My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1 PCSR 04-25-2017 DRAFT MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Packets
>
2011-2020
>
2017
>
04-25-2017
>
4.1 PCSR 04-25-2017 DRAFT MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/21/2017 3:27:34 PM
Creation date
4/21/2017 3:27:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCSR
date
4/25/2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 <br />March 28, 2017 <br />asked what happens if an issue arises between inspections. Mr. Simon stated that any further <br />action would be complaint-driven or as noticed by staff. <br /> Councilmember Wagner asked who would do the inspections. Mr. C <br />planning staff would make the first inspection and subsequent inspections would be handled <br />by code enforcement staff. Councilmember Wagner asked if any of <br />were surveyed experienced an impact on property values by allowing chickens. Mr. Carlton <br />stated no, that was not mentioned. Councilmember Wagner stated <br />of developments that have homeowners associations and asked if t <br />restrictive than the cityÔs ordinance. Mr. Carlton stated yes, they could be more restrictive, <br />but not less restrictive. <br /> Councilmember Wagner asked if other cities passed on any information they have learned <br />since adopting their ordinances. Ms. Simon stated that a couple <br />issue of animals running at large and had to involve animal cont <br />noted that initially there was high interest in raising chickens <br />off quite a bit after a year or two. <br /> Councilmember Wagner asked what happens when people lose intere <br />that they would prepare a one-page handout stating what people s <br />noted that he is aware of a rescue site called Chicken Run in Minneapolis, so apparently this <br />can become an issue when people become tired of raising chickens. <br /> Commissioner Thiel asked what would happen to the coops and run <br />interest. He expressed concern that keeping chickens could attract wildlife/predators. He <br />felt odor would need to be addressed, depending upon the lot size. <br /> Commissioner Rydberg stated that he felt that the proximity to pedestrian and public use <br />areas should be considered in the permitting process. <br /> Chair Johnson stated that attracting predators could be a concern for the neighbors. He <br />asked if the permit fee was in line with other cities. Ms. Simo <br />cities surveyed ranged from $30 to $50. Chair Johnson suggested the chicken area be <br />screened with opaque fencing. <br /> Commissioner Larson-Vito stated she opposed creating a financial burden to raise a few <br />chickens. Commissioner Nicholas stated that he did not feel the yard should require opaque <br />fencing. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rydberg asked if other cities noticed an effect on <br />stated she did not ask that specific question but she could ask <br />surveyed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Feinstein asked if staff had concerns with complian <br />stated that there are other sections of the cityÔs ordinance that address enforcement. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rydberg asked what is the maximum number of chicken <br />allowed on the smaller lots. Ms. Simon stated that the smallest lots could have 4 chickens. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.