Loading...
7-30-12 Agenda PacketAGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Managers Room, Monday, July 30, 2012 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — June 25, 2012 3. Section 10.32 Study A. Discussion with Officer Keith Streff from the Animal Humane Society B. Discussion with Todd Carey of the St. Paul Animal Control C. Ordinance Review From Other Cities 4. Program/Project Updates (Staff) a) TMDL b) 1/1 c) Private Development Update d) Decola Ponds e) Recycling Update f) Wetland Management g) Bottineau Transitway 5. Commission Member Council Reports (Commissioners) 6. Other Business 7. Adjourn GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes June 25, 2012 Present: Commissioners Tracy Anderson Rich Baker, Dawn Hill, Debra Yahle; Jeannine Clancy, Public Works Director; Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer; and Lisa Nesbitt, Administrative Assistant Absent: Commissioners Lynn Gitelis (attended via conference call), Jim Stremel, Damon Struyk 1. Call to Order % Baker called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. AAAAAA0� 2. Approval of Regular Meeting Mi MOVED by Hill, seconded by Yahle, and approve the minutes of the May 21, 20y 3. Section 10.32 Study Bob Lies, owner of EggPlant Urban Far1y, , his experiences in urban far Les Lars0r3 Chairman of the Ordinance ommittee' spoke to the commission abou ence rai shared his experience in reviewi o ordin Both presentation, -file and p Q&A Staff handed o , -ring keeping the stuc� 4 I ern Reff CI / P ori'' %thewes, duetoos$2dable de $100 to *� detract re period and" ore close supported a/��ease in ,irrsminized. to ea( al 2012 ;,unanimously to Itto the co` sion about ng Commissi end the City of Oakdale, also chickens. Additionally he for the City of Oakdale. edlftp rate ly. ich will assist in has psi' d%"d/ 0 additional buck thorn removal of the pry am. The current program requires a e:/// quested that the deposit be increased to fr eeping them beyond the seven-day lending ever the cost of the wrench. The commission deposit. 5. Program/ g ft dates Summary on file Ad / ally: 1/1— There has been some concern expressed over certificates issued in 2006 as a part of the 2007 PMP. The certificates issued in 2006 were for sump pump and foundation drain inspections only and were valid for only one year. Bottineau — At the June 19, 2012 City Council meeting, a resolution to support the Locally Preferred Alternative plan through Brooklyn Park, Crystal and Golden Valley failed by a vote of 3-2. 6. Commission Member Council Reports Wirth CAC meeting summary on -file. Minutes of the Environmental Commission June 25, 2012 Page 2 of 2 Baker attended a meeting with the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and Golden Valley staff regarding general areas of common interest and how best to work together on these areas. Baker received a letter from a resident regarding bluebird houses in public areas. Clancy gave the Commission background on the request to put bluebird houses in the City right-of-way. Baker will respond to the resident. Anderson attended the public hearing for the Bottineau trail. 7. Other Business Commissioners were reminded that the next meeting will be July 30tH 8. Adjourn MOVED by Hill, seconded by Anderson, and the motion carried to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be July 30, 2012 at 7 pm. Bob Lies (EggPlant) and Les Larson — Q&As from June 25th Presentation Bob Lies Presentation Hill Q — It seems like you have opposing statements — having chickens for pets and having them as a source for meat. A — When people come to our class we ask them right away, to identify their feelings about the bird. Is this a farm animal for you, is it going to produce eggs for you and then in two years you're going to process it and eat it? Is this a pet to you, in which case you are not going to eat it. Most people that come in are interested only in getting a few hens that will lay eggs. Some people do come in to get boiler chickens that will be used for meat and that is a whole other process. Baker Q — So when you explain to the audience that they only lay eggs for a small portion of their life then they are forced to face the dilemma of the idea of getting eggs but they don't want to slaughter the chickens. How do they deal with that? A — People are on different sides of that question. There is a woman that owns Chicken Run Rescue and she is opposed to eating chickens or their eggs. We are not opposed to eating the eggs or the chickens. Most people want laying eggs and do not understand their lifespan and the problems they might encounter. We pose the question to them "Are you the kind of person that will take a $5 chicken to the vet?" You need to know the answer to that question before you get a bird. Clancy Q — When a chicken lays eggs do you just refrigerate them until you want to use them? A — You can. That is the safest thing to do. Baker Q — I'm assuming the costs shown for the coop don't include energy costs which I assume can be substantial? A — It can be substantial. So if you have 60 or 100 watt heater in there running all the time it adds up. Q — What is the rule of thumb that you use for square foot per bird? A — St. Paul recently changed their policy based on recommendations from the U of M. Inside the building it should be 4 sq. ft. per bird, which is a reasonable amount. So in a 3x4 box you can have 3 birds. The run is 8-10 sq. ft. per bird. Hill Q — The fact that you keep the food and water outside of your coop is your personal preference, not a requirement right? A — Yes. Q — How does heating work? A — There are a couple of ways to go at it. It you insulate adequately you can get back without any heat. (Les) I have a very well insulated coop and pay only $5/month go heat it. (Lies) His is a very well -conceived coop, most people wouldn't be able to get by with only a $5 bill. I know I don't. When I built my coop I did not insulate. We have a heat lamp we keep in the coop. There are also radiant heaters which are a little more expensive. Insulation is the cheapest way. The heat lamp also serves as light in the winter. Birds need 16 hours of light per day or they stop laying eggs. You also need to heat the water. Q — How effective is to have to get your neighbors consent? Are the talking points in your class a way for people to be able to sell their neighbors on the idea? A — Sure. Mostly because you avoid a lot of problems if you just have a conversation with your neighbors about it. If people don't know what you're doing, they feel like you're doing something illegal. Q — We have a pretty high profile study so I expect people will know one way or another if someone has chickens in their yard but there are lots of ordinances on the books that aren't followed. Having to get consent might be tough. A — Minneapolis and St. Paul require a certain percentage of the people within a certain distance. You can require notification without certification so you don't need to get signatures but you would be obligated to send out a postcard. The signature portion just serves as proof that the notification did occur. Q — Do you ever talk people out of raising chickens? A — No. I'm an advocate and I think it is a doable thing but there are a lot of considerations. I just try to give people all the information they need to make the decision. Anderson Q — In St. Paul you aren't allowed to have roosters so what do they do when they get a rooster? A — We have an arrangement with a farm store for them to take the roosters. There is a market for roosters. Hill Q — If Minneapolis had it to do over again, do you have a sense that they would ban roosters? A — It surprises me that they allow it. Strictly speaking, they aren't necessary. Not allowing roosters is not a hardship for anyone. Les Larson Presentation Baker Q — Have you heard of a city that requires that you contact 100% of your neighbors but only require consent from a subset? A — The ordinance in Oakdale is that everyone within 100 -feet of my property line has to be contacted but I only need 75% of them to consent. (Lies) That is the way it is in Minneapolis as well. Q — What is your back-up plan in a power outage? A — I don't really need one because of my coop. (Lies) It hasn't happened yet but if it did I would bring out water. Frankly, if it is 20 below and there was a power outage I would be more worried about my own survival. The chickens will be fine. It is much easier for them to stay warm in the winter than cool in the summer. Anderson Q — One of the concerns I hear is the fear of hearing a neighbor slaughter chickens in