Laserfiche WebLink
Request for Action <br />To <br />Item Number <br />Planning Commission <br />4.2 <br />Agenda Section <br />Meeting Date <br />Prepared by <br />Planning Items <br />November 25, 2014 <br />Zack Carlton, Planner I <br />Item Description <br />Reviewed by <br />Ordinance Amendment Modifying Setback <br />Jeremy Barnhart, Deputy Director CODD <br />Requirements for Agricultural Animals <br />Public Hearing, Case No. OA 14 -12 <br />Reviewed by <br />Action Requested <br />Recommend, by motion, modifications to setback requirements regarding the keeping of agricultural <br />animals in all zoning districts. <br />Background /Discussion <br />The recent ordinance amendment regarding boundary fences raised concerns about the minimum setback <br />for agricultural animals in the R -1 Single - Family Residential zoning districts, and staff was directed by the <br />City Council to evaluate the setbacks for the keeping of agricultural animals. <br />The current ordinance requires the keeping of livestock be setback at least five (5) feet in the R -1a zoning <br />district, and 100 feet in the R -1b, R -1c, and R -1d zoning districts. The setback is in place to protect <br />neighboring properties from the impacts (odor, noise, biting) of agricultural animals. <br />The larger 100 foot setback in the developed /urban areas of the city is in response to the increased <br />density, smaller lots (approximately' /4 acre) and small setbacks of these neighborhoods. The side yard <br />setback in these districts is 10 feet, and a reduction in the setback would bring livestock uses closer to the <br />home. <br />The R -1a zoning district has minimum lot sizes of 2.5 acres and larger side yard setbacks. Potential <br />impacts to homes in this district are minimized due to the larger lots and setbacks. The smaller setback <br />reflects these differences. <br />Staff compared our livestock /agricultural animal setbacks to those of nearby cites. The result of this <br />research is outlined in the following table. The peer comparisons may be used as a guide, however each <br />city is different and any amendment to Elk River's ordinance should be evaluated based on what is <br />appropriate for our city. <br />Municipality <br />Required Livestock Setback <br />Big Lake <br />300 foot setback <br />Ramsey <br />75 foot setback for stables and barns, 10 foot setback from property line. Additional <br />setback of 30 feet from inhabited structures. <br />Blaine <br />100 foot setback <br />Buffalo <br />100 foot setback <br />Albertville <br />Match residential building setback <br />P 0 W I R E 0 R 1 <br />Template Updated 4 /14AUR <br />