08-06-25 PC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 3 of 6 incorporated to allow license holders the option to install an exercise yard without setting a minimum size requirement for an exercise yard. The drafted language in Subd. 6 A. 3 updates the language for a pen, which is defined as a fully enclosed and covered area attached to a coop where the chickens can roam unsupervised. Some cities use this same definition to define a run. In the drafted language, pen remains a required area for the keeping of chickens with a minimum size per bird of 10 square feet of floor space. Both the Urban Chickens and Extension resource reference a pen, with the latter resource recommending 10 square feet minimum per bird. The City Council has discussed modifying the minimum size per bird, with one member suggesting 8 square feet per bird and another supporting a larger minimum size per bird. The Planning Commission may consider discussing the minimum pen size per bird and if there is a recommendation to the City Council to further amend this language. c. Modify coop location and setback requirements The drafted Subd. 6 A. 2. e. updates the location requirements for a coop and pen and incorporates specific language that the outer limit of the coop and pen shall in no instance be located less than 10 feet from the property line, but remains the same on the standard that these shall be closer to the principal dwelling upon the license holder property than any other abutting property. This language conforms with the setback requirements for an accessory structure. d. Remove screening requirements for areas dedicated to the keeping of chickens The drafted amendment includes removing Subd. 6 A. 4, which removes the requirement for screening to be installed around the perimeter of the area for the keeping of chickens. A fence around a pen is still a requirement in 6 A. 3 but a fence around the entire chicken keeping area is proposed to be removed. The Urban Chickens resource recommends that pens are fenced and recommends the use of privacy fencing while the Extension resource does not explicitly reference fencing. The intent with striking this item is to remove a requirement that could be seen as cost prohibitive when combined with the requirement for a pen to be fully fenced and covered as noted in A. 3 and definitions of Chapter 4, Animals and Pets. e. Modify language for the required maintenance of chickens The drafted revisions in Subd. 6 B. include updates for the required maintenance of chickens. In 6. A. 2.f, language has been added to update requirements for climate control from a specific temperature in line with guidance from the Extension resource. In 2.g, language that was previously addressed in A. 7 is incorporated with the first reference to maintaining a rodent-free environment and the reference was removed from A. 7. Similarly, 2.i is updated to reference that chickens must not be housed in a residential house or an attached or detached garage, which was originally in the previous version A. 5 and is proposed to be removed in the drafted amendment. Subd. 6 A. 4 describes the requirement to keep all premises on which hens are kept clean. The provision does not include a specific frequency for cleaning, and this is common in other cities’ ordinances for the keeping of chickens as well. The Extension resource references weekly coop