before.
» Okay. All right. Welcome to our council
meeting for August 13th. Please stand
for the pledge of allegiance.
» Algiance to the flag of the United
States of America,
>> to the republic for which it stands, one
nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all.
» Right. First up is open forum. Would you
like to speak, Jim?
>> [laughter]
» Assuming there's nothing on that sheet.
We'll move on. There's no presentations
tonight. Um move on to approve agenda.
Council members may add items to the
agenda for discussion purposes or staff
direction only. The council will not
normally take official action on items
added to the agenda.
>> Move to approve.
I'll second.
>> All right, we have a motion and a
second. All in favor?
>> I.
>> All right, that motion passes. Consent
agenda. These items are considered to be
routine and will be enacted by one
motion. There will be no separate
discussion of these items unless a
council member so requests in which I
event the item will be removed from the
consent agenda and placed elsewhere on
the agenda. Anyone have anything? Um, I
have an item uh item 5.8.
Okay.
Anything else? I think that'll be it.
>> I'll move to approve.
the Go ahead.
You need to run, brother
council. You should
» Okay, quick. Jim, what do you have a
question on?
Madame Mayor and council members, the W
Communities Program is a program offered
through the Metropolitan Council.
There's numerous different grant
opportunities, one of which is policy
related. The
>> city was awarded a grant to pay for
almost the entirety of a housing study.
The housing study is not directed by the
Metropolitan Council. It's directed by
us. they just fund the program. So we
have also on that item an agreement with
Stantech to complete the housing study.
The information from the housing study
helps influence what goes into the
comprehensive plan identifies our needs
from a housing standpoint
>> or some in the case if there was a case
of being a certain product type
overbuilt. So it's really giving us a
background that we need for anything
housing related for the community as we
move forward.
>> So it gives us a good inventory of
existing housing in the city.
>> Good.
>> Thank you.
>> I'd uh move to approve the consent
agenda less item 5.
» Second.
>> All right. I have a motion and a second.
All in favor? I
>> I
>> All right. 5.8 acceptance of a donation
from Roger Rogers.
>> I can't talk tonight. Rogers at Seigo
Youth Baseball. Mainly I just wanted to
highlight um and thank them for the
donation. We always appreciate
donations. And it was uh $10,000. So
that's pretty impressive. Thank you.
>> That's wonderful. Thank you so much.
>> Indeed.
>> And I'll move to approve 5.8.
>> I'll second.
>> All right. We have a motion and a
second. All in favor?
>> I.
>> All right. That motion passes. Thanks
again, youth baseball.
All right. We have no public hearings
tonight, so we'll move on to general
business. Consider amendments to city
code and zoning code related to the
keeping of animals and backyard
chickens.
Let's see. Uh are you able to see the
PowerPoint that I'm attempting to share?
Believe so.
uh does only meeting organizers and
presenters.
Well, I pull this up. I can give some
background on the item before turning it
over to Zach. Um, over the past year or
so, we've been spending quite a bit of
time and discussion on backyard
chickens. Uh we starting with an
individual who came to open forum and
through he was having active code
enforcement case at that time. City
council asked to look further into it at
which point we did a [clears throat]
um a larger survey which had over 550
responses to it to get a good baseline
of what the general residents feel was
to the item. Um the survey was really to
see trends on a few different items that
we wanted to see. And through that
discussion, we presented to the city
council the different items that we had
received feedback on and that led to the
council direction to draft an ordinance
which was reviewed by the planning
commission earlier this month. And Zach
will go through some of the details on
that ordinance.
>> Thanks Brett. Uh madame mayor,
counselors, good to see you again. Um, a
lot of this presentation, uh, is going
to be pretty similar to the one that we,
uh, went over at the planning
commission, but with just a lot of the
recommendations that we got from both
the planning commission, counselors,
and, uh, some of the general public at
that last meeting.
So, just a summary to go through it
again, just kind of what the ordinance
is in its complete form, um, is it we're
going to allow residents on smaller lots
to keep backyard chickens. Uh, this will
be under subsection F of backyard
chickens. Uh the ordinance required us
to create kind of a new section in our zoning code which is uh going to be
labeled 1-125-95
uh keeping of animals. So, it's going to
keep um house the the backyard chickens
as well as relocating some of our uh
code, you know, regarding uh livestock
and and kennel operations into this
section uh just for clarity and um
easier when people are trying to kind of
figure out what the the regulations are
on some of these things. Um
so, that also required us to reumber
some tables within section 125 just to
maintain numeric consistency. and then
uh the amendment uh to 125102 where we
house all of our definitions for some of
the new terms that are referenced in
this backyard chickens ordinance just so
there's uh clarity u when people are are
reading the ordinance.
So I kind of went over some of this
already but um yep relocating uh animals
and farming operations, livestock
operations into this new 125-95.
We also updated some of our language um
surrounding feed lots just to make sure
that we were compliant with MPCA
requirements um and the state
requirements with uh livestock
operations. Just for kind of background,
currently the way that our code was
written um if we would have allowed uh
backyard chickens without updating our
uh feed lot language in our our
amendment or in our code, it would have
technically been a feed lot. So we
basically just updated our definition of
a feed lot to uh exempt smallcale
operations uh similar to you know
keeping backyard chickens. These are uh
different from you know livestock uh
large agricultural operations that would
be considered a feed lot by the state.
Um let's see here. I think all this I've
kind of gone through already. Um so
we'll get into kind of some of the
feedback that we uh heard from the last
uh planning commission meeting on uh
August 3rd. So uh a big takeaway from
that meeting was both the some of the
people that spoke from the public as
well as planning commissioners wanted to
see some sort of permit process um
before keeping check-ins. The original
ordinance that we brought to the
planning commission did not uh have a
permit process. Um through discussion
between counselors and planning uh uh
commissioners, I think we kind of ca
staff came to an agreement that uh an
actual full-on permit would be very
labor intensive and taxing on on staff.
