Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout042721 UA MINUTESCITY OF APPLE VALLEY URBAN AFFAIRS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES April 27, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Urban Affairs Advisory Committee meeting was called to order by Chair Sharon Schwartz at 6:02 p.m. Members Present: Sharon Schwartz, Linda Blake, Sandy Breuer*, Pamela Sohlberg*, Walton Mahlum, John Vegter, and Ann Arens Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist, Planner/Economic Development Specialist Alex Sharpe *Virtual attendee 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Schwartz asked if there were any changes to the agenda. MOTION: Vegter moved, seconded by Mahlum, approving the agenda. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – March 23, 2021 Chair Schwartz asked if there were any changes to the minutes. MOTION: Breuer moved, seconded by Sohlberg, approving the minutes of the meeting of March 23, 2021. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. 4. ACTION ITEMS A.Animal Ordinance Additional Discussion on Regulatory Aspects of Keeping Chickens Planner Alex Sharpe presented a brief presentation. Planner Sharpe advised that the committee begin discussion and provide some direction so that staff can begin to draft an ordinance. Committee Member Vegter commented that the committee should focus on chickens only and not ducks, geese or other fowl as those may have other parameters. Chair Schwartz asked if the ordinance would need to specifically state that it was for chickens only. 2 Planner Sharpe responded that it would need to specifically state it was for chickens as a definition would need to be created to show what is being permitted versus not. CD Director Nordquist advised that staff would also need to provide a reason for why other fowl, ducks, pigeons, etc. are not included and only chickens. Committee Member Arens asked if it would make sense to state that other fowl would have different needs than chickens do. Committee Member Arens also asked if there have been any petitions to allow other animals besides chickens. Planner Sharpe stated that there have not been any signed petitions for other fowl. Planner Sharpe advised that the definition would be decided between staff and the City Attorney. CD Director Nordquist stated that there are definitions already distinguishing between farm animals and poultry. Committee Member Sohlberg advised that she had spoken with a neighbor who had chickens and provided some feedback such as a large amount of waste and that there is a smell associated with chickens especially with those that do not adequately care for them. Committee Member Sohlberg also stated that her neighbor suggested that suburban homes would not be appropriate for chickens. Her neighbor also stated that with the cost of feed and the upkeep, there is not much of cost savings for having your own eggs versus purchasing in store as eggs are inexpensive. Committee Member Vegter brought up that coops are also very expensive and a large amount of eggs could be purchased with the cost of a coop but that some people enjoy having fresh eggs as opposed to store bought. Chair Schwartz advised that keeping chickens could be seen as more of a hobby as opposed to a food source. She expressed concerns that people may see this as a fun activity and not realize the amount of work that can go into keeping chickens. Committee Member Arens commented that having residents take a class prior to keeping chickens could help them with realizing what it entails. Committee Member Vegter recommended that a permit be required along with attending a class on what is involved. Chair Schwartz agreed with Committee Member Vegter. She also stated that residents have information on setting up a proper coop. Chair Schwartz also stated that the City may want to have a permit procedure, similar to what is done for fences or sheds, for building a coop and maintaining setback requirements. Planner Sharpe advised that the City does not require permits for fences under 8’ tall or sheds that are under 200 sq. ft. He expressed concerns that Planning staff would not be 3 able to look at chicken coops as they are not knowledgeable in Inspections aspects. The Building Inspections department would not be able to inspect them either as they cannot inspect below 200 sq. ft. by state law. He also advised that some cities, such as Plymouth, provide their residents with a handout stating additional information such as checking with your homeowner’s association to be sure what is allowed so that the responsibility is put onto the resident and the City responds on a complaint basis. Staff would also want to know if the Committee would want to require annual registration for the permit, a one- time registration, etc. Resident Andy Riesgraf was present virtually and commented that chicken owners are informed enough to take care of backyard chickens. He also stated that residents are allowed to have dogs without having to take a class. Going back to Committee Member Sohlberg’s comment earlier regarding the smell of chickens and feedback received from her neighbor, Andy stated that this was in reference to farm chickens which are not kept the same as backyard chickens would be. Andy also stated that keeping chickens was not necessarily done from an economic standpoint although chickens would be less expensive than owning a dog. Resident Colette Joncas was also present virtually and stated that raising a flock of 50 chickens on a farm is very different than raising 3-5 chickens in a backyard setting. She also stated that most residents are not going to want to jump into keeping chickens without any knowledge beforehand and would be more likely to adopt a cat or