Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — SEPTEMBER 22, 2025 6 <br />Councilmember Holden commented on the cleanliness language and asked if residents would be <br />able to clean their coops and place the waste in a compost pile. <br />Senior Planner Fransen reported the language requires residents to maintain a nuisance free <br />environment. She indicated the language did not speak to compost piles or where waste from the <br />coops shall be placed. She stated it would be up to the licensee to manage the waste odors. <br />Councilmember Holden explained she was concerned with how coop waste could be added to <br />compost piles and the odor that would be created from this. She commented on how the Council <br />discussed and supported having neighbor consent versus neighbor notification. She expressed <br />concern with how coops may be placed closer to a neighbor's home than a licensee's home, <br />which could be worked through if neighbor approval remained in place. She questioned why the <br />Planning Commission recommended seven chickens instead of six. <br />Senior Planner Fransen stated that the Planning Commission discussed that chickens could be <br />ordered three at a time. She also noted the Planning Commission discussed requiring neighbor <br />consent at the initial licensing period. She reported the Planning Commission recommended the <br />same requirements be followed, when it comes to neighbor notification, for chickens as was done <br />for bees. <br />Councilmember Holden commented on the differences between the keeping of bees versus the <br />keeping of chickens and stated the two were not the same and therefore she did not believe the <br />neighbor consent process should be the same. She explained she wanted to protect both the people <br />who were keeping chickens as well as the neighbors. <br />Councilmember Monson thanked Senior Planner Fransen for her detailed presentation. She <br />requested further information regarding the 25-foot setback. <br />Senior Planner Fransen reported the proposed 25-foot setback would make the coop placement <br />more standard. She indicated other communities have similar language in place. <br />Councilmember Monson stated she generally supported the recommendations from the Planning <br />Commission and she appreciated their efforts to be consistent when it comes to the keeping of <br />chickens. She inquired if a licensee were to have a fully fenced back yard would this resident be <br />allowed to let the chickens roam free. <br />Senior Planner Fransen explained a fully fenced in backyard would meet the definition and <br />could serve as an exercise yard for chickens to roam when supervised. <br />Councilmember Monson suggested the language read "and other allowed breeds" to address the <br />potential for another loud bird type and in the event a resident were to bring in such a type that <br />was not allowed in ordinance. She reported she supported the ordinance moving forward but <br />suggested the setback requirement go back to the calculation in order to require a coop to be <br />closer to a licensee's home than a neighboring home or expanding the setback from a neighboring <br />structure. <br />Mayor Grant asked if there was a minimum pen size for six hens. <br />