And that's would potentially even could
have required adding a staff member for
this. And so the uh what staff is
recommending uh with this ordinance now
is that it'll be a uh kind of a
registration license process um but it
won't have an inspection. So I'll get
over or I'll go over the actual uh like
what that license processing is going to
look like in a couple slides here. But
that's kind of where we're at is that
we're not recommending a permit process,
but we are recommending a license um for
this uh keeping back our chickens at
this time. Um there were concerns over
the number of chickens being allowed. Uh
the planning commission uh multiple
commissioners made comments that they
felt it was overly complicated. So we
kind of simplified the table that we'll
go over here in a second. Um staff was
seeking feedback at that meeting on
minimum lot size and just distances that
these chicken coops or runs need to be
um set back from neighbor neighboring
residential dwellings. Um it seemed like
uh that the initial recommendation of
0.2 acres being the minimum was uh was
uh agreeable for most commissioners and
so we're still recommending that and
keeping the uh 30 foot setback although
we did update some of the language to
clarify that it needs to be 30 ft from a
residential dwelling. Earlier it was
just a residential structure. So, uh it
doesn't necessarily have to be 30 ft
from somebody's shed, but somebody's
house uh dwelling um which is defined in
our code. So,
um and then we did get some community
feedback on just uh some concerns about
how early we should be requiring
residents to move uh chicks out of the
out of a dwelling or garage. Um, so we
just kind of relaxed those standards a
little bit by a couple of weeks just to
um we were educated and did some
research on that and a lot of sources
were recommending that it takes a couple
more weeks for chickens to reach the
maturity where they can survive outside
um especially if it's a colder spring or
something like that. So,
uh Brett kind of went through this
already, but some backyard uh or
background on kind of how we got to this
point. So, the survey was sent out in
late 2025 following some community uh
feedback of of asking whether or not
they can have chickens. Um, like Brett
said, we received over 550 responses.
Uh, 70% of the people that filled out
the survey did want to allow for
backyard chickens, but the majority did
also want to have a minimum lot size
restriction put in place. Um, 0.2 acres
was the uh most commonly selected answer
for minimum lot size. and uh staff
directed were directed to draft an
ordinance at the June 23rd of this year
uh city council work session. So um we
did some research into various cities in
the region. Um most cities that do allow
them are allowing anywhere from four to
six are the are kind of the common
numbers that we're seeing. Permit
processes are pretty split. Some cities
are allow are requiring them, others
aren't. Um, and the most common
complaint when staff reached out to
other cities to kind of see, you know,
how how it was going, what are the
what's the feedback that you've gotten
from citizens? Um, birds getting loose
tends to be the most common issue that,
uh, other cities see. [clears throat]
Um, and as you would expect, the
majority complaints in the spring,
summer, um, when people are getting
chickens in the first place. Um, a lot
of cities do allow other birds other
than chickens, such as ducks, geese. Uh
the ordinance that staff is proposing
tonight is only allowing chickens, not
other uh fowl. So um as I stated before
recommending 02 acres um a little bit of
background on that one uh that seemed to
be what kind of council and a lot of uh
the general feedback from the survey uh
was pushing staff towards and we did do
some analysis on lots in the city and uh
that 0.2 2 acres does seem to be a good
number that staff feels good about if we
were to increase that to 0.25 acres. Um
we would be excluding around 730 homes.
Um just analys analyzing lot sizes and
uh things like that. Um this will be for
single detach family only. This uh
ordinance will not allow people in
duplexes, town homes, things like that
to to have backyard chickens. And as I
stated before, based on the public
feedback, we are now recommending that
we'll have a license to be able to keep
uh chickens. So,
kind of some summary of what the
ordinance actually has in it. So, on the
top left there, this is the a simplified
table. Before we had it broken out into
more categories depending on what your
lot size was. Feedback was just to
simplify this. So, like I said, if
you're on less than 0.2 acres, you won't
be allowed. Um, and then it's going to
kind of scale up until you get to that 3
acres or more area or size, which you'll
be able to keep 20 hens. Or if you're in
an A or R1 zone, um, you'll be able to
keep, uh, the number of poultry as
permitted by our livestock uh, units.
So,
um,
the ordinance is drafted to, uh, prevent
against, uh, you know, nuisance
conditions hopefully. So, chicks, uh,
coups and run areas will have to be kept
in sanitary condition. Um the ordinance
explicitly states that manure must be uh
collected and stored until it can be
disposed of and then um in order to
prevent pests um collecting uh keeping
feed in a rodent uh proof container um
to try to reduce any type of uh pest
coming in. Um and then as far as kind of
setbacks and things like that. So we are
requiring the coups and runs will have
to be 10 ft from any property line and
as I mentioned earlier we clarified the
language 30 ft from any residential
dwelling is how the ordinance is uh
written at this point. Um some other
feedback we got at that planning
commission. It was in the uh ordinance
already, but just uh wanted to make sure
it's clear that we are requiring when
somebody is going to uh want backyard
chickens that when they submit their
plans that they're going to have to have
four square ft of minimum uh uh floor
area per each bird and then 10 ft uh
square feet per hen in the run area to
uh make sure that they have enough room
where there's not going to be, you know,
less likely to have diseases or or other
issues, things like that.
