential dislike of the pen. 142 12/812012 3:26 PMview Responses 143 144 If raising farm animals is important to them they should move out to a farm. Poultry and 145 farm animals should not be allowed in the city because of the closer housin situation. 146 12/8/2012 2:28 PMview Responses 147 148 1 don't think you want to open "THIS CAN OF WORMS "!!!! 149 12/8/2012 2:12 PMview Responses 150 151 Restrict to no less than a 5 acre lot. 152 12/8/2012 1:45 PMview Responses 153 154 Move to the "country" 155 12/8/2012 1:06 PMview Responses 156 157 1 think you open a can of worms when you allow poultry on a common city lot. 158 12/8/2012 12:54 AMview Responses 159 160 Our lots our way to small to have this be allowed. Who would be monitoring that they 161 keep them code? Is that something else we will have to pay for? 162 12/8/2012 11:54 AMview Responses 163 164 This is a great concept! Both green and cutting edge and good for children to witness. 165 As a 60 year CG resident I heartily support this. 166 12/8/2012 11:23 AMview Responses 167 168 There should be limits based on square footage to make sure the animals have 169 adequate space and are comfortable. 170 12/8/2012 10 :57 AMview Responses 171 172 If you want farm animals, move to a farm. I live in a city for a reason. 173 12/8/2012 9:19 AMview Responses 174 175 1 think they should have a limit on how many chickens they can have - -maybe only 6. 176 Also, I would like to say the example you posted for a coop and pen area is a very 177 drastic and poor example. I have seen some that look like little dwarf cottages and 178 penned in very nice. It actually enhanced the yard area. 179 12/8/2012 8:32 AMview Responses 180 181 1 love my neighborhood and do not want to see that mess of chicken wire anywhere in 182 it! Not too mention the noise and the oder. People have a hard time picking up after 183 their dog, I can't imagine them cleaning up after their poultry. Do people realize that Page 4 183 they poop all day anywhere they want? Yuck! Support a local farmer a couple of miles 184 away and buy his farm fresh eggs and chickens. 185 12/8/2012 8:23 AMview Responses 186 187 There should be restrictions of course as to the distance a coop has to be to a 188 neighbors property. It should have to be several feet from any property line - 189 12/8/2012 7:39 AMview Responses 190 191 There should be something in here that says if my dog (or cat) kills one of these things 192 because the fowl got loose it isnt the dog owners fault. Also should state that if my dog 193 or cat freaks out and barks meows at the fowl the fowl has to go, not the dog or cat 194 12/812012 7:29 AMview Responses 195 196 The picture above doesn't seem very representative of a normal coop /pen from what 197 I've seen. I'd support a more standard looking coop but not this "double- dome" cage. 1 198 don't believe hens fly so there would be no need for this type of structure. They can be 199 designed much better and are not much different than an outdoor dog house /kennel. 200 12/8/2012 7:15 AMview Responses 201 202 urban areas are not farms!!!!!!!!! 203 12/8/2012 5:42 AMview Responses 204 205 There is a distinct difference between urban and rural. These animals belong on a farm. 206 12/7/2012 11:25 PMview Responses 207 208 They would have to be kept clean and with no odor. 209 12/7/2012 11:06 PMview Responses 210 211 If someone wants to keep farm animals, they should buy a farm. 212 12/7/2012 11:01 PMview Responses 213 214 1 think the existing ordinance is fine. Minimum of 5 acres to have that type of 215 "domesticated" wildlife is fine. I would not want any neighbor of mine with an urban loft 216 to put up a coop or pen on anything less than 5 acres. 217 12/7/2012 10:43 PMview Responses 218 219 1 think if you would like to have these types of animals you should live ine the country, 220 where they don't bother anyone else. I know I would not like to hear them or smell them 221 everyday. Barking dogs are enough to deal with, I can't imagine rooster crowing in my 222 back yard too. 223 12/712012 10:35 PMview Responses 224 225 Free range Chickens in someone's back yard that is fenced in seems perfectly 226 reasonable to me. Louder animals such as roosters, ducks and geese could be very 227 disruptive to neighbors. 228 12/7/2012 10:02 PMview Responses Page 5 229 23o Animals need space. Shouldn't have to be cooped up in a small area. 231 12/7/2012 9:46 PMview Responses 232 233 1 think that it's ok if it is a farmer that farms land and has at least 5 acres or more! 234 12/7/2012 9:33 PMview Responses 235 236 1 picked 6000sgft as the minimum area to keep chickens. I'm thinking no more than two 237 per every 6000sgft. 238 12/7/2012 9:30 PMview Responses 239 240 1 hope this goes through, thoughts of moving more rural to have chickens have crossed 241 our minds 242 12/7/2012 9:24 PMview Responses 243 244 This is rediculous, should you have farm animals in a residential area... Absolutely Not!! 245 12/7/2012 9:22 PMview Responses 246 247 Chicks, ducks and other fowl make much less noise and mess than dogs! 248 12/7/2012 9:22 PMview Responses 249 250 If you want a farm , live on a farm!! Not a city street home!!!!!!! I do not want farm 251 animals right outside my damn kitchen window!!! Ugh !!!!!!!!!! 