their backyard. Did you allude to the fact that the farm supply place you spoke of earlier, would slaughter the chickens for you? A — (Lies) No, they will take your rooster and find a home for it. Any municipality will prohibit slaughter on your own property. There are a small number of processors that will process the chicken for you. There is one in South St. Paul. Hill Q — Do you know of an ordinance where a class is required? A — (Larson) We're talking about that in Oakdale. Q — (to Lies) Is there an equivalent of what you do in other cities? A — In St. Paul animal control is asking the same question. The inspector we work with would like to attend our class to see if that should be required. Having a mandatory educational component is not a bad idea. The U of M has resident experts. They don't offer classes to the public but it is another avenue. Q — Can you tell us where you are with the ordinance? You gave us the model from Maplewood with questions for Oakdale. Oakdale hasn't done anything with the ordinance yet? A — No, we're just doing it now. We've been content with the ordinance up to now but we're going to try to nail it down a little tighter? Q — Any big changes coming? A — No, not in Oakdale. Q — Is there an acreage requirement? A — No, we don't. That isn't a bad way to do it however. Q — How many people have permits for chickens, in St. Paul A — (Lies) I don't know but there are many hundreds in Minneapolis. cityof golden, valley Public works Department 763-593-8030 / 763-593-3988 (fax) . g s Date: July 24, 2012 To: Golden Valley Environmental Commission From: Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer Subject: Speakers for July 30, 2012 Meeting .:sem , < :Kx�y..,:. xrs, ,r,, , . ;" Officer Keith Streff with the Humane Investigations Department of the Animal Humane Society has more than 25 years of experience in the investigation and enforcement of animal welfare laws. He has extensive knowledge in the language and structure of animal -related ordinances. He will be in attendance during the July meeting to present information pertaining to animal welfare and to field questions relating to ordinances and ordinance development. In addition, Todd Carey of the St. Paul Animal Control will be present to discuss the City of St. Paul's chicken ordinance. He is a field officer that responds to many of the complaints and concerns that residents have. Bryanna Vidden, a former planning intern for the City, prepared a memo for the Commission that includes general ordinance research. This research includes ordinance summaries of four cities, including New Hope, Robbinsdale, Shoreview, and St. Anthony. Please find the memo enclosed. Also enclosed with this memo is a working document that takes a more in-depth look at a number of local ordinances. This document has received "balloon" comments from staff so that key points of the ordinances are more apparent. The League of Minnesota Cities' provisions for writing a chicken ordinance are also included. Attachments G:\Environmental Comm ission\Memos\EC_Memo_Ju1y2012.docx TABLE OF CONTENTS CityCodes......................................................................................................................................................1 Leagueof Minnesota Cities.......................................................................................................................1 Cityof Edina - Prohibited...........................................................................................................................3 Cityof Minneapolis - Allowed...................................................................................................................4 Cityof St. Paul -Allowed ...........................................................................................................................6 Cityof Plymouth - Prohibited..................................................................................................................10 Cityof Burnsville -Allowed .....................................................................................................................11 Cityof Shoreview - Allowed....................................................................................................................12 City of St Louis Park - Prohibited.............................................................................................................13 Cityof Robbinsdale - Allowed.................................................................................................................14 Cityof New Hope - Allowed....................................................................................................................15 Cityof St Anthony - Allowed...................................................................................................................17 League of Minnesota Cities 1. Section II, Header A - "Drafting the ordinance" a. When deciding how to handle animal -related issues, the city may select the solution it sees as the best fit (so long as it is reasonable) even if it is not the same method used in other cities or what other people might see as more appropriate. b. The city should make sure it has the people, resources, interest, and capability to enforce any ordinance it adopts. The city should also consider the unique aspects of animal regulations, such as catching or seizing animals, impounding animals, destroying animals, and other similar issues that arise when dealing with animals. 2. Section II, Header B — "Making Distinctions between animals" a. There may be many distinctions that have a reasonable basis. Some common distinctions are: i. Farm animals from pet animals ii. Police dogs from other dogs iii. Service animals from other animals iv. Zoo ownership of wild animals from private ownership of wild animals 3. Section III, Header B — "Responsibilities" a. Animal owners also have responsibilities for their animal. Some of the common responsibilities are to: i. Obtain the appropriate license, if any, from the city and satisfy all requirements related to obtaining and maintaining the license. ii. Treat their animals humanely iii. Maintain control of their animal and comply with applicable nuisance ordinances, such as not allowing the animal to run at large, not allowing their animal to be excessively noisy, etc. 4. Section IV, Header B, Section 4 — "Disposing of Animal Carcasses" a. State law provides that the animal should be buried at a depth that will prevent scavenging by other animals, burning the carcass, or by other approved methods. b. Some cities prohibit the burning of carcasses, particularly by burning them in a wood burner or boiler. Section IV, Header B, Section 6 — "Slaughtering" a. Cities generally have the authority to regulate slaughtering within the city. Many cities prohibit slaughtering of animals in city limits, unless the location is a slaughterhouse or similar establishment or is in a particularly zoned area. However, cities need to be careful in drafting and enforcing ordinances on slaughtering of animals so that the ordinance is not used to target religious slaughtering or sacrificing of animals. 6. Section V, Header B — "Humane Care" C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\K62B97PO\City Ord ina nces_Guide.docx - 1 - a. When looking into whether an animal is being treated inhumanely, cities should keep in mind that different animals, and different breeds of animals, may have different needs and different thresholds. Otherwise, an owner may challenge a citation for animal cruelty on the basis that the ordinance was applied to him or her arbitrarily. 7. Section V, Header F — "Cleaning up Animal Waste" a. Many cities also have an ordinance that requires people to pick up animal waste. The point is to prevent animal waste from accumulating or entering storm drains, which could lead to a variety of livability and health-related concerns. 