Um, if the shelter, so the run area and
the coupe is less than 200 feet, we will
not be considering an accessory
structure and it won't require a a
building permit. They'll still have to
have a license. But if they're over that
200 ft, then they will need a building
permit in addition to the license and
then that will count as an accessory
structure, which depending on the zone
that uh a resident is living in, we do
have restrictions on, you know, the
number of accessory structures that uh
residents may have. So,
um, other things, uh, the most,
especially small lots that are in the
city, they're going to have to have a
privacy fence or similar landscaping for
a coup and run. So, the way the
ordinance is written currently, uh, if
your chicken coupe or run is within 30
ft of a neighboring property line, then,
uh, you'll have to have it screened. If
you have, you know, a really wide lot or
a bigger lot, um, you may be exempt from
that. But, uh, most of the smaller lots
that are in that, you know, 2 to 3 acre,
uh, those are almost in all cases going
to have to have a 6oot privacy fence or similar landscaping just to kind of
reduce the visual impact of these. Um,
and then just some other things. Uh,
this is roosters. Uh, roosters and
crowing hens are not allowed on lots
less than 3 acres. Um this is only hens
just to reduce on the noise and we're
not allowing uh water fowl, pee foul or
any other uh similarly kept birds. So as
far as the license process, this is
something that staff uh worked on after
the last planning commission. Um this,
like I mentioned before, is not going to
require an on on-site inspection unless
the coupe is over 200 feet, which at
that point it's into the building permit
territory. Um, and as the ordinance is
written, uh, when resident that wants to
keep chickens, when they submit their
application or for their license,
they're going to have to have the name
and contact information, the property
address where the chickens will be kept.
If it's a renter situation, they're
going to need some kind of property
ownership consent. Um, the number of
hens that they're proposing to keep, and
then as well as the location, size of
the coupe and run, and showing that it
meets setback requirements on their
plan.
Um, we also are viewing this license
page as kind of a uh landing spot or one
kind of stop for residents. So, um,
we're going to have links to best
practices. The University of Minnesota
has a lot of really good information.
There's a lot of other websites. I know
uh um we've gotten some some good
feedback from counselors and residents
on on valuable information, you know,
best practices. So, um we're hoping that
residents will when they are applying
for their license will be able to access
this information and um learn more about
it before maybe they jump into it. And
as far as kind of the mechanics of it,
the license will be a onetime process
and valid for as long as chickens are
kept on the property line. uh this
license will not be able to be
transferred if a resident moves or um uh
yeah and then uh just due to us the the
city switching over its permitting
process to IMS um in 2027, this
ordinance will not actually go into
effect until January 1st because that's
when we plan on launching this uh
license portal as well.
Um, so with that, I I think I'll uh open
it up for for questions or um comments
from counselors. Thanks.
How far from the property line? How far
from any dwelling? And what are we
calling a dwelling?
Like I don't want it near my deck. I
don't want it near my kid's playground.
I don't want it near my, you know what I
mean?
>> Cuz I've heard comments about that. Like
I don't like I build a playground for my
kid and then my neighbors put a coupe
right next to it.
So the way it's currently written is 10
feet from any property line um and 30
feet from a dwelling. So to your
question that a dwelling would not
include something like a a swing set or something like that. But uh they
would not be able to put the coupe or
run area right up to the property line.
They still had to have it 10 ft from the
property line. and feeds like from here
to there right to the podium
>> right and then also I would consider
like accessory structures also have
their own setbacks so obviously it's
going to depend on on the district but
in most cases you're would probably have
at least 15 feet just based on if you're
you know your neighbor has their
accessory structure cited where it's
supposed to be if your neighbor got
chickens that 10 ft plus whatever you're
supposed to have your
>> sure
>> but to your point though yes it's not
the way it's currently written it does
can't build a playground right on my
property line either, right? So, it
would be it wouldn't be 10 ft.
>> But just so that it's uh you're it's
clear. Yeah. It's not uh the 30 ft only
refers to the dwelling, not um not any
structure in in a neighbor's yard.
>> That too.
>> Is a deck considered part of the
dwelling?
Madame Mayor and council, usually a deck
is not considered part of the overall
principal dwelling unit, but it really
depends on how it's kind of laid out on
the property. Usually decks have shorter
setback, so they can encroach a little
further than a house could on the
sideyard.
So typically, no.
>> So even if they're attached, they're not
considered part of the dwelling.
>> It's not considered the principal
dwelling. There are just similar how
decks can encroach into your rear yard
setback and other features that a
principal dwelling couldn't.
[clears throat and cough]
>> So, oh, go ahead.
>> The only question I had was on uh just
to be clear on enforcement.
So, we talked a little bit about it. You
know, Brett, you mentioned there'd be a
citation
or maybe you could just describe again
the how it escalates and then cuz my
expectation is that you get to the end
of that process. If you can't get
conformance, then we have a means to say
you're off the list. you have to
uh
get rid of the chickens and dismantle
the coupe and you're done and you're on
the list that of folks that are no
longer allowed to have chickens.
>> Yeah, madame council. So adding the
license process as Zach mentioned adds a
kind of a separate layer to what was
discussed in the planning commission. So
now if there is we're a complaint based
city. So, if the city receives a
complaint on someone's chicken keeping,
whether it's loose or animals, waste,
whatever it may be, smell, um, city
would typically send a letter of
violation to the property owner stating
that they have x amount of time to
rectify the issue. Um, if they don't,
there could be with the licensing
process a revocation of their license,
which would then mean that they are no
longer allowed to keep chickens. If
they're in violation of that, then
there's citations, which are typically a
misdemeanor charge. Um, and
they wouldn't be allowed to keep them.
Everyone's going to need a license now
to operate. And if there's violations,
we can revoke those license. If there's
ongoing issues, we can seek further
enforcement action. Um, the license adds
a little bit of an easier process from a
stat. Well, it's more work upfront. It
adds the ability to have all that
contact info for each ownership right
off the bat. Um, and it also means
everyone has to comply and follow and
should be reading the ordinance before
they get the chicken. So, we have kind
of a dual approach with the license. And
the way Zach laid it out is was our
preferred method. Um, because we're
going to have a site plan. They're going
to have to submit a site plan to us. So,
we're going to see the actual distances
from the property line, everything
related to it. Um, without that license,
it meant a lot of people probably get
them without reading the ordinance or
all the details of the ordinance. So,
this gives us a little bit additional
background to it. And being that it's a
non-insspection license, it really
drastically reduces that staff time
that's needed.