252 12/7/2012 9:06 PMview Responses 253 254 The noise, waste products, and disease potential is not acceptable. If someone wants 255 to keep what I consider to be farm animals, they should simply buy a farm. 256 12/7/2012 9 :04 PMview Responses 257 258 1 live right next door to the person trying to keep his 4 ducks. They are right under, my 259 kitchen window and I smell gross poop every time I open the window. They are so loud 260 that I can hear them throughout my whole house all the time! Especially when we are 261 outside anywhere. Because of the placement of this persons property to mine, his 262 backyard in directly the side of my house where our deck and windows are. I am also 263 concerned about the ecoli issues that go with having ducks as my children have 264 respiratory issues and 95% of ducks carry ecoli in their feces and it is injested by dust 265 particles being blown in the wind. PLEASE LEAVE THE FARM ANIMALS ON THE 266 FARM! 267 12/7/2012 8:53 PMview Responses 268 269 These are dirty noisy farm animals that belong on a farm. Not in a backyard of a city lot. 27o They would bring a whole new set of issues that our city staff. especially police officers 271 would have to deal with. 272 12/7/2012 8 :51 PMview Responses 273 Page 6 274 Go by land out in the country if you want farm animals. They are loud, smell and is 275 going to cause lots of other issues down the road! 276 12/7/2012 8:41 PMview Responses 277 278 Allowing our citizens the opportunity to raise a sustainable resource is a step in the 279 right direction for Cottage Grove. I've seen many lovely, aesthetically pleasing chicken 280 pens and coops. The photo choice seems as if it was selected to sway people's opinion 281 in a less than favorable direction. 282 12/7/2012 8:14 PMview Responses 283 284 This will totally hurt resale of properties, I would conceder selling if this happens. 285 12/7/2012 8:09 PMview Responses 286 287 Would there be an ordinance on how many animals can be present on specific land 288 areas? Will there be some kind of recommendation on pen sizes? Roosters 289 cacadoodldoo'ing each morning? I would live more in the country if I would want that. 290 1'd really prefer this ordinance to not be passed. What is the proper disposal of carcass' 291 if they are allowed to kill the birds onsite? I'd assume that some people would still defy 292 the ordinance and kill their animals on their property which to me could be disease 293 spreading. Thank you. 294 12/7/2012 8:05 PMView Responses 295 296 This is not acceptable. Please read the article attached to your fb post regarding this. 297 This is not for a city lot. This is not ok. 298 12/7/2012 7:48 PMview Responses 299 300 1 do not want any of this next to me. But, if you do allow it a limit on the number animals 3o1 has to be set. Like 4. Roosters should not be allowed. Drive a chicken or turkey farm 302 and smell it. We don't need that in a neighborhood. If you want to farm, buy a farm. 303 12/7/2012 7:39 PMview Responses 304 305 Sounds like a good idea. 306 12/7/2012 6:56 PMView Responses 307 308 1 really don't want farm animals around my home. It would be most frustrating for the 309 people who do not follow the rules and my guess is CG does not have the proper staff 310 for funding to enforce any ordinace allowing such things. Please don't allow chickens 311 nor other farm animals around here. 312 12/7/2012 6:29 PMview Responses 313 314 1 <heart> free range birds 315 12/7/2012 5:41 PMView Responses 316 317 PETA= People Eating Tasty Animals 318 12/7/2012 5:38 PMView Responses 319 Page 7 320 While there are many who who do it in compliance with the law, I have a huge concern 321 about those who will not. Can the City afford the cost/manpower to policing it? What 322 about fowl that get loose? Can animal shelters handle found birds? I think that during 323 these times of tightening government budgets, Cottage Grove cannot afford to take on 324 this additional cost. 325 12/7/2012 5:26 PMview Responses 326 327 1 think any homeowner in Cottage Grove should be allowed to keep chickens in the 328 backyard. I don't think the noise is an issue as I am sure my two small children are 329 noisier than the chickens would be. Also, I have had many occasions where my 33o neighbors have noisy dogs. I also have had neighbor cats do their business in my yard. 331 1 think raising chickens is a great way to be "green" and support raising your own food 332 and also bed educational for my children. I think of Cottage Grove as more rural than 333 suburban and I know that St Paul and Minneapolis allow for chickens in residential lots 334 so I am surprised that Cottage Grove has not allowed them up to now. 335 12/712012 5:06 PMview Responses 336 337 If I wanted to be near these animals I would live on a farm. This is the City. Not 338 acceptable. 