My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7.3. SR 10-16-1995
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1995
>
10-16-1995
>
7.3. SR 10-16-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2010 10:02:32 AM
Creation date
5/7/2010 10:02:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
10/16/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
amendment to his Conditional Use Permit which would allow him to keep both <br />horses on the property. <br />. , <br />Analysis <br />Agricultural Uses are a conditional use in the R1-a zone for parcels under 5 <br />acres in size. The Barents property is 3.66 acres, but 1.03 acres is in the <br />highway R.O.W. Therefore, the property only has 2.63 usable acres. The City <br />Ordinance limits the number of horses allowed to one (1) horse per acre of <br />pasture Land, as per MPCA standards. The Barents currently have just under <br />acre of pasture. <br />The Planning Commission should again look at the seven (7) standards for a <br />conditional use permit as found in the Elk River City Ordinance Section 900.42. <br />Staff has a couple of concerns with the addition of another horse to the property. <br />The .City Ordinance says that the standard is one horse per acre of pasture land, <br />by allowing the second horse on this property, the number of horses would <br />exceed the MPCA standards as well as the City Ordinance. The biggest concern <br />with allowing two (2) horses on less than one acre of pasture land is the odor <br />and waste associated with the addition of the second horse. Staff requested <br />that Mr. Barents provide the City with information on how the additional waste <br />would be handled, but we did not receive that information. <br />The complaint received by the City regarding this property was not a complaint <br />about odor, rather, it was about the number of horses on the property.. The <br />complainant felt that the City was inconsistent in enforcing its ordinances and <br />granting Conditional Use Permits. Staff has not received any other complaints <br />about the property.. However, the property to the west of Tyler Street is zoned <br />Rlc with city sewer and water. While odor has not become a concern yet, as this <br />area develops, two agricultural animals on a property this size could become an <br />even greater issue. <br />Recommendation <br />In Staffs opinion, this request does not meet the seven standards for granting a <br />conditional use permit and, therefore, recommends denial of the Conditional Use <br />Amendment to allow a second horse on the property .based on the following <br />findings: <br />1. The addition of the second horse will exceed the MPCA standard of <br />one horse per acre of pasture land. If the amendment is granted, it <br />will double the number of horses per acre and could detrimentally <br />affect the use and enjoyment of other property in the neighborhood. <br />S:\PLANNING\KENDRA\CU95-21.DOC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.