8. Section VIII, Header C, Section 2 — "Chickens" a. There are no state laws that address urban chickens or keeping of chickens in cities, so it is up to the city council to decide if it wants to regulate the keeping of chickens. The city may choose to allow, allow if a permit is obtained from the city, or prohibit urban chickens. The city can do this in a number of ways, including regulation under the general animal or farm animal ordinance or by passing an ordinance specific to keeping chickens. b. If the city does choose to regulate the keeping of urban chickens, some common requirements are: i. Allowing only hens (no roosters) ii. Limiting the number of hens allowed iii. Maintaining coops or runs in a sanitary and humane condition iv. Keeping chickens contained or under control at all times v. Locating coops a certain distance from property lines and other structures like houses. C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ord inances_Guide.dou - 2 - City of Edina - Prohibited Animal. Without limitation, livestock, rodents, dogs, cats, birds, reptiles and other animals. Livestock. Farm animals kept for use, pleasure or profit, including, without limitation, horses, mules, sheep, goats, cattle, swine and ;fowl.' 300.09 Keeping of Certain Animals Regulated. No person shall keep any rabbits, mice, hamsters, guinea pigs or other rodents, ferrets or any bird on any premises used for residential purposes except in a metal cage so constructed that it may be completely and easily cleaned and that the animal or animals kept therein are completely enclosed and protected from children and animals on the outside. Such animals at all times shall be kept within the dwelling or an accessory building. 300.10 Animal Enclosure. Any animal enclosure, whether now existing or hereafter constructed, shall not exceed 300 square feet in area and shall be placed only in the rear yard and no closer than 20 feet to any property line.', 300.11 Keeping of Certain Animals Prohibited. No person shall keep within the City: A. Any livestock. B. Any mammal belonging to the order of Carnivore except dogs, cats and ferrets. For the purposes of this paragraph, the bloodline of an individual animal must comprise not less than 51 percent domestic breeds. C. Honeybees and apiaries. D. Venomous snakes. C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content,Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx - 3 - Comment [ESeaburgl]: Fowl is listed under Livestock category Comment [ESeaburg2]: Birds allowed for j residential purposes only but must be kept in a metal cage at all times Comment [ESeaburg3]: Few limitations to Animal Enclosures Comment [ESeaburg4]: coop must be less than 300 sf and no closer than 20' to a property line Comment [ESeaburg5]. All Livestock is---�D L prohibited City of Minneapolis - Allowed 70.10. - Permit required. . (a) No person shall anywhere in the city keep, harbor, or maintain care, custody, or control over any small animal or any fowl such as a chicken, turkey, duck, or pigeon, without obtaining a -- —� permit issued by Minneapolis Animal Care and Control. Comment [ESeaburg6]: Permit required for - any number of chickens (b) The Manager of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control may grant permit pursuant to this section after the applicant has sought the written consent of at least eighty (80) percent of the occupants of the several descriptions of real estate situated within one hundred (100) feet of the applicant's real estate. Such written consent comment [ESeaburg7]: a0r of neighbors - within 100' of applicants real estate shall be required on the initial application and as often thereafter as the Manager of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control deems necessary. (c) EE (e) (f) FE No permit shall be granted to keep any animal, fowl, or pigeon within a dwelling unit or part thereof, nor on any real estate which contains three (3) or more dwelling units' This section shall not apply to dogs, cats, ferrets, or rabbits nor to veterinarians or licensed pet shops or licensed kennels. Application for permit. Any person desiring a permit under this chapter shall make written application to Minneapolis Animal Care and Control Approval of application is subject to conditions prescribed by Minneapolis Animal Care and Control. Failure to adhere to conditions is cause for cancellation of the permit and/or result in an administrative fine. Duration of permit. All permits issued shall expire on January 31 of the following year after its issuance unless sooner revoked. The application fee for such permit shall be fifty dollars ($50.00) which shall be paid at the time of application. The Comment [ESeaburg8]: Tries to limit to single l family homes annual renewal fee thereafter for such permit shall be forty dollars ($40.00). Comment [Eseaburg9]: $50 permit application - - - Minneapolis Animal Care and Control will inspect the premise annually oras fee, and $40 annual renewal fee. Annual Inspections deemed necessary. Five-year permit. The fee for a five-year permit will be one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00). All five-year permits issued shall expire on January 31 of the year I comment [ESeaburg10]: 5 -year Renewal Fee following the fifth year after its issuance unless sooner revoked. Minneapolis Option. Annual Inspections 111 C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ord i na nces_Guide.docx - 4 - (h) Animal Care and Control will inspect the premise annually or as deemed necessary. Refusal to grant permit. Minneapolis Animal Care and Control may refuse a rco.me.c [eseatmr 11]: A«ePttne right to e permits permit to keep or maintain animals or fowl hereunder for failure to comply with— — the provisions of this chapter, and shall refuse a permit if such animals or fowl should not be kept upon the premises described in the application for the permit. If any such permit is refused, the fee paid with the application shall be retained by Minneapolis Animal Care and Control. C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx - 5 - City of St. Paul - Allowed Sec. 198.02. - Permits required; exceptions. (a) N Hoofed animals. No person shall stable, keep or permit any hoofed animal to remain on any lot or premises within the city without a permit. Small animals and birds of the orders Anseriformes and Galliformes. No person shall keep or permit more than one (1) live rabbit, or any mink, ferret, female chicken, turkey, duck, goose or pigeon or similar small animal or bird, in any dwelling or on the same lot or premises with a dwelling or other premises within the city without a permit. This paragraph does not apply to any single dove or any Comment [ESeaburg12]: 11 avowed a permit. other small bird, or any chinchilla, hamster, gerbil, white rat, mouse or guinea pig without permit, more than 1 requires maintained as a pet. Sec. 198.03. - Keeping of certain animals absolutely prohibited; exceptions..` (a) Prohibited animals. No person shall keep, maintain, sell or harbor within the City of Saint Paul any of the following animals: (1) Any animal or species prohibited by federal or Minnesota law. (2) Any exotic animal or species when kept in such numbers or in such a way as to constitute a likelihood of harm to the animals themselves, to human beings or to the property of human beings, or which constitutes a public or private nuisance. (3) Any skunk, whether captured in the wild, domestically raised, descented or not descented, vaccinated against rabies or not vaccinated against rabies. (4) Any regulated animal obtained after January 1, 2005. (5) Any member of the family Canidae, such as wolves, dingoes, coyotes and jackals, except domesticated dogs. (6) Any crossbreed such as the crossbreed between dogs and coyotes and dogs and wolves. (7) Any raccoon. (8) Any red -eared turtle (Pseudemys scriptae-legans) with a shell length of less than four (4) inches. (9) Any sugar glider (Petauras breviceps). (10) Any male chicken (rooster).'', comment [Ueaburgl3]: Roosters NOT allowed Sec. 198.04. - Permit; application, procedures, term and fee.. — C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.dou - 6 - (a) Application. Any person desiring a permit required under the provisions of section 198.02 shall make written application therefor to the environmental health officer upon a form prescribed by and containing such information as required by the environmental health officer. Among other things, the application shall contain the following information: (1) iA description of the real property upon which it is desired to keep the animal or animals. (2) The species and number of animals to be maintained on the premises. (3) A statement that the applicant/permittee will at all times keep the animals in accordance with all the conditions prescribed by the environmental health officer, or modification thereof, and that failure to obey such conditions will constitute a violation of the provisions of this chapter and grounds for cancellation of the permit. (4) Such other and further information as may be required by the environmental health officer. (b) Consent. The applicant for any permit required under the provisions of section 198 02 shall provide with the application the written consent of !,seventy-five (75) percent of the owners