339 12/7/2012 5:06 PMview Responses 340 341 Buy a Farm, I dont want to smell or hear these animals all day and night 342 12/712012 4:56 PMview Responses 343 344 This is ridiculus that you are even thinking about this. 345 12/7/2012 4:48 PMview Responses 346 347 The thought of a couple chickens next door doesn't bother me. But looking at the coop 348 and pen makes me feel property values would be affected. It looks trash to me. Not 349 sure how to come to terms w/ the paradox of it. 350 12/7/2012 4:46 PMview Responses 351 352 What's behind done to prevent the spread of disease bringing poultry into the city? 353 12/7/2012 4:46 PMview Responses 354 355 My aunt and uncle in laws have chickens, they are noisy, you have to have lights on 356 inside if the coop(typically ran by extension cords) which would be against state fire 357 code. This would be a horrible idea! 358 12/7/2012 4:39 PMview Responses 359 36o There needs to be a minimum lot size so the noise and smell from livestock doesn't 361 infringe on their neighbors. There's also the issue of lower saleability of a home next to 362 someone with livestock. 363 12/7/2012 4:27 PMview Responses 364 Page 8 365 Allowing chickens or geese would not hurt anyone. Everyone is so concerned about 366 what is going on in someone else's yard, worry about your own yard. Dogs can be 367 noisier and more of a problem and actually hurt people vs a few chickens or geese. 368 Please allow them, what a great educational option for parents /kids as well. Teaching 369 our youth to grow some of their own food is a wonderful idea! 370 12/7/2012 4:18 PMview Responses 371 372 Dogs barking at all hours of the night can be much worse than a few chickens. Maybe 373 don't allow roosters as they can be more noisy than chickens. People want to grow 374 their own food, let them ... it is their own backyard after all, not their neighbors or the 375 cities!!! 376 12/7/2012 4:12 PMview Responses 377 378 People should be able to put whatever they want in their backyard, so long as it is not a 379 real danger to anyone 380 12/7/2012 4:10 PMview Responses 381 382 A citizen should be allowed to keep these animals in their yard as long as they don't 383 harm their neighbors. 384 1217/2012 3:56 PMview Responses 385 386 This is not acceptable unless you have the space. I am ok with the ducks that live in a 387 pond on a residents but noisy dirty chickens no thank you! If I wanted to live near farm 388 animals I would have purchased a hobby farm. 389 12/7/2012 3:52 PMview Responses 390 391 Keeping urban animals is a detriment to the animals along with the neighbors and 392 citizens. Countless numbers of chickens and ducks are abandoned every year. We do 393 not need to add to that number in Cottage Grove. 394 12/712012 3:51 PMview Responses 395 396 If you allow chickens please lower my property taxes when my neighbor builds a 397 chicken coop. Absolutely "no ". Enforce the rules as they are written now. 398 12/7/2012 3:48 PMview Responses 399 400 They belong on a farm. 401 12/7/2012 3:46 PMview Responses 402 403 In regards to coops and fences I feel petiole just need to have at the least a fenced in 404 yard. The chickens should bee allowed to have a grassy area to run around in to bee 405 able to eat grass and bugs. Thank you for considering this. 406 12/7/2012 3:43 PMview Responses 407 408 If you pass it please limit the number of animals /chickens. I thnk it is sure to initate 409 more police calls by cranky neighbors if allowed on smaller properties. 410 12/7/2012 3:42 PMview Responses Page 9 411 412 1 think they should only be allowed if you have the space (5 or more acres) to- support 413 them, just as things are now. I did not purchase a lot in a residential neighborhood to 414 smell and look at farm animals every day! 415 12/712012 3:23 PMview Responses 416 417 Animals, when not in the coops, must have the owner right next to them in order to 418 ensure they do not find a way into others yards or injure other community members. 