>> Um, the license itself as it is operated
will be operated through the community
development department. And so Alex's
going to be the one reviewing all the
license applications that comes in.
>> So how is it different if someone just
does it without a license?
>> Well, then they're in violation of the
ordinance and they can get a misdemeanor
charge for being in violation of our
ordinance.
Usually we would send a letter stating,
"Hey, you need to have a license to have
chickens. You need to submit this, this,
and this to come into compliance." But
if they don't [clears throat] do that,
then there's enforcement action we can
take.
>> Good.
>> So, I have a question. Um, how does this
affect like legally non-conforming
properties at this point?
» Yeah, Madame Mayor and Council. So, the
way that it's written is really pertains
to all the districts. So, it's really
looking at single family dwelling units
as a specific use. So even if it's
say the a home in the RC district, if
it's a single family operated home and
it's meeting all the standards, I should
be able to get chickens still. So I'm
[clears throat] thinking more along the
lines um if you're let like your zoning
changed, you own chickens, your zoning
changed, you're legally non-conforming
now. Um, does this force them to get in
line with
these numbers and stuff or how does that
work?
>> I would defer to Bob on that one.
» Leading the fifth. [laughter]
>> Yeah, making council. It's a it's a it's
a good question. Uh, I I think I'm
agreeing with what staff is saying. Um,
uh, yes. uh because this would be an
accessory a permitted accessory use and
it's a permitted accessory use in all
districts as long as the use that exists
is a single family home. Uh I think the question you're raising counselor is
could we make the argument could the
city make the argument could other folks
in the community make the argument that
your non-conforming use your home in a
district that doesn't allow homes is
being expanded by the presence of
chickens? And the answer to that is no.
That argument wouldn't be available. Uh
because it's an a permitted accessory
use to a home and the home is legally
non-conforming. You could have the
coupe. However, to your point, you'd
have to comply with all of the rules
that are being created here. If you
approve this, you'd have to comply with
all those rules. There is no exception
because it's a legally non-conforming
use the house. There's no exception to
what you could do with the coupe. you'd
have to comply with everything with
>> So, I'm thinking more along the lines
like we have rural residential um
properties that got then switched over
to R2
>> and so they may have a higher number of
birds.
>> Mhm.
>> Are they required now to go down to this
number of birds?
>> And I can actually hit that on that. So,
I didn't quite understand what you're
saying at first. Um
the way that this ordinance is written
is relaxing the standard. So the way
that the existing
code states is you have to be a minimum
of 3 acres. So with this new code, if
you're hitting that 3 acre mark, you're
still following the same feed lot
standards that we've had in the past.
Okay?
>> So anyone with their current operations
that are meeting our current ordinance
will be able to remain the same. There's
the slight difference with the animal
units, but I would be highly shocked if
anyone at 4 acres actually has 200
chickens. The way our current ordinance
is written.
>> Okay, good. I just wanted to make sure
we weren't coming through and saying,
"Hey, you have to decrease that number
now." Like, okay. Um
then um I saw that the change in animal
units and table 26 for egg one districts
looked like it got cut in half. Is that
kind of along the lines of the feed lot
requirements or
» Yes, that is uh that's in line a little
bit more closely in line with um some of
the MPCA standards. So they have a
range. It's all dependent on
the way that the chickens are basically
being fed. So there's different animal
units for chickens, at least at the
state level, if they're eating dry food,
if they're free range or liquid manure,
uh sorry, liquid feed. Um and so we're
the number that we've updated our uh
feed lot unit to is is a little bit more
in line with what the the state and the
MPCA is uh has. So that's the the reason
for that. And then obviously if we're
going to update the one for the chickens
because fowl um things like ducks and
geese also produce more we had to just
you know increase their uh animal unit
in in step with with chickens.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> I had a couple questions if I could. Um
it looks like it's in the notes. Those
opposed typically cited concerns on
odors, noise, and predators.
I guess my concern is it sounds like if
there's, you know, if a complaint comes
along, the neighbor, one neighbor says
there there any of those things.
Um, the followup action from what I
understand, we just send a letter. I
mean, I think I'm afraid where this is,
you know, what one person thinks is a
nuisance, the others may not, and it
could turn into
us or kind of a mediator getting
involved, going out there. I'm little
concerned police might be out there.
You're talking about a misdemeanor. is
that [gasps]
I just I'm a little worried we're
opening the door to something that might
be somewhat vague between neighbors and
having a lot of problems between them
and us getting dragged in to try and
resolve that
or not. Is that what's been the history
at other cities? I mean, it just seems
like it could potentially be a problem.
>> Yeah, Metamean Council. So, there's I'm
going to kind of have a three-part
answer to this. The first part is we
already get those calls. We there's
neighbor disputes that happen all the
time for various different reasons.
Chickens have actually been some of
those reasons in the past. Um so we do
treat that the same as we would with any
other call. There is that fine line of
is this just a neighbor disagreement and
a civil issue. If that's the case, we
push it say this is a civil issue. It's
not a violation of our code. If you want
to pursue your own civil action, go
ahead do that. But there's nothing from
a ci city standpoint that we can do. um
from a I think Zach kind of touched on
the um piece of what other cities have
seen and what I've seen in the past in
my career. It tends to be in the
summertime
and it's usually those that are chickens
that are getting free. I think that's
one of the key factors of what that
number and putting a limit on the number
of six. It helps reduce the smell.