or occupants of privately or publicly owned real estate within one hundred fifty (150) feet of the outer boundaries of the premises for which the permit is being requested or, in the alternative, proof that applicant's property lines are one hundred fifty (150) feet or more from any structure. However, where a street separates the premises for which the permit is being requested from other neighboring property, no consent is required from the owners or occupants of property located on the opposite side of the street'. Where a property within one hundred fifty (150) feet consists of a multiple dwelling, the applicant need obtain only the written consent of the owner or manager, or other person in charge of the building. (c) Fees; term of permit. For all permits issued hereunder, the fee shall be established by ordinance as provided in section 310.09(b) of the Legislative Code. The term of the permit shall be one (1) year from date of issuance, and the permit may be renewed from year to year with payment of an additional fee, established by ordinance as provided in section 310.09(b) of the Legislative Code, upon application to the environmental health officer; provided, however, that upon any adverse action or violation of the conditions of the permit or substantial amendment to the permit application as originally described, a new application, fee and investigation may be required before the granting of a permit or renewal thereof. (d) Investigation by environmental health officer,- may grant permit. The environmental health officer shall make such investigation as is necessary and may grant, deny or refuse to renew any application for permit under this chapter. (e) Permit; conditions. If granted, the permit shall be issued by the environmental health officer and shall state the conditions, if any, imposed upon the permittee for the C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx - 7 - - _ _ ---- __ .. ------ Comment [ESeaburg14]: Detailed description of setup and birds for permit application j - - - rComment [ESeaburgl5]: 75% approval within 150' of property lines Comment [ESeaburgl6]: Approval not L required for properties across the street Comment [ESeaburgl7]: Permit last one year 1 -and be renewed annually Comment [ESeaburg18]: Health officer reviews and rants denies permits_ - keeping of animals under the permit. The permit shall specify the restrictions, limitations, conditions and prohibitions which the environmental health officer deems reasonably necessary to protect any person or neighboring use from unsanitary conditions, unreasonable noise or odors, or annoyance, or to protect the public health and safety. Such permit may be modified from time to time or revoked by the environmental health officer for failure to conform to such restrictions, limitations or prohibitions. Such modification or revocation shall be effective from and after ten (10) days following the mailing of written notice thereof by certified mail to the person or persons keeping or maintaining such animals. (f) Refusal to grant or renew a permit. The environmental health officer may refuse a permit to keep or maintain animals hereunder for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, if the facilities for the keeping of the animals are or become inadequate for their purpose, if the conditions of the permit are not met, if a nuisance condition is created, or if the public health and safety would be unreasonably endangered by the granting of such permit. (g) Numbers of animals; species. The permit shall state the maximum number and species of animals which may be maintained on the premises. The permittee shall not exceed the maximum number of animals allowed on the permit or substitute the animals with different species. A permittee that wishes to increase the number of animals allowed or to substitute or add a different species to those listed on the permit, Ishall be required to apply for a new permit and pay the appropriate fee. (C.F. No. 95-520, § 1, 6-7-95; C.F. No. 97-285, § 4, 4-9-97) Sec. 198.05. - Rules and regulations; conditions of permits. . (a) Rules and regulations. The environmental health officer shall promulgate rules and regulations prescribing the general conditions, limitations and prohibitions applicable to the keeping of animals or classes of animals under permits granted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. Such rules and regulations, and any amendments thereto, are effective twenty (20) days after filing with the city clerk. (b) Special conditions. The environmental health officer may prescribe specific conditions, limitations and prohibitions pertaining to the keeping of particular animals under any permit granted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter as the environmental health officer deems reasonably necessary to protect any person or neighboring use from unsanitary conditions, unreasonable noise or odors, or annoyance, or for the control of rodents and insects, or to protect the public health and safety. (C.F. No. 97-285, § 5, 4-9-97) Sec. 198.055. - Regulated animal registration..,' (a) Within 60 days after January 1, 2005, a person who possesses a regulated animal must notify in writing the animal control officer using a registration form prepared by C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx - 8 - Comment [ESeaburg19]: New permit if l applicant wants more birds in the future AN the Minnesota Animal Control Association and approved by the board of animal' " health. The notification shall include the person's name, address, telephone number, and a complete inventory of each regulated animal that the person possesses. The inventory shall include the following information: number and species of each regulated animal; the microchip number and manufacturer for each regulated animal if available; the exact location where each regulated animal is kept; and age, sex, color, weight, scars, and any distinguishing marks of each regulated animal. A certificate of registration shall be issued to the possessor upon payment of the .m." registration fee, and if necessary, the site inspection fee. Fees for registration and` A4 site inspections shall be in the amounts as set forth in 4 310.18 _, J (b) A person who possesses a regulated animal must notify animal control in writing within ten (10) days of a change in address or location where the regulated animal is kept. a �. (c) A person with a United States Department of Agriculture license for regulated animals shall forward a copy of the USDA inspection report to animal control within thirty (30) days of receipt of the inspection report. (d) If a person who possesses a regulated animal has a microchip implanted in the '34 Wql animal for identification, the name of the microchip manufacturer and the k identification number of the microchip must be provided to the local animal control authority. If a regulated animal is sedated for any reason and the animal does not have a microchip implanted, a microchip must be implanted in the regulated animal. Within thirty (30) days after the microchip is implanted, the name of the microchip a. manufacturer and the identification number of the microchip must be provided to the. tri local animal control authority. A person selling or transferring ownership of offspring under six (6) months of age as provided in Minn. Stat. § 346.155, subd. 2, para. (e), is encouraged to have a microchip implanted in the animal prior to the sale or transfer. Within 30 days of acquisition, a person acquiring ownership of an offsprings with a microchip implanted shall comply with microchip information reporting requirements under this section. .. Y4 k t� � ,r,y •,'S� ,� st C:\Users\Inesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\K62B97P0\City Ordinances_Guide.docx - 9 - a: _ }• z m City of Plymouth - Prohibited REFERRED TO IN ZONING ORDINANCE Subd. 7. "Animal' shall mean all living creatures, not human, endowed with sensation and power of voluntary movement, and includes mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles. (b)Farm Animals. Cattle, hogs, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, horses! (including Comment [ESeaburg2o]:Chickens are miniatures) and other animals commonly accepted as farm animals in the State of classified as farm animals Minnesota. (Amended by Ord. No. 2008-09, 03/25/08) 21170.01. KEEPING ANIMALS: The following animals may be kept in the City: Subd. 1. Domestic animals are allowed in all zoning districts, as regulated by Chapter 9 of the City Code. Subd. 2. In all residential zoning districts except FRD, the raising or keeping of animals of any type for slaughter is prohibited. Subd 3. The keeping of horses, including miniature horses, is an allowed use in the FRD district provided: a. The minimum lot size is two and one half (2.5) acres b. The number of horses does not exceed one (1) per acre to a maximum of six (6) horses, unless a higher number is granted by the issuance of an interim use permit. Subd. 4. 