419 12/7/2012 3:21 PMview Responses 420 421 1 do not want to hear or smell my neighbors farm animals! If I wanted to live next to a 422 farm I would move there. I will be moving if this passes and my neighbors implement it. 423 Filthy horrid idea that will only deteriorate my property value 424 12/7/2012 3:18 PMview Responses 425 426 Allowing neighbor to keep poultry and farm animals could result in noise that would be 427 disturbng, injurious to sleep patterns and would interfere in my right to enjoy my own 428 property. 429 12/7/2012 3:18 PMview Responses 430 431 ABSOLUTELY NOT TO THIS AMMENDMENT. I grew up on a FARM in the 432 COUNTRY. That is where this kind of thing belongs. UNACCEPTABLE. PERIOD. Want 433 to see property values decrease even more? This would be the way. I want to build the 434 image of CG, not allow this to happen. 435 12/7/2012 3:17 PMview Responses 436 437 If it a farm that's cool if it's a residence I dont think so .... do what Woodbury does—case 438 closed....... 439 12/7/2012 3:14 PMview Responses 440 441 A limit should be put on the number or "for personal /family consumtion only" should be 442 apart of the ordinence. 443 12/7/2012 3:10 PMview Responses 444 445 1 think it is a good idea 446 12/7/2012 3:08 PMview Responses 447 448 There is no way I think chickens /ducks should be allowed in a traditional neighborhood. 449 The coops are very unattractive, chickens /ducks smell horrible, and they are loud. They 45o belong on a farm, not in a neighborhood! 451 12/7/2012 3:07 PMview Responses 452 453 The amount of excessive noise should be included in the ordinance, the same type of 454 policy for a dog. 455 12/7/2012 3:07 PMview Responses 456 Page 10 457 Raising out own food without hormones makes all the sense in the world... nothing 458 better that fresh eggs- Not to mention the keep the eat their weight in bugs 459 12/712012 3:03 PMview Responses 460 461 1 am ALL FOR poultry being allowed in a residential backyard but I think the number of 462 adult poultry/fowl or small farm animals should be limited if the animals are in a 463 residential lot. 464 12/7/2012 3:00 PMview Responses 465 466 If I wanted animals in my yard (or next to me), I would move out to the country - or at 467 least more land area. If my neighbor has chickens - what happens if MY dog eats one 468 or more? I do not want that responsibility. I also do not want the noise of the animals. 1 469 grew up on a farm - animals make noise and smells. 470 12/7/2012 2:59 PMview Responses 471 472 Chickens and ducks are no worse than annoying constantly barking dogs that are 473 never dealt with by the city or wandering cats. 474 12/7/2012 2:53 PMview Responses 475 Page 11 Robert Janicek 8571 Jeffery Ave S Cottage Grove, MN 55016 651- 458 -1021 October 5th, 2012 City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission 7516 80�' Street Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Dear Planning Commission et al.: I am a long -time resident of our City, and I am writing primarily to share information regarding the subject of urban chickens. Although I am a supporter of this topic, I have provided both supportive and not so supportive information in the interest of the Committee making the best informed decision possible for all residents in CG. I have also provided some humor, I'm hopeful that this effort does not offend or make light of this situation, but provide a bit of levity that seems to be often missing in our busy lifestyles. The subject of urban chicken keeping and city farming are popular topics of late, with many communities amending existing or adopting new rules for land use including the allowance of what was once considered livestock animals such as chickens. On one side of the fence (no pun intended), you have folks who immediately envision cute fuzzy chicks for their children, or who have a harkening back to their farmstead upbringing, or simply people who have an irrational fear of food borne illness and believe that keeping your own chickens for eggs somehow totally prevents this risk. On the other side of the fence you have folks that believe chickens are truly farm animals with no personality and should exclusively be treated as such and that allowing urban chicken keeping will result in people having cows and horses in their residential backyards and chickens running rampant throughout the neighborhood. Somewhere around the fence line is the truth; in fact both sides of the argument above contain blatant misinformation. If one were to research cities with existing laws the truth would probably be more on the side that urban chicken keeping does succeed and truly is of little or no impact, pro or con, on a city such as ours. I'm hopeful that the Committee can see through the emotion and above the ignorance that seems to be inherently related to this issue and see it for what it really is and that is a handful of people wanting to keep another type of non - dangerous, quiet, non - intrusive animal as a pet (with