That's kind of the big thing. Smells
typically are generally tied to large
quantities of the birds and on hot days
with wind blowing. That's usually when
you get the most of the smell to be
transferred across property lines. With
that being said, it's also very easy
from a staff perspective to tell if that
is the case. If there's a blatant
violation like smell if they have a
license and we can contact them. That's
kind of the best thing with it. We will
have their phone number. Well, we'll do
a letter spec specifically if they don't
have a license. The license grant us the
ability to have the contact information
for everyone. So, trying to reduce that
number of days, especially on a smell
type violation. Those are pretty easy.
Um, from the rodent one, from the cities
that I've talked to in the past, they
didn't see an uptick in rodents in with
the chickens coming in. Now, whether
that's getting calls on it or not,
usually a city's not going to be the one
to get a ton of calls on that. Um,
and then
I would say just generally the way that
the ordinance was written was to be as
clear and straightforward as process.
And kind of like we talked about in the
work session when we did it, really
bulking up on that nuisance
section more than what I've seen other
cities have just to have clear standards
and clear enforcement ability for any
nuisance conditions that come up. So, we
tried to be I don't want to call it
restrictive because it's not technically
restrictive, but it's defined enough to
where it's pretty easy from an
enforcement standpoint to notice a
violation and act upon that violation.
» And with regards to the P, if I read
this right, the yard needs to be fenced.
Is that correct?
>> Yeah. Metamean Council. So, there's kind
of two parts to that. The run has to be
fully enclosed that the and that's
really tied to predators. So when we say
fully enclosed, it's with a mesh wiring,
but that includes a top. So that means
even at nighttime if they're not within
the coupe, which usually they're going
to be in the coupe, but if they're not,
there's not the ability for a predator
to go into the coupe. And they're also
not ranging free for the whole day. So
there's kind of the two pieces. There's
a fence component, which would keep the
first wave of predators out, you could
say, and then the actual coupe standards
would be one that would restrict any
ability for a predator to come in. But
the backyard has to be fully fenced. Is
that correct
>> in certain circumstances? Yes.
>> Okay.
>> That would be due to like proximity to
neighbor property. So smaller smaller
yards is the distance to the neighboring
property.
>> It's just if if you want them to roam
the yard, the yard has to be fenced.
>> Correct.
>> They're still going to need to have a
coupe and everything to go with it. Uh,
yes.
>> But if you keep them in the coupe,
you don't have to have a fence. You're
saying
>> you would it? Well, it depends a lot
size ties. I'll let Zach kind of expand
on it, but
>> I'm just trying to I want to be able to
answer my neighbors questions when they
ask me later tonight when I get home.
>> Madame Mayor and counselors, uh, so a
couple of things. So yes, in most cases,
especially on small lots, a resident is
going to have to have a fence anyways,
even if they weren't going to let their
chickens roam in that fenced area. And
that's mostly due to the visual uh it's
I guess it's two things. It's one to if
they, you know, confines the chickens in
a fenced area as well as reducing the
visual impact of a neighbor having uh
to, you know, to see the the chicken
coupe. Um, as Brett touched on though,
uh, the ordinance is kind of written to,
uh, and have kind of two components. So,
the chicken coupe, which is in our
ordinance, going to be defined as like
the actual, for lack of a better term,
kind of the house that they would live
in, right? And then the chicken run area
which uh is the area that needs to be
fully enclosed even from the top um with
a w mesh wiring or if they choose to do
a solid roof they they can but then it
does count towards the actual size of
the accessory structure which is um a
consideration that residents will have
to make. But uh yes, they will have to
be either in the run area during the day
in that enclosed mesh area or in a fully
enclosed fenced yard. Um as well as the
ordinance has a a section that does
require residents to put the chickens in
the actual coupe, not just the run area
at night from sunset to sunrise. And
that's we put that in staff put that in
for two reasons. one to reduce potential
noise issues, you know, late at night,
as well as predators tend to, not
always, but you know, predators tend to,
especially a lot of suburban uh
predators tend to strike more at night.
And so having them actually in a house
versus in that uh meshed area, um is
part of the reason we have that in
there. Um
so yes, I hope that it kind of answered
that. Just to be clear, your statement
on fencing and size of the lot, it's not
a perimeter fence, it's screening,
right? That's the way I interpreted the
way you described it.
>> Yeah. So, it doesn't technically have to
be a perimeter fence. If they want to
fence an area for their chickens to
roam, similar to what you some people
have done with dogs, you could
theoretically do that. But section seven
of the ordinance is what Zach was kind
of referring to. It states, "Men shall
be confined in a coupe from sunrise to
sunset during daylight." hours. Hens
must be provided with access to the run
area. Hens may range outside the Cooper
run only within a fully fenced rear yard
or or on the premise. So, it doesn't
technically have to be perimeter fence.
They could have a fenced area with an
open top.
» So, when you say mesh, like how how
small of an opening on mesh?
Uh I believe let me I just want to I
believe it's 1 inch is the standard that
we actually have. Uh yes section 5D. Let
me make sure here. Yep. Uh the run must
be completely enclosed including from
above by either a solid roofing or a
mesh uh wire hardware cloth or something
similar. Um no uh no openings larger
than 1 in. Um, as well as it has to be
sufficient enough to contain the hens
and exclude predators such as uh wild
birds. So,
it's we're kind of leaving it up to
residents on how they want to, you know,
if they want to use a net or a wire
mesh. Um, but it does have to be small
enough that it's uh and and strong
enough to um to exclude predators or
other birds. Yeah, [clears throat]
>> it's going to be problematic with heavy
wet snow.
Yeah.
>> I mean, yeah, but they they're going to
have to manage it.
>> I guess my concern here is just that I
mean, obviously there's support for it
and there's those that maybe don't want
it and they're going there'll be people
living next door with different
opinions. And if the ones against it
just call up and say, "It's loud. I can
smell it. I've seen predators around.
