My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1. DRAFT MINUTES 02-02-2015
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2015
>
02-02-2015
>
4.1. DRAFT MINUTES 02-02-2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2015 9:07:39 AM
Creation date
1/30/2015 9:07:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
2/2/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Council Minutes Page 6 <br /> January 20,2015 <br /> Councilmember Wagner stated her experience about being raised on a farm,noting <br /> she felt a 5' or 20' setback doesn't matter and that animal noise and smell will still <br /> exist. She didn't feel it right to require current property owners to install an <br /> additional setback fence no matter what the distance. <br /> Mayor Dietz expressed his concern with not having a setback and his experience <br /> living adjacent to a property where cows came up to his property line. He felt there <br /> should be some sort of setback when properties border residential properties. <br /> Councilmember Burandt stated people have different preferences with what they <br /> want to view in their back yards and some prefer animals. <br /> Councilmember Wagner asked if the fence wasn't placed on the property line,how is <br /> the property located between the fences being maintained. <br /> Counselor Beck stated the city should look very closely at how to enforce current <br /> agricultural use in regards to non-conforming properties. He also stated it would be <br /> difficult to draft ordinance language to cover every possible property scenario in the <br /> city. <br /> Councilmember Westgaard proposed to remove the 5' setback in the areas zoned <br /> R1 a;in R1b or R1c settings, determine a setback between larger parcels that have <br /> agricultural animals and adjoining housing developments. He stated there will be <br /> plenty of discussions taking place in the near future about possible rezoning of the <br /> northern half of the city, and there is a challenge in crafting language that will cover <br /> every possible scenario and exception. <br /> Councilmember Burandt asked to consider removing the requirement of a setback <br /> fence if a partition fence in already in place, on adjoining properties that are <br /> combined to total 20 acres or more. She also asked to remove all the setbacks if you <br /> have a large enough piece of property to warrant a partition fence as identified in <br /> state statute on properties that qualify to put up a partition fence in any zoning area. <br /> It was the consensus of the council to have staff work with Mr. Beck to determine if <br /> language could be drafted. Staff was directed to draft language modifications to <br /> remove the setback for properties in the R1a districts, and remove the requirement <br /> of a second fence in R1, b, c, and d zoned areas when parcels total 20 or more acres <br /> on those properties that qualify to put up a partition fence in any zoning area as <br /> identified by state statute. <br /> 9.3 Annual Report <br /> Mr. Portner presented the staff report. <br /> Mayor Dietz provided a history of the annual report presentation and stated <br /> although he felt it a valuable piece of information and marketing tool,it no longer <br /> served its usefulness, stating the Council receives information from staff year-round <br /> P 0 W I R I U 9 Y <br /> 1`4M UREJ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.