egg rewards!). The safety net for the City on this issue is revoking a potential amendment to city code; it is truly a low risk proposal with great marketing payoff and revenue generating potential. I urge the committee to make an informed decision based on facts and data, I'm confident that based on facts and data your decision will be a supportive one. I look forward to your recommendation to the Council, and politely ask that you keep me informed on this issue via email at bob @bitstream.net. Sincerely and with due respect, VZ 'i r! r,, =) OCT 0 a 2012 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE _ From: David Campbell <davelcamp @gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 5:34 PM To: John McCool Subject: Re: Planning Commission Comments - Report to City Council RE: Backyard Chicken Ord. Thank you for the update. I do not have a problem with keeping chickens. I have a problem with my neighbors keeping chickens, I have this problem because their yard is a dump.. If they were clean and their yard was maintained (to the city requirements) I would not have complained. I will not get into what I do for a living but I can assure you that I know about property valuation. Based on my years of experience in this area I can assure you that my property is worth less money and it will take me much longer to sell my home, simply because these people live next door. I have the following recommendations. 1. People who want chickens should not have a legitimate city complaint in the past 3 years. (no trash in the front yard, no high weeds...). They should have a proven track record of keeping their property in good (city acceptable) order. 2. The coop and such should comply with specific standards. I would guess that PETA or some other animal society would have good guidelines. 3. Every neighbor should have to "sign off' on the application. I have rental property next to me so I think that it is unlikely that the home owners really care. 4. The homeowner should have a 6 foot privacy fence installed to at least the standard of a professional around the whole back yard. I have no problem with the home owner installing the fence but it should be of a specific quality. 5. The homeowner should pay a fee and agree 3 or 4 inspections each year. I think that the property owner should pay enough in fees to cover this cost rather than making all of the residents pay for their "hobby ". Thanks again for keeping me in the loop. 11/26/12 To: Myron Dailey, Dotrick Lehrke, Justin Olsen, J011 Peterson, Dave Thiede, John Burbank, John. I'+/lcCool, Kathy Dennis Igor: Auttunn Carlson Hello, My name is Autui - nn Carlson, and I am a junior at Patk High School, I previously sent an email to the City council members and the mayor about the fowl in Cottage Grove tapir;, l would like to provide more information for them and the also the planning commission. I am interested and conceited about the fowl ordinance issue, 1 am opposed to allowing fowl in the city of Cottage Grove for multiple reasons including abandoned fowl, unnecessary suffering, upkeep Casts, and more. There are a few items that I would like to bring up, With every backyard hers there are roosters who are suffering. In many cities roasters are not allowed. Because roosters are not allowed they are seen as disposable and either die or suffer immensely. Also, last sunnner I found a young chicken in my Cottage Grove backyard. This chicken was bound by its legs thris having to endure suffering for an untold period of time. The cast to house chickens properly is quite a large amount, Annually individual chickens cast $288 for the extensive amount of supplies needed. On top of that there are start up costs of $3,870 acrd even more for veterinarian costs. Many families just don't have the financial means to raise chickens properly. The results of uninformed citizens can be shown in the Star Tribune article titled "Cottage Grave debates if fowl is fair ", in this article there is a picture shown of a. child who has to bend over in her chieken's coop. This is problematic because chickens are indeed binds and need vertical space to thrive in their living quarters. There would be an increasing amount of costs associated with the city of Cottage Grove to keep the rules in the ordinances upheld city wide. i would appreciate there to be an informed discussion on this topic. For that reason, I am sending some links that shave the harmful effects of a ban/suburban fowl keeping and that provide examples of what other cities have done with the issue. Thank you for your consideration, http:// w' ww. worldpoulti -y.net/Layers/1lealtb]20 1 1/ Backyard - chicken - owners - hurting-birds- 1109147W/ http: / /Wiv" s t, camllocal /backyard- Chicken -bo om-prod fowl - result- uam.i.nte.d- roosters/ 2012 11 / 23 / 4 fd39524- 33de- IIe'2- 9Cfa- e41bac906cc9 story.httnl 5/1/2012 Utne Reader Down on Their Cluck: Abandoned Iyarni Animals Fill Humane Societies staff http: / /WGvlv,utne.com/ environment /hu mane societies- znrOzl2mizros.aspx 2/1/2012 Chow .Magazine the .lark Side of Backyard Chickens Joyce Slayton http: l /Ivw�v.chow hews /104627/ the- dark-side- of- 'ba(kyard- chi htt wwNv .city /citynews /Hews /local/ardr,le/ 1329 78-- backyud- chiek d deferred- lndefhaitely Autumn Carlson 10 /10 39Vd ENDS 9NIAI 9L5189LZ99 83:06 3106 /96/1Z From: Autumn Carlson <autumnfall555 @yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 5:44 PM To: John McCool Subject: Re: Keeping of Poultry in Urban Residential Neighborhoods Hi Mr. McCool, Thank you for tracking me down and responding. I'm sorry about the email mishap. I appreciate the information regarding the meeting. I hope the links and resources I sent are useful. I will continue to look for resources that may be helpful to aid in having an informed discussion. I will reattach the links I sent before onto this email. My previous correspondence was done by fax so I don't know how many people wanted to type in all of the URL addresses to follow the links. I hope that the planning commission will realize what a detriment having poultry in the backyards of urban lots would be for the animals, neighbors, and the city. I will be attending the meeting on the 17Th. Thank you for your consideration. Here are some links to look into: Increased Demand for Placement of "Urban Farm" Animals http: / /www.chickenrunrescue.org /surrender chart.pdf Veterinary Expenses for Urban Rescues as Indicator of Poor Care http://www.chicicenrunrescue.org/vet chart.pdf Casualties of Urban Agriculture h ttp : / /www.facebook.com/media/set/ ?set =a. 10150602336545201 .676806.475016785200 &type =3 http: / /www.worldpoultry .net /Layers /Health/2012 /11 Backyard- chicken- owners - hurting- birds - 1109147W/ http: / /www.washingtonpost.cor llocallbaelcyard-chielcen- boom - produces- fowl - result- unwanted- roosters/ 2012/ 11/ 23/ 4fd39524- 33de- 11e2- 9cfa- e4lbac906cc9 story.html 5/1/2012 Utne Reader Down on Their Cluck: Abandoned Farm Animals Fill Humane Societies staff http: / /www.utne.com/environment /humane- societies -zmOz l2mjzros. aspx 2/1/2012 Chow Magazine the Dark Side of Backyard Chickens Joyce Slayton http: / /www. chow.com/food- news /104627 /the -dark- side -of- backyard- chickens/ http:// www.citytv.com/toronto /eitynews /news /local /article/182978 -- backyard- chickens- debate -defer ed- indefinitely Autumn Carlson From: Autumn Carlson <autumnfa11555 @yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2012 6:46 PM To: John McCool Subject: Autumn Carlson- Chicken Ordinance presentation Hi Mr. McCool, When a chicken flew into my yard this summer we brought it to a chicken rescue in Minneapolis that has taken in more than 800 chickens over the years. I keep in contact with them and also am a volunteer at The Chicken Run Rescue. The owner of the rescue, Mary Britton Clouse, has offered to give the Cottage Grove planning commission a similar presentation of what they were asked to give to Golden Valley Environmental Commission. They are very knowledgeable when it comes to chicken issues and ordinances. They also have written plans to use for inspection guidelines at the request of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control and St. Paul Animal Control. Having them present would add more information and ideas to the discussion. Let me know if you would want them to present at a future meeting. Thanks, Autumn Carlson This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http: / /www.sManteceloud.com From: Angel Popowitz [mailto:angelpopowitz @vahoo.com Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 5:09 PM To: John Burbank Subject: Ducks Hi there. So I was wondering what's going on with this duck situation? I read the star tribune article about this situation. I don't think you all understand that this man has no space for these ducks. His back yard backs up to the whole side of my house. His ducks are in the farthest back of his yard which is the closest to our side of our house by our deck and under our kitchen window. I wish you would come out and see where he has these ducks placed. Of course any other neighbor barely hears or sees them because he is on a corner and they are the farthest from everyone else but us! Please let me know what is happening with this!!! Thank you!! Angel Popowitz Www.angelpopowitz.blogspot.com Angelpopowitz@yahoo.com Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities November 2012 Poultry/Fowl Allowed oosters B ' tcheri g . - Qoo e e oo r W—se, tio o City mit ` Coo p Setbacks Comments Population on Urban Lot License Req. Permit Amount "Insns Req. Max. No, of Chickens o e Setbacks for Andover 30,847 No Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited accessory structures in the zoning district Lot must not be on city water or sanitary sewer. Lot must be zoned R1, R2 or R3 (Minimum lot area is 2.5 ac.) located in. Zoning Anoka 17,331 Yes No NIA N/A 4 4 No No Yes regulations for accessory structure o the Building permit inspection. 