dog. Colette also advised that the Committee and staff may want to provide a list to residents of commercial coops that are available and that this cost could be seen as an adoption cost and could show more of an economic stake in keeping chickens. Colette also stated that their pests such as Japanese Beetles were reduced when she had her hobby farm in Wisconsin. Committee Member Vegter opined that the sample permit for Plymouth that was provided in the agenda packet was a good reference for the types of information Apply Valley may want to provide to residents. Committee Member Blake asked whether a decision was going to be made on requiring a permit or not. She also asked what would happen if someone decided to keep chickens without going through the permit process and whether there would be compliance. CD Director Nordquist replied that there is a hierarchy starting with registration so that the City would know where the chickens are located and then a permit would be a step further with requiring various conditions in order to keep chickens. Committee Member Sohlberg asked whether the discussion was still open or if the Committee had decided to allow chickens and parameters were just being decided currently. CD Director Nordquist advised that the meeting is to gather feedback currently as opposed to making a motion on each action item. He stated a draft ordinance will be 4 created regardless of what the committee decides and will then move forward to Council to make a decision. Committee Member Vegter advised that the committee should make a decision on whether or not to allow chickens, whether to require a permit, what parameters will be included in the permit, etc. Committee Member Sohlberg expressed support for Committee Member Vegter’s comment. Committee Member Mahlum asked whether the committee would need to set parameters prior to moving to City Council such as permitting, etc. even though the Council may make a different decision on whether chickens will be allowed. CD Director Nordquist advised that the City would like to be responsive to the 300 residents that have petitioned for chickens. He advised that no action be taken this evening. Committee Member Mahlum clarified that he was questioning whether or not the committee would need to provide additional information to the City Council in the event that the committee makes a recommendation of not allowing chickens and Council does not agree with it. Committee Member Vegter advised that the committee would need to provide reasoning on why they would not allow chickens and they would likely need to provide background information if City Council decides to allow chickens against the committee’s recommendation. Committee Member Breuer stated that chickens should be allowed in the City and agreed with resident Andy Riesgraf’s point regarding the City not requiring a class to have a dog. She advised that the City should provide a rule sheet for residents on keeping chickens but not require a permit. Committee Member Blake agreed with Committee Member Breuer’s comments on not requiring a class for keeping chickens. She stated it would be better to provide the resources so that residents can make an informed decision. Committee Member Arens added that she noticed most suburbs in the Twin Cities do allow chickens and she also advised that providing rules and having a structure for residents to follow when keeping chickens. Arens stated that the number of residents keeping chickens would likely be very low. Planner Sharpe stated in response to Colette Joncas’ comment on providing a list of commercial coops that are available, that the City would not be able to provide a link on our government website and would need to use a resource like the University of MN Extension program to provide this information to those interested. 5 CD Director Nordquist recommended that a checklist be created so that the committee can discuss and make a decision on the various items at the next meeting on May 25, 2021. He also advised that a public hearing would be held once a draft ordinance is created, to get feedback from residents. Chair Schwartz asked if a public hearing has been held since the pandemic began. CD Director Nordquist advised that there was still participation in the public hearing held, both in person and virtually. Planner Sharpe advised that there have been 4-5 public hearings just this month. Chair Schwartz restated her concerns regarding placement of coops and the proximity to sources of water where contamination could occur. She also expressed concern over having residents be sure that coops are located within property lines. CD Director Nordquist stated the City likely would not require a survey be done. Resident Colette Joncas responded to Chair Schwartz’ concern regarding water contamination and feces and stated that there are more hazardous materials such as lawn fertilizers that residents use that the City does not have control over. CD Director Nordquist stated that contamination from feces likely would not be a problem in residential areas but could be for those located on the shores of the city’s lakes. He stated that further regulations could be included in the ordinance for these unique properties. Planner Sharpe advised that in the Shoreland Overlay District require the same setback from the principal structure from the normal high-water line. There are very limited properties within the Shoreland Overlay. Committee Member Mahlum asked whether the public hearing would be looking at the ordinance prior to it going to the City Council. CD Director Nordquist responded that the feedback from the public would be gathered before the City Council votes. 5.OTHER BUSINESS A.Next Urban Affairs meeting is scheduled for May 25, 2021