'Except as provided in the FRD district, farm animals (including miniatures) are prohibited in the City. Furthermore, any pen, pasture, paddock, feedlot or building designed to confine a farm animal shall be located not less than one hundred (100) feet away from any residential dwelling that is not owned or leased by the person owning the farm animal. Subd. 5. Animals being kept as part of the Minnesota Zoological Gardens, St. Paul Como Zoo, or similar institutional docent programs are an allowed use in all zoning districts by administrative permit. Prior to permit issuance, the participant in the program shall notify the Zoning Administrator in writing of their participation in the program and identify all animals being kept. Subd. 6. No animal feedlots shall exceed six (6) animal units as defined by Minnesota Rules 7020.0300, Subd. 5. (Amended by Ord. No. 2009-07, 05/12109) Subd. 7. Animals may only be kept for commercial purposes if authorized in the zoning district where the animals are located. Subd. 8. Animals may not be kept if they cause a nuisance as defined by the City Code or endanger the health or safety of the community. Subd 10. The keeping of wild animals shall be regulated in accordance with Section 915.29 of the City Code. C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx- 10 - Comm Eten�[ Seaburg2l]: Farm animals are prohibited in the City except for Future Restricted Development District (FRD) City of Burnsville - Allowed 6-2-3: LICENSE REQUIRED:t No person shall own, harbor or keep within the city a dog, cat, ferret or hen chicken over four (4) months of age unless a current license for such dog, cat, ferret or chicken; has been obtained as comment [ESeaburg221: Permit required for herein provided. Licenses shall be issued on a biennial basis and shall be for the whole of or chickens, good for two years unexpired portion of the two (2) year license period ending on December 31. (Ord. 1153, 3-17-2009) '6-2-31: CHICKENS WITHIN CITY LIMITS: Comment[ESeaburg23]: Most emphasis in -------------- --- ---- ---- -- ------ ordinance is around shelter and setbacks. (A) Confinement: Every person who owns, controls, keeps, maintains or harbors hen chickens must keep them confined on the premises at all times in a chicken coop or chicken run while in the city. Chickens are not allowed to be located in any part of the home and/or garage. (B) Chicken Coops And Chicken Runs: Comment [ESeaburgM]: see bullets 1-8 for l setback requirements 1. Any chicken coop and run fencing must be consistent with building and zoning codes. 2. No chicken coop or run shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building. 3. Chicken coops and runs shall not be in the front or side yard. 4. Any chicken coop or run shall be set back at least fifty feet (50') from any residential structure on any adjacent lots and ten feet (10') from the property line. 5. Any coop or run shall be screened from view with a solid fence or landscaped buffer with a minimum height of four feet (4'). 6. All chicken coops must have a maximum size of ten (10) square feet per chicken and must not exceed six feet (6) in total height. Fenced in chicken runs must not exceed twenty (20) square feet per chicken and fencing must not exceed six feet (6') in total height. Chicken runs may be enclosed with wood and/or woven wire materials, and may allow chickens to contact the ground. Chicken runs must have a protective overhead netting to keep the chickens separated from other animals. 7. Chicken coops must be elevated a minimum of twelve inches (12") and a maximum of twenty four inches (24") above grade to ensure circulation beneath the coop. 8. Chicken grains and feed must be stored in rodentproof containers. (C) Conditions And Inspection: No person who owns, controls, keeps, maintains or harbors hen chickens shall permit the premises where the hen chickens are kept to be or remain in an unhealthy, unsanitary or noxious condition or to permit the premises to be in such condition that noxious odors are carried to adjacent public or private property. Any chicken coop and chicken run authorized under this section may be inspected at any reasonable time by the city animal control officer or other (Comme— nt [ESeaburg25]: May be inspected at agent of the city. (Ord. 1153, 3-17-2009) l any time C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx- 11 - City of Shoreview - Allowed (D) Chickens. (1) Chickens may be kept within the City limits on residential properties located in the RE, Residential Estate Zoning District and the R1, Detached Residential District, subject to the following conditions: (a) On residential properties less than 2 acres in size: i. A maximum of four (4) hen chickens or pullets are permitted. ii.Roosters are prohibited. (b) On residential properties containing two I,(2) or more acres] in size: i. A conditional use permit may be required for more than four (4) hen chickens or pullets. ii.Roosters may be permitted provided the crowing is not a nuisance. (c) The butchering of chickens is prohibited. (d) Chickens shall be fully contained on the property at all times through the use of fencing. (e) Shelters must comply with all requirements of the Development Code concerning accessory structure and said structures shall not be placed in the front, side yard or side yard abutting a street on residential property. Said shelters shall be setback a minimum of 30 -feet from an adjacent principal dwelling. (f) Food materials that are stored outside shall be in closed containers with lids. ;(g), All containment areas and shelters shall be maintained in a clean, sanitary, and odor free environment and shall be free from the presence of rodents or vermin at all times. (h) Chickens shall not be raised or kept for fighting. Cockfighting is prohibited. (2) License. No person shall keep, maintain or breed chickens on property located within the City of Shoreview unless a license is obtained pursuant to the provisions stated herein. Application shall be made on a form provided by the City Manager. The City Council shall from time to time set a fee by ordinance for the initial license and the bi-annual renewals. (3) Inspection'. The City Animal Control Officer will conduct an inspection of the property to determine compliance with the license and ordinance standards. (4) License Fee. The license fee must be submitted with the application. The fee will be established by City Council ordinance. (5) Duration of License. A license shall be issued for a period of two years. (6) Issuance of License. Upon completion of the application form, receipt of the license fee, the City Manager shall cause a license to be issued to the applicant. (7) Change of Address. An applicant who has obtained a license shall notify the City Manager of the applicant's address changes within the corporate limits of the City within ten (10) days of an address change. Comment [ESeaburg26]: Lot Restrictions — Comment [ESeaburg27]: Lots < 2 acres can NOT have more than 4 birds. No Roosters ---. j Comment [ESeaburg28]: Lots > 2 acre CAN have more than 4 birds with a C.0 P . Roosters allowed. J C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ord inances_G uide.docx- 12 - Comment [ESeaburg29]: Bo' setback from principal dwelling 1 Comment [ESeaburg30]: Discusses shelter `conditions and setback requirements J Comment [ESeaburg3l]: Permit required, city li council has authority over applications & renewal COlt, Comment [ESeaburg32]: Doesn't specify how often inspections will occur City of St Louis Park - Prohibited Sec. 4-1 Regulating the keeping of domestic animals'i No person shall keep or harbor any fowl, horses, cattle, sheep, goats, or swine in the city, or permit the same to be done upon premises the person owns, occupies, or controls without written permission from the city. C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ord ina nces_Guide.docx- 13 - Comment [ESeabur9331: Requires written permission from city City of Robbinsdale - Allowed 915.37. Domestic animals. Subdivision 1. General rule. It is unlawful to keep or maintain roosters or bees, without first having obtained a permit therefor. It is unlawful to keep or maintain more than two