What are you going to do about it?"
I just don't want to get us drugged into
a bunch of that. Either you're sending
csos out or our staff's going out or
we're spending an inordinate amount of
time on it. I respect people's
right to to use their backyard as they
see fit. But I also think about the
neighbors and want to make sure this
isn't creating
a bunch of headache for our staff and
our residents and you know just we
creating something that's going to be
hard to deal with and I hate to be
sitting here hearing well now we need
some more staff to deal with it or
whatever. I just I'm relying a lot on
you saying we've got the adequate
language in the licensing part of this
that if those kinds of vague situations
come up with we just are we going to be
able to just put a stop to it or are we
going to get dragged into legal things?
That's my concern. Madame Mayor and
Council, the one thing I will just note
on this is
we are at a position where a lot of
cities have already allowed chickens
when those cities have kind of taken the
burden of dealing with unique situations
and there's a lot of resources to aid in
our city as we begin to take this step.
Um, numerous cities that are even
similar to us with the growing
community. Lakeville just bumped their
ordinance up to six chickens for the
smallest lots I think two weeks ago. So
we have ability to learn and get best
practices from that which will ease the
burden on staff time. The license while
it does add some staff time. I'm not
fearing that this is going to be
suddenly that hey this is blowing out my
department and we can't deal with what
we have anymore. If it was an annual
license, I would feel differently. Um,
but being a onetime license, it really
aids our benefit. Um, we will handle
complaints how we always do. It's a code
enforcement issue. License makes I think
code enforcement actually easier for us.
>> Mayor,
>> if I may, just in response to the
counselor's question, I'm going to say
something staff. Tell me if I'm wrong
because I haven't studied what you're
proposing here nearly as much as you
have. But to your point uh counselor
about you know the concerns are smell
sound predators my understanding of the
ordinance is that you've got some
objective standards setback requirements
a cage requirement a run requirement a
pen requirement and other objective
requirements that are meant to address
those things. But if a person is uh has
a license and has a compliant facility,
has the run and the coupe uh all
compliant with the requirements, a
neighbor's complaint that the chickens
are too noisy, just is not something the
staff is going to deal with. I mean, the
question is whether the facilities are
compliant or not. And that's an
objective question. And you know, and
the reality is that you could have a
compliant coupe and the chickens may
make noise. Um, and those noises could
be heard, but that's just the
consequence of allowing chickens. Um,
and so, so it do I have that basically
right, staff?
>> Yeah, Madame Mayor Council. Uh, that's
correct. That is a really good way to
look at it. Um, in a lot of ways, it's a
lot very similar to dogs.
It's keeping of animals. there's dogs
that we get calls on and there's a lot
of times where we can't address those
items related to dogs because it's not a
violation of the ordinance. The
intention of the license and the
ordinance is to ensure that we have the
best set of standards possible to ensure
that everyone knows what they need to
do, how it needs to operate, and we have
enforceable measures that we can address
if we need to.
The only one other comment I have is
just the aesthetics of the coupe. And
again, [clears throat] I know you
describe it in here, but can it be
can someone just cobble something
together out of scrap
>> pallets?
or not? I mean, what how does
you know, how's that going to look in
backyards? I guess
>> madame mayor and councel if you look at
section 5C of the ordinance that's what
really tries to deal with the coupe
itself it says coupe shall be
constructed of durable material shall be
winter rise to protect hens from extreme
temperatures and shall be resistant
um so and then it goes on to talk about
ventilation insulation and a window
related to it um so this is really
trying to hit the coupe itself you can't
just put a box in your yard and call it
a coupe we're going to actually want to
see that as part of the license
application of what that coupe is going
to be made of. So
>> that's part of the license application,
>> correct? Yeah. They're going to have to
show details about the coupe.
>> Oh,
>> and isn't there a requirement too that
it has to either be elevated or on slab
for the coupe?
>> Yeah.
>> The mayor counselors Yes. Uh so the
Yeah, the coupe floor um will have to be
elevated at least 12 in, not more than
24 in above grade unless it's uh
constructed on a concrete slab. or other
rodent resistant um foundation. And the
main reasoning for that is I mean the
rodent part is in there, but uh
additionally research into this um
ventilation and just air flow can do a
lot to reduce smells that uh can build
up. And so, um, that's part of it as
well as, uh, rodent resistance, keeping it off
the ground or on concrete, as well as,
um, some air flow underneath that can help reduce, uh, reduce smells.
>> And there's a requirement too for like
storage of waste and feed.
>> That's correct. Yes. So, uh, waste will
have to be, I believe, let's see what
section is that in here. Um, I know it's
it has to be contained in like a leak
proof container is I believe how it's
worded in the ordinance. Uh, as well as
um until it can be disposed of properly,
which in most cases I would imagine
every any resident that's having trash
services um they would have to wait
until they can, you know, dispose of it
then. Uh and then feed needs to be
stored in uh just a road and proof
container is how it's worded in the the
ordinance. Um there was some discussion
uh amongst planning commissioners of
should we update this the language there
to be a metal container. Uh but
ultimately we I think staff feels and um
having a conversation with the
commissioner that raised that question
that just leaving it rodent proof is
probably the better way to go versus
being so prescriptive that it has to be
metal. I mean, there's other materials
that somebody could um you know, build a
container out of that's still road
proof. So,
» Madam Mayor,
>> yes,
>> I've had several people in my area come
to me and they said number one, the
point 2 lots
very encroachable
and very unsightly,
especially for people that have elevated
decks that cover the whole neighborhood
in the backyard.
They're worried about loss of value
because some neighbor has a chicken
coupe.
Might be a little petty, but it's a
fact.
They're also available that they cannot
shield that from the neighbor
and that they would still with the
smallest lots that we do have don't have
the room in the backyard to accommodate
the chicken coupe and still have a
sightly backyard.