5 ft. side yard Ordinance since 2006. Do receive some complaints, but typically found compliance. zoning district located in. Ag District Ag Buildings Chickens still an ag use and allowed only in Ag Districts. Apple Valley 49,801 No Unlimited Yes City Council just re- evaluated ordinance and decided again only allow chickens in agricultural Blaine 58,331 No districts. No Yes Less than 120 sq. ft. & less than 6 ft. in height. Building permit 50 ft. from property line. Solid fence not less than 4 ft. height is required, Changed ordinance in 2011. Bloomington 83,671 Yes No N/A Only on complaint basis, 4 4 No Chickens not allowed anywhere in city. Brooklyn Center 30,204 No Considered a farm animal. * Ord. currently allows in Urban Reserve with 5 ac. minimum lot area, City is looking at amending Brooklyn Park 76,238 No Yes ordinance to allow chickens in residential neighborhoods. Coop or run must be screened by solid fence. Burnsville 60,664 Yes Yes $50 for two year permit N/A 4 4 No Only in R1A District Yes Maximum coop height is 10 ft., coop floor must be a minimum of 12 inches from Yes Minimum of 50 feet from residential structure. Min, of 10 ft. to property line. Storage of chicken feed must be in rodent proof container. ground and not greater than 12 inches. Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities November 2012 - EL Q' o a ° ° 'a s e e r o s ect o s e o (i a e s o os a B e e hoop eq a oo S a a s � B tl °S e o (boo a ae s (30 e s o a a - Chicken is a farm animal and is allowed only in Champlin 23,223 No Agricultural District. City has very little Ag zoned land. Chickens allowed in Ag District. Minimum of 2.5 acre lot area. City Council has looked at Chanhassen 23,247 No ordinances, but decided not to change ord. Lots only 15,000 sq. ft. in area. Chaska 24,002 No Animal & Fowl Ord. Agricultural distt'iet only. No ordinance. Tell people they can't have Columbia Heights 19,619 No chickens. Ordinance proposed 7 yrs. Ago but not supported by CC. Council discussed three year ago. Decided they do not want farm animals in urban Coon Rapids 61,766 No neighborhoods. Cottage Grove 34,828 No Limited by PCA Farm animal. Minimum of 5 acres of land. feedlot regs. * Being debated. Only enforce ord. based on Crystal 22,168 No * complaints received. Roof structure,1 sq. ft. of window for every 15 sq. ft. Yes, building permit Coop and pen area of floor area, must setback a Duluth 86,256 Yes Yes $10 Annual Annually 5 5 No No Yes Minimum coop required if coop is minimum of 25 ft. greater than 120 sq. and pen area ft from adjoining must not be less residential structure. than 10 sq, ft. per chicken. Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities November 2012 ou try) owl AI o 0 ce se e e o s ea o e o o C is e s o e B a e oo e e o0 5 a a o e a (�o e Minimum coop area is 2 sq. ft. Coop and attached per chicken and 5 fenced area must sq. ft. for pen. setback a minimum Attached fence area is required and must be Eagan Ea 64 456 Yes Yes $50 annual) Initial and annual 5 5 No No Yes Coop and pen With building permit. g y inspections. must be of 10 feet from rear completely enclosed. Eggs cannot be sold. connected and lot line and 5 feet fro m side lot line. completely enclosed. Chickens only allowed in rural areas and only if Eden Prairie 61,151 No legally non-conforming use. CC is discussing honeybee in urban neighborhoods. Chickens considered livestock. Livestock Edina 48,262 No prohibited in residential districts. Elk River 23,101 No Minimum lot area is 5 acres. Enforce only if complaint received. Has been an Faribault 23,409 No issue of discussion, but not widely supported, Planning Commission recommended ord. CC denied ord. amendment because they do not Farmington 21,369 No believe chickens should be in urban residential districts. Allowed only in agricultural districts with a Forest Lake 18,591 No minimum of five acres with a minimum of two grazable acres. 50 feet from all Fridley 27,515 Yes Yes $100 annual Annually None N/A N/A Determined in the Yes None Yes residential review process structures In process of evaluating. Probably Feb. 2013 Golden Valley 20,427 No* direction from CC will be given. Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities November 2012 (3oop.lns echo o (3o e City _ op a io 0 0 o e a s e e i o s e e o of Chickens a u a e gjd9 0 0 _ - e _ 4 per acre and a 4 per acre and a 25 ft. setback from One acre minimum. Food container required. Hastings 22,217 No Yes minimum of one minimum of one No Not addressed Yes Solid floor Yes property line 350 ft, mailed notice. School, museum or acre of land. acre of land. agricultural uses only. Fence required. Hopkins 17,701 No Only if complaint 25 feet from Agricultural Districts only. Minimum of 1,76 acre Inver Grove 33,774 No Yes Yes property lines parcel. Considered ordinance in 2011 but no received Heights action taken. Unlimited in Ag Unlimited in Ag Chickens allowed in Ag District with a minimum of Lakeville 56,534 No District but 10 acre District but 10 Yes Yes 10 acres of land. minimum acre minimum Minimum of 10 acres and in Rural, Rural Lino Lakes 20,505 No Executive, and Rural Business Districts. Max. # of hens Max. # of hens Accessory structure Maple Grove 62,436 No 12 chickens per ac. and roosters is and roosters is setback for Ag Allowed in Ag District with a 1.5 acre minimum. 12 per ac. 12 per ac. district. Interior floor Leg banding required for each chicken. Climate At time of license space a minimum 5 ft. from rear and control maintained between 32 -85 degrees Maplewood 38,374 Yes Yes $75 per year approval and 10 10 No No Yes of 4 sq. ft. per side property lines. Fahrenheit. Runs a minimum of 10 sq. ft, per renewals. bird. Minimum bird. height 6 ft. — Minimum of one acre for farm animals. Minnetonka 50,0464 No restrictions. If complaints received, they New Brighton 21,496 Yes No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No None No None determine if action is necessary. $0 for up to 3 Accessory structure Can apply to get permit for more than 3 poultry /fowl. No N/A Building permit. setback for zoning New Hope 20,486 Yes Yes No 3 3 No No poultry /fowl. $75 for 4 or district located in. more. 25 feet from any Wire fencing in pen must be a minimum of 18 Unlimited but inches above the ground. Chickens must be kept Northfield 20,454 Yes No N/A N/A requires a minimum 6 No N/A Yes N/A N/A residential structure in covered structure or fenced enclosure at all of 5 acres. on adjacent lot. times. Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities November 2012 t o e o eq r e Coo a ar s (ioo I s ea o (boo e a ommen, s.. f3 0 0 a Lo ae e e it ou eat o s a o o a e o e oos a e 9 tl Pe i Setbacks for Depends on size of Depends on size If approved by No Yes None Building Permit for accessory structure 75 % of owners /occupants within 150 feet. Oakdale 27,538 Yes Yes No fee. Periodically lot, of lot. neighbors. accessory structures. in the zoning district for property. ---- - - - - -- - - - - - -- Based on State Rural arias only' Plymouth 71,263 No Statute Prior Lake 23,01-0 No 10 ft. from property Lot size determine how man chickens. Ramsey 23,865 Yes No N/A Upon complaints 6 6 No No Yes None Building Permit line. y Proposed Ord. Proposed Ord. Proposed Ord. Proposed Ord. * Started process to amend ordinance. Richfield 35,376 Yes * No N/A N/A 3 3 Yes No Amendment Amendment Amendment Amendment Coop floor a Minimum of 75 feet minimum of 12 from adjoining Must obtain written permission from neighbors inches and not residential shows yards border the property. Maximum loft Rosemount 22,139 Yes Yes $25 annually N/A 3 3 No N/A Yes more than 24 Yes structures and a height is six feet. Must screen loft or coop from inches above minimum of 10 from view by fencing or evergreen plantings. ground. property line. 5 ft. from property Roseville 33,807 Yes No N/A N/A No limit No limit Yes N/A No No Building Permit line and 6 ft. from Not regulated. house Savage 27,147 No Only in Rural or Ag Districts Shakopee 37,652 No 30 feet from Shoreview 25,118 Yes $30 for two years 2 years At the time permit is 4 4 No N Yes Yes residential issued. structures South St Paul 20,275 No 31 Buts Pak 45,505 No Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities November 2012 _ Goo sea o 0o e a s o e 0 0 0 o ba o ee s e e o ec e a o. o e e o e Coop and pen 3 ft. side and rear No chickens in the house. Must provide a secure Not yet Every two Yes must equal at Yes yard setback and 6 and well ventilated roofed structure. An attached Stillwater 18,299 Yes Periodically 5 5 No No least 10 sq. ft. of ft. from other determined years. structures. pen and protective overhead netting is required. area per chicken. A minimum of five acres is required. West St Paul 19,605 No Council voted it down two years ago. White Bear Lake 23,820 No Chickens allowed on five or more acres of tared, Woodbury 63,143 No 52 Communities Surveyed 17 Communities (33)% allow poultry /fowl on urban residential lots 35 Com nn s (67 0 /6) ;psrobli bft -poutttygowl on urban ± Id-ential lots Five communities in the process of evaluating ordinances.