chickens, ducks, geese, turkeys, pigeons, rabbits, chinchillas, minks, ferrets, nutrias, or guinea pigs without first having obtained a permit therefor,. It is not permitted to keep or maintain large domesticated animals such as a horse, cow, donkey, comment [eseaburg3a]: Permit requiredfor Roosters_ More than two hens requiresa pony, mule, pig, permit. - goat, or sheep. All of the aforementioned are hereinafter referred to as "animals." (Amended, ---- - Ord. No. 07-17; Ord. No. 08-06) Subd. 14. "Proper enclosure" means secure confinement indoors or in a securely enclosed and comment [ESeabur935]: They define proper locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection enclosure from the elements for the animal. A proper enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage, or other structure that would allow the animal to exit on its own volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open, or in which door or window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the animal from exiting. IRobbinsdale City Code 915.01, Subd. 15(Rev. 2008) (a) Any such pen or structure must have secure sides and a secure top attached to the sides. (b) Any such enclosure must be locked with a key or combination lock when occupied by the animal for which a proper enclosure is required. (c) Any such pen or structure must have a secure bottom or floor attached to the sides of the pen, or the sides of the pen must be embedded in the ground no less than two feet. (d) All such structures must comply with any statutory requirements and all zoning and building regulations of the city and must be adequately lighted and ventilated and kept in a clean and sanitary condition. (e) A porch or patio or any part of a house or structure that would allow the dog to exit on its own volition is not a proper enclosure. (Added, Ord. No. 07-17) C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62697PO\City Ord ina nces_G uide.docx- 14 - Comment [Meaburg36]: Proper enclosure further defined. City of New Hope - Allowed Sec. 7-6. - Limitations on keeping of animals. It is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and unlawful to slaughter, ride, herd or drive any animals within the city. It shall also be a public nuisance and unlawful to allow, permit, keep, maintain, sell or harbor animals within the city, in violation of the following regulations or without a city permit as provided for in subsection (8): (1) Dogs. Four or more dogs over six months old, to a limit of ten dogs including puppies under six months old, unless a kennel license is obtained. (2) Cats. Four or more cats over six months old, to a limit of ten cats including kittens under six months old, unless a kennel license is obtained. (3) Other household pets. Four or more other domesticated household pets of any kind or combination thereof kept for companionship and pleasure including, but not limited to, small caged animals in the rodent family, members of the lagomorphs family, domesticated ferrets, caged birds in the parrot or finch families, non -venomous reptiles less than six feet in length and non-poisonous amphibians and non -game fish sold for the purpose of being kept in an aquarium. (4) 'iFowl. Four or more fowl of any kind or combination thereof. Fowl means chickens, ducks, geese, pheasants, turkeys or other domestic, agricultural or wild fowl. Fowl does not mean roosters and no roosters of any kind are permitted within the city by this section. (5) Wild animals. Live wild animals of any kind except one animal not exceeding 20 pounds confined to a cage within a dwelling. A wild animal kept per this section shall be licensed, registered, vaccinated and tagged in accordance with the same regulations for dogs, cats and ferrets in subsections 7-2(1) and 7-2(2). (6) Hoofed animals. Any horses, cows, sheep, goats, pigs or any other hoofed animals with the exception of one pot-bellied pig. (7) Any combination of animals and/or fowl of any age kept in such numbers or under conditions which unreasonably annoy, injure, or endanger the health, safety, comfort, repose or welfare of the public or of said animals or fowl. (8) Permit to exceed limitations. Any person desiring to exceed the limitations on the keeping of animals as set out in subsections (1) through (7) above may do so only by permit granted by the city council after submitting an appropriate application for a public hearing on the permit as provided in this section. i) Application. An application for a permit must contain the following information: (i) the name and address of the applicant, (ii) the address of the premises upon which the animal or animals are to be kept, (iii) the number, species and, except in the case of bees, the sex of such animal or animals, and (iv) a statement regarding any property damage or physical injuries caused by such animal or animals in the past. The council may also require submission of such additional information or material as it deems necessary or convenient. The applicant must pay to the city clerk such initial permit fee and renewal permit fee as shall SUPPLEMENT HISTORY TABLE Chapter 7 - ANIMALS New Hope, Minnesota, Code of Ordinances Page 16 of 16 C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ord ina nces_G uide.docx- 15 - Comment [ESeaburgW]: This is the limitation they have. No Roosters, and noConly 3 hens. _ Comment [ESeaburg38]: Council approval of permit for the keeping of 4 or more birds be established from time to time by council resolution. Upon submission of the initial application, the city clerk must set a date for a hearing on the application before the city council and must notify the owners of all properties located within 350 feet of the subject premises of the date and time of the hearing. ii) Hearing. At the hearing the city council may take such testimony or receive such documents or information as it deems appropriate. A permit will not be issued if the city council finds that such animal or animals, because of their number, size, proximity to other properties, history of vicious or destructive actions, or inherent characteristics, are or are likely to become either a nuisance or a hazard to the public health or safety. In the case of bees, a permit will not be issued unless the hive or hives are to be located at least 500 feet from any other property. iii) Term. Permits are valid until December 31 of the year of issuance and may be renewed annually by the council. The council may revoke a permit prior to its expiration if the council finds that the terms or conditions of the permit have been violated or if the animal or animals have become either a public nuisance or a hazard to the public health or safety. Nothing herein in this subsection is to be construed to prohibit or constrain any action allowed by law designated to prevent the spread of disease or the imminent damage to persons or property caused by such animal or animals. C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\K62B97PO\City Ordinances_Guide.docx- 16 - Comment JESeaburg139]: Neighbors can come to the hearing to express concerns to council City of St Anthony - Council Approval 91.56 KEEPING OF CERTAIN ANIMALS. No person may keep swine, cattle, horses, goats, or more than 2 dogs or 3 dogs allowed under " 91.01 through 91.05 or fowl, within the city nearer than 500 feet to any human habitation or platted land, withoutapproval of the City Council. The City Council may, Comment [ESedbUrg40]: Anything within 500' before approving or denying any request for approval, request a report from the Health L of human habitation requires approval by council -- --� C:\Users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\City Ord i nances_G uide.docx- 17 - Planning 763-593-8095 / 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: May 18, 2012 To: Golden Valley Environmental Commission From: Bryanna Vidden, Planning Intern Subject: Research on Chicken Ordinances Background As part of the process for creating an ordinance concerning the keeping and raising of chickens in Golden Valley, Planning Staff has performed research on the ordinances which manage chickens for several comparable cities in the Twin Cities Metropolitan area. Staff examined the ordinances for the cities of New Hope, Robbinsdale, Shoreview, and St Anthony, because of their comparable age, size, and similar issues which they face throughout their continuing development. Scope To gather information on the city ordinances which manage the keeping and raising of chickens, staff looked into the number of chickens which can be kept on a single property, the zoning districts where chickens can be housed, where on a property