Another thing I don't like is the
licensing practice. It was on sorry the
licensing practice. I see a slippery
slope
non- inspection of the licenses.
We want to trust people but a lot of
people will push it to the envelope
and if we get into enforcement then we
get into cost.
So I don't like that idea either.
I think in my personal opinion
I'm not in favor of this ordinance at
all.
So that's where I stand on it and we'll
go from there.
>> Thank you.
>> Did those issues come up at the planning
commission? I mean, what was the gist of
the testimony and people that talked was
it are they supportive?
>> Yeah. Men, mayor and council. So during
the public hearing, I would say there
was five individuals who spoke. I would
say three were in favor of the chickens.
Um,
and two had some concerns. Some wanted
licensing. Of the concerns, that was
probably the most common item that I
heard that if you're going to do the
ordinance, have a license to go with it.
>> Okay.
>> Uh, or permit, one of the two. And I
think it was more geared towards a
permit during that discussion.
>> Okay.
>> Um, but obviously the language wasn't
worked out quite yet. Um, I would say
the ones that spoke in favor of it, it
was quite a learning experience. They
had a lot of great information. I would
say the especially one individual who
spoke I would consider to be a very
responsible owner and I learned a lot
just by hearing him speak and I'd say
some of those things influenced some of
the language changes that we had.
>> So I'd say it's generally positive after
the meeting itself. There was a few
individuals who emailed um which is one
which changed that chick age of having
to go out cuz there was things about
chickens bullying each other if they're
not the right size when they get
introduced. So that was important to
learn. And then another individual spoke
out against the chickens, stated
concerns. Um, I shared the ordinance
with her and kind of highlighted the
items of the ordinance for her concerns
and after that she was generally fine
with it. Um, so it kind of ranged, but I
would say I've dealt with chickens in
every city that I've ever worked for.
It's always split. It will always be
split. There are always going to be
residents who don't want it. There are
always going to be residents who do want
it. say during the survey and through
the process, I've seen more that do want
it than I generally have seen in
comparison to those opposed. Um, so we
tried to kind of create an ordinance
that hit a lot of different pieces to
it, but in the end, this is a policy
decision. It's up to council discretion
if you want to move forward with it, if
you want alterations to it, or if you
don't want to move forward with it.
on the neighbor. So the gentleman that
spoke that had the chickens already, he
did mention that he went to his
neighbors ahead of time.
>> Mor and councel, he I think it was
during the enforcement of his chickens
is when he went to his neighbors. And
>> sure, but I mean the point is that he
went to his neighbors, got a, you know,
agreement from them that it was okay.
And I'm not saying we want that in the
ordinance cuz that's a burden, but it
wouldn't hurt to say that's a best
practice.
>> Yeah. Metame and council that's a great
point. I wouldn't ever recommend that to
be a requirement as part of a license.
Obviously, neighbors change, things
happen, and it becomes a very tough
enforcement piece. We will have that on
the website as part of our best
practices. We're going to have handouts
that are a lot more detailed and cover a
lot more than this ordinance does in
terms of actual keeping of the chickens.
As attorney Vos mentioned, this is very
structured on where that placement is,
how it's going to be set on the
property, things of that nature. The
best practices and the handouts we're
going to have is really on the keeping
of chickens, the care of chickens, the
best practices, and with that being
said, how to be a good neighbor. What
talk to your neighbors about it,
recommend we do that, but it's not part
of the license process.
So, I think I asked this question
previously, but I'm going to ask it
again. Um, for those point 2 acre
properties, how many of those fall
within HOAs? So, most likely there's a
chance they wouldn't be able to have
chickens in
>> council. I I don't know the exact
number. There are quite a few. And this
ordinance is not going to super if an
HOA has a rule, they can enforce that
rule. If they don't allow chickens,
that's the HOA. If they're in if someone
gets chickens in violation of their HOA,
it's up to the HOA to enforce it. We
aren't going to enforce HOA bylaws on
their behalf. We don't do that for
anything. We enforce our rules. So, HOAs
have the ability to restrict chickens or
have higher restrictions than we have in
this ordinance. So they
>> you can have a coupe, but it has to be
50 ft from residential structures if
they wanted to, but that's up to their
HOA boards to decide.
>> Okay. Thank you.
I'm in favor, but the only thing that
makes me uncomfortable is someone like
the deck thing. If these decks in our
neighborhood in some of the smaller
lots, um, they're budding up to the
they're taking up most of the art. So,
I could see that becoming a problem.
And I don't know if there's a way to
word it so that
it's just advised that you don't you
take your neighbors into account like be
respectful of your neighbors yard too,
right?
>> I mean I worry about that.
>> That's a hard one.
>> Madame Mayor and Council, if you want to
go that route, I think we could easily
make a slight alteration to the wording
to just say
dwelling structure including attached
accessory. I like that
>> items
>> including decks.
>> Yeah, I like that too. The attached
accessory.
>> Yeah, I'm good with attached because
everything else I'm fine with. But
» yeah, Madame Mayor Council, would you
want it to be worded in a way that also
includes patios?
>> I would. Yeah. Yes.
>> Thank you.
Do you have any data on
>> chicken coops reducing somebody's
property value?
Madame Marian Council, I do not um think
and I don't
>> I would say that comes up a lot for
>> Well, it's always the car played is
whatever it is I don't like is going to
reduce my property value and I
>> it's an old tired
>> Yeah. Metamean council. That's actually
one that I haven't heard in the past um
in the [clears throat]
four different three times I've looked
at chicken ordinances. So, I'm not sure
on that. I've never seen a study on that
personally.
>> Okay, Mr. reckoning.
>> I would agree if as long as they're
decent like in the picture here. I mean,
this is
>> almost could be mistaken for a backyard
playet.