chicken coops can be placed, and whether or not a resident is required to obtain a permit from the city to keep chickens. Findings As stated, the ordinances of New Hope, Robbinsdale, Shoreview and St Anthony have been examined and are discussed below. It should also be of note that roosters are not allowed within the city limits of any of the following Metro communities. New Hope The City of New Hope does not require residents to obtain a permit for keeping chickens, but the number of chickens which can be kept on a single property is limited to four. The City's ordinance regarding chickens is located under Animal Control, and does not specify which zoning districts do, or do not allow chickens. In addition, the location of chicken coops on a property must follow zoning regulations that mandate the placement of accessory structures. Robbinsdale Residents of Robbinsdale who wish to keep more than two chickens must obtain a permit through a hearing before the City Council, which includes notification of neighbors within two hundred feet. Once again, Robbinsdale's ordinance does not specify the zoning districts where chickens are allowed or not. Lastly, the City's accessory building ordinance must be followed in the placement of chicken coops. Shoreview Chickens are allowed within Shoreview's zoning districts of RE -Residential Estate and R1 - single family residential, along with a permit obtained from the City. On lots smaller then two acres in size, there is a limit of four chickens, while lots larger than two acres can house more than four chickens with a conditional use permit. Additionally, zoning code on accessory structures must be followed in the placement of chicken coups. St Anthony The keeping of chickens within five hundred feet of platted or habituated land is not allowed without prior City Council Approval. Also, St Anthony ordinances do not specify the number of chickens allowed on a single property or the zoning districts which do or do not allow chickens. In the same fashion, accessory building zoning code would have to be followed in the placement of a chicken coop. N From: City of Golden Valley [mailto:no-reply@wufoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 6:35 PM To: Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric Subject: Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley [#47] Name * Tonia Galonska Address 6324 Glenwood Ave. City * Golden Valley Comments We would be thrilled if the city of Golden Valley allows residents to own/raise chickens and the sooner the better. It has been extremely frustrating moving back to G.V. from Chicago and discovering how slowly and even behind the times G.V. is becoming environmentally "friendly". A neighbor showed me the article in the CityNews May/June issue on the city's study on raising chickens and we were both very excited. I noticed the article had a more negative slant, giving the impression that the city wants to show how environmentally progressive they are in looking at the topic while swaying the residents to discourage the adoption of the issue. So, I thought I would note some beneficial qualities of allowing chickens in G.V. and would love to see another article in the City/News with some of the benefits of raising chickens in our city. In regards to benefits of raising chickens the following are just a few: 1. After the most recent egg recall our city's residents would be responsible for their own egg quality and overall better health if they choose to raise organic eggs. 2. The benefits of saving money for the residents and city our numerous a. It is far less expensive to raise eggs than to purchase them i.e. the drugs the factories need to give the mass of chicks which the consumer in turn eats, the cost of fuel which is incorporated in the price of the eggs which would also help the environment overall if less trucks are on the road b. Chickens love to eat insects even ticks, so there would be less spraying of mosquitoes, less flea and tick toxic meds. for cat & dog owners which is also damaging to our environment c. One chicken eats about 7 pounds of food "waste" a month which in turn lowers the garbage that needs to be hauled away to a landfill and they also convert yard waste (leaves, grass clippings) into compost again not only saving money for the owner and city but better for the environment as well. In fact a city in Belgium is actually giving three laying hens to 2,000 homes in an effort to reduce landfill costs. City officials expect to recover a significant portion of the $600,000 a year the city spends on dealing with this type of household "trash." d. Chickens not only produce fertilizer and compost so the owner does not need to use chemicals for their lawn and gardens but help due to their love of scratching eliminating the use of gas powered & noisy garden tillers. I also wanted to address 2 more points for those that may have trepidations regarding chickens are too noisy, that is more a problem when roosters are allowed and second that the chickens may bring coyotes, foxes, &/or raccoons which G.V. already has. For more information please check out the following links: htti3://kstp.com/news/stories/S2621 276.shtml?cat=1 http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/homegarden/l 6980386.html http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2010/10/02/parade-chicken-coops-minneapolis-st-paul Thank you for your consideration on this needed ordinance. Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley (#49] City of Golden Valley <no-reply@wufoo.corn> 0 If there are problems with how this message is displayed, click here to view it in a web browser. Sint Wed 6/27/2012 4:06 PM 7, Nesbitt, Lisa, Seaburg, Eric Name 2 Pamela Holm Address 3001 Kyle Avenue North City * Gorden Valley Comments t Hello, I strongly recommend having chickens_ My husband is from Great Britain and his parents live in West Sussex in an area that is suburban like Golden Valley_ They have 4 chickens, no roosters, and you would never know they are living in the back yard. They are very quiet, all one hears when close, is a gentle cluck cluck sound. Roosters are the noise problem but one does not need roosters to have eggs. Also, most of their neighbors have chickens too_ It is just what one does to have nice, fresh, lovely eggs_ 4 chickens would easily supply a family of 4. One would need to make sure they have proper housing, feeding, and water facilities especially in the winter_ They need to roost at night. If you have any questions, we would be happy to answer them about chickens in suburban Great Britain. Kind regards, Pamela Holm Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley 1##481 City of Golden Valley <no-reply@wufoo.com> ® If there are problems viith how this message is displayed, click hereto view it in a web browser. .e!nt Wed 6/27/2012 3:53 PM Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric Name * Wayne Roiger Address 6027 Westmore Way City * Golden Valley, MN Comments * I am against the proposal to allow the raising of chickens in Golden Valley. There are cleanliness issues, wild animals near Basset Creek that might potentially threaten the chickens, and it will be disruptive to the existing pet population. Consider the person with a hunting dog that might now have trouble with checkens next door. Similarly, cats in the neighborhood may react to chickens_ There are all natural fed checkens available in many markets_ The chickens for sale cost more due to the feeding habbits being as natural as a chicken will do without special treatments in their growth or non -healthy feeding of for sale chickens. I urge the City officials to not allow chickens to be grown on a residential lot. Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley 1#501 City of Golden Valley ono-reply@wufoo.com> 0 If there are problems with how this message is displayed, click hereto view Kin a web browser. Fri 6/29/201210:25 AM Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric Name = Hannah Niedenfuer Address 2685 N Scott Avenue f City' Golden Valley Comments : (respectfully request that our lawmakers pass legislation that will allow residents to raise chickens on private property in Golden Valley. What better, more natural way to help with pest control than chickens, who eat bugs and spiders (as unappetizing as that may seem)? And to what better use could these bugs and spiders possibly be put than the creation of food? Chickens are like tiny food factories in our back yards! Of course they -are- animals, and animals come with responsibility --just like a cat or dog_ Golden Valley allows us to keep these animals on our private property, trusting that we will do so in a responsible, safe, and humane way. We are expected to feed, care for, clean up after, and control our pets. Chickens can be raised the same way --by responsible citizens who feed, care for, clean up after them, and keep them properly housed and secure_ Concerned neighbors fear a great deal of noise, but only roosters are known fo r that kind of cacophany. Citizens who raise chickens for their eggs won't need to roosters -- hens can lay eggs without them (http:l,ismallfarm.about.comlodlfarmanimalslalhtkeepchickens.htm). An occasional cluck or two from a small hen is nothing compared to a barking dog, which the city of Golden Valley currently permits. The concept of the urban farm is spreading. Golden Valley has a tremendous opportunity to stand out as the next progressive city to legalize the raising of chickens, to allow its citizens this unique and enriching experience, and to attract similarly -minded people here to live, work, and yes, raise chickens_ Thank you. Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley 1#511 City of Golden Valley <no-reply@wufoo.com> 0 If there are problems with how this message is displayed, click here to view it in a web browser, Tue7/10/2012 2,54 PM Nesbitt, Lisa; 5eaburg, Eric Name * John Griffin -Wiesner Address * 2125 Kelly Dr City * Golden Valley Comments * I support allowing residents to keep a small number of chickens - no roosters of course. Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley [#52] City of Golden Valley <no-reply@wufao.com> 8 If there are problems with how this message is displayed, click, here to view it in a web browser, Sun 7/15/2012 7:24 PM Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric Name : Erik Gulsvig Address * 149 Barry Ave N City : Wayzata Comments 3 I think people should be able to keep chickens and other fowl (such as pigeons) as long as things are well maintained, the birds are not loud, and they are kept in sanitary conditions_ PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES TMDL No updates 1/1 No updates PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS Douglas Drive Land Use Planning As a result of a previously concluded land use and planning study, staff requested that the Planning Commission vote to recommend re -designating the area at the northeast corner of Douglas Drive and Highway 55 to "Businesses and Professional Offices". The smaller area that used to house the former restaurant, as well as BNC Bank, would not be a part of this action and would be studied for more retail and service -specific use. The Planning Commission voted to table the request until it had additional direction from the City Council/Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). Staff will discuss the long term land use options for this area with the HRA and report back to the Planning Commission. Originally, this area was thought to be suitable for long term corporate campus -type development. The Planning Commission would like to introduce alternate options, such as housing, for the site. Staff hopes to have this matter resolved by September. Minor Subdivision — 6601 and 6621 Medicine Lake Road A developer has proposed to subdivide the properties located at 6601 and 6621 Medicine Lake Road into three new lots. The existing homes, outbuildings, and lawn features on the property would be demolished. City Code requires that each new lot meet the required 10,000 square foot minimum lot size. The proposed new lot sizes are each approximately 28,371 square feet. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of this request to the City Council. It will go before the City Council August 8. Disturbia in Suburbia An applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to open "Disturbia in Suburbia" at 8806-88087 th Ave. No. The facility, part of a larger office/warehouse complex, is located in the Light Industrial Zoning District. Under the regulations of the Light Industrial Zoning District, a recreation facility is classified as a conditional use. Therefore, Disturbia in Suburbia must obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) prior to conducting business. The applicant has described Disturbia in Suburbia as a "unique interactive game played in a live setting." The facility would offer two different themed, interactive, multi-level, horror -themed labyrinths. It would include a maze -like setting, laser tag, and interactive activities with zombie -themed actors. The facility would serve all age ranges. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the CUP to the City Council. However, before this matter goes before the City Council, the applicant will conduct a Building and Fire Code Analysis. Staff anticipates the CUP to go before the City Council in August. Schuller's Tavern — General Land Use Plan Amendment Schuller's Tavern, located at 7345 Country Club Drive, has requested that the City Council amend the City's General Land Use Plan Map in order to add an outside patio. Schuller's Tavern is currently designated on the City's General Land Use Plan Map as "Low Density Residential." It is zoned "R-1 Single Family Residential." Therefore, as a restaurant and bar, it is a legally non -conforming land use. Statutory language provides for replacement of legally non -conforming land uses if they are damaged by fire or other disaster, but it does not permit for an "expansion" of the use. Construction of a patio intended for outdoor dining, drinking, smoking, etc. at Schuller's Tavern would expand the use of the establishment beyond its current capacity, and would be considered an expansion. The Planning Commission voted not to recommend approval of this request, stating that allowing this property to be guided and zoned "Commercial" could enable other non - desirable uses to locate at the site should the current owners ever sell or redevelop the property. This item will go before the City Council on August 8. DECOLA PONDS The Cooperative Agreement and the Barr proposal for Phase 2 is going to Council on August 21St RECYCLING UPDATE Memo attached WETLAND MANAGEMENT No updates BOTTINEAU TRANSITWAY No updates Date: July 20, 2012 Public Works Department 763-593-8030 / 763-593-3988 (fax) To: Environmental Commission From: Mark Ray, PE, Engineer N(L-' Subject: Recycling Program Update C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Multi-family/Commercial/Institutional Recycling Since expanding the recycling program, four properties have started participating. In addition, one more property has expressed interest, but the City has not received an agreement yet. Staff will be attending a property managers meeting in September and again be informing property managers about this new program. Recycling in the Parks As of the week of July 16, the City's recycling in the parks pilot project has started. Recycling carts will be put out at Brookview Park and Isaacson Field which are regularly used during the summer. Additional carts will be deployed on an as -needed basis at various parks throughout the City when they are hosting events. Staff is working to implement a communications effort for this pilot program with communication planned for various mediums, including the website, City newsletter, and other informational materials. One of the primary concerns with this pilot program is the amount of contamination (non - recyclable materials) that will be placed in the carts. The recycling carts will all be placed directly next to a garbage container so that correct disposal is not inconvenient. However, staff will be monitoring the carts and trying to take corrective measures as needed. Should contamination continue to be at unacceptable levels even after corrective measures, the program may be terminated. G:\Environmental Commission\Memos\Recycling Program Update 7.16.12.docx Recycling at the Farmers Market Efforts to provide recycling carts at the Sunday Farmers Market on the City Hall Campus started earlier this summer. During the first few weeks, the contamination was too high. In response, staff contacted a resident who completed Hennepin County's Master Recycler Program about his assistance with recycling at the Farmers Market. The resident ended up setting up a recycling booth during the event, with recycling carts nearby where he could monitor them, handed out recycling information, and was available for general recycling questions. Staff received feedback that some residents who stopped by the booth requested additional recycling service calendars. In response, the City will be providing additional calendars for the booth.