>> Well, yeah. I mean,
>> those kids can be pretty noisy.
>> What I'm talking about, though, is
that's a pretty ideal example. And I
think to your point,
>> this little
>> But how do you how do you know that
that's the exception to the rule?
>> Yeah, maybe not.
>> We don't we don't we don't know that.
>> Past history.
So
>> I was in Ripon, Wisconsin. We had the
same discussion.
There was one chicken coupe that looked
similar to this. Breast look like a
cardboard box with a tin roof.
>> That's not We're not going to allow
that.
>> Yeah, our ordinance specifies how it's
supposed to look.
>> That's what the ordinance said.
>> I get what you're saying and I agree. We
can't we have to be very specific about
what we're going to allow because there
will be people that will do the
cardboard box thing if we let them.
>> But that but that's not a durable
material,
>> right?
And then you learn in the middle of
winter that a cardboard box is not going
to
>> Right.
I mean, we could easily find a whole
bunch of reasons to to not do this.
Right. Right. Any
other questions,
concerns?
>> Um, I have a question about the
licensing time because you mentioned it
wouldn't take a lot of staff time. Do
you kind of have an idea? Is that new
permitting software going to have the
residents enter most the info and you
guys just review it or how does that
work?
>> Yeah, Madame Mayor and Council. So, IMS
is an online permitting portal. We're
actually transitioning all of our zoning
and land use items into this portal.
um when it gets unveiled. Um from a
licensing perspective, as someone
submits the items, they'll have it goes
through a completeness check, which
takes about five minutes knocking off to
ensure that they have everything. They
pay the fee up front. Um we review it
usually based on what's the required
info. It would probably take five to 10
minutes for each one.
And usually if there's like say they're
missing something or they're not in
violation through the IMS software, we
can directly respond to the applicant.
They'll get an email directly stating
it. They'll have to re-upload with any
changes. And so it's actually a very
smooth permitting software. I don't
anticipate this having
even close to the amount of time that
would be needed for a signed permit
application.
And and just to reiterate,
you said you you require a plan,
>> correct,
>> for the design of the coupe and the run.
>> Mhm.
>> And which includes tell me the materials
used, right?
>> Yeah. We Yeah, we'll define everything
into our permit. We haven't built out
that permit. Obviously, we want to get
the ordinance figured out first in case
there were any changes, but yeah, we'll
[clears throat] have all that info.
something for residents to be working on
now before 111
goes into effect.
>> And madame mayor and council, I'll just
kind of note on the license, there is
going to be a small fee for it to cover
the staff time that it will take to
administer this program. Um, but with
that being said, and what I've seen in
the past is having a fee also shows some
seriousness that people are taking into
account and actually want to go forward
with this in a respectful manner. um
free permits. Typically, people get a
lot more kind of loose with how they go
about it. So, I think the fee will show
that commitment by the property owner,
but also we'll cover the staff time that
we're going to need for it.
>> Y
it was pretty clear what you see the the
folks that are in favor of it. I mean,
when I was a kid, I was in 4. you don't
just don't see 4 anymore and I can just
see parents really making an effort to
uh use it as an opportunity with their
kids and animal animal husbandry and and
just teaching them responsibility and everything that goes with what we
heard from the folks that participated
in it. I just um
to cut that off just because we're
afraid of a complaint just doesn't make
any sense to me. So, I'm I'm in favor of
it.
>> Yeah. I think when I got here, I'm not
sure I was, but I my big concern was
just making sure we were covered with
the language. And I think sounds like we
are. I just want to make sure,
like I said, trying to balance the
homeowners right to do it, but also the
neighbors who might not care for it.
But,
um,
sounds to me like we've got things
covered. And I wasn't unfortunately able
to make that last get together meeting.
So, I rely on that what you're saying. I do I think there's value in having
animals around, learning, and that's good stuff. So, I think I would
go that way as well. And
um you mentioned verbiage on
I mean I'm sure you'll pick the right
words but just to make it very clear and
pretty assertive that
um anybody considering it can save
themselves a lot of headache if they do
make the rounds and and discuss this
with neighbors and they understand what
kind of a position they're going to be
in. Um,
and then they can weigh whether or not
they want to fight that battle.
[laughter]
And I think that'll go a long way and
uh so I just would
my suggestion [clears throat] or
recommendation is to to make, you know,
not only recommend that they go do that,
but uh give them some of those reasons
why. Just save yourself some headache.
You know,
>> madame mayor and council, I should also
note on the license because we have this
for some of the other IMS ones. When it
does get built out, we're going to have
an acknowledgement where they have to
check the box and it links to the code.
So, acknowledgement that I've read the
ordinance related to this where they
will have to check that box. So, now
granted, they may not, but at least then
they're actually stating that they have
acknowledged that they've reviewed the
code.
>> So, yeah.
>> Great. So they can't say they're unaware
of the code later.
>> Better Mary, that's correct.
>> Yeah. Um I'm in favor. Um I'm neutral as
far as chickens personally, but with the
feedback from the survey and over the
past few years people asking for this,
so I'm thinking, yeah, I'm for it.
» Great.
You want to present a motion? I would uh
make a motion to adopt ordinance
2026-14.
» I'll second that.
>> All right, we have a motion and a
second. All in favor? I
>> Oh,
>> jeez.
» Is that with the revision to add the
30-foot setback not just from dwellings
but also from attached
>> accessory stuff? Is that the intent of
them?
>> Yes, that's the intent of the
>> Thank you.
>> changes recommended through discussion.
» Okay. And I'll second that. All right.
We have a motion and a second. All in
favor? I
>> I
>> opposed.
>> All right. We have a that passes four to
one.
>> All right. We have correspondence and
reports on are online and we are
adjourned. Thank you.
Seriously think a lot of people be