7.5. SR 12-15-2014 City of
Elk Request for Action
River
To Item Number
Mayor and City Council 7.5
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Public Hearinj December 15, 2014 Zack Carlton, Planner I
Item Description Reviewed by
Ordinance Amendment Modifying Setback Jeremy Barnhart,Deputy Director CODD
Requirements for Agricultural Animals Reviewed by
Cal Portner, City Administrator
Action Requested
The Planning Commission recommends no changes to city ordinance as it relates to the setback of
agricultural animals.
Councilmember Burandt requests this item be continued pending further discussion at a future Council
worksession. The Council should then open and continue the public hearing,by motion,until their
January 20, 2015, regular meeting.
Background/Discussion
Case No. OA 14-12
The recent ordinance amendment regarding boundary fences raised concerns about the minimum setback
for agricultural animals in the R-1 Single-Family Residential zoning districts,and staff was directed by the
City Council to evaluate the setbacks relating to the keeping of agricultural animals.
Staff compared our livestock/agricultural animal setbacks to those of nearby cites. The result of this
research is outlined in the following table. The peer comparisons may be used as a guide, however each
city is different and any amendment to Elk River's ordinance should be evaluated based on what is
appropriate for our city.
Municipality Required Livestock Setback
Big Lake 300 foot setback
Ramsey 75 foot setback for stables and barns, 10 foot setback from property line. Additional
setback of 30 feet from inhabited structures.
Blaine 100 foot setback
Buffalo 100 foot setback
Albertville Match residential building setback
Staff's recommendation is to leave the ordinance as written. The five and 100 foot setbacks are
appropriate for existing uses and interactions between agricultural animals and residential development
will increase with development.
P a w E A E U a r
Template Updated 4/14 INIM UREI
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission did not have any questions or comments and recommend no changes to the
ordinance by a 7-0 vote.
After the meeting, Councilmember Burandt expressed concern about compliance with state statute. Ms.
Burandt requests this item be tabled,to be discussed at a future workshop.
The city regulates fencing and agricultural uses separately. A fence is permitted on the property line
(boundary fence) in all districts. Additionally, barbed wire,barbless wire, and electric fences are permitted
in the R-1a and A-1 (Agricultural Conservation) zoning districts as a boundary fence. Boundary fences are
not a requirement in any zoning district and fences six feet tall or less may be constructed without a
permit.
Separately, ordinance regulates the keeping of agricultural animals with a setback in all R-1 (Single Family)
zoning districts.The current ordinance prohibits the keeping of agricultural animals within five feet of the
property line in the R-1a zoning district, and within 100 feet in the R-1b, R-1c,and R-1d districts. How
the setback is established is not specified.
Public Hearing
No one spoke during the public hearing
Financial Impact
None
Attachments
■ Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 25, 2014
N:\Public Bodies\Agenda Packets\12-15-2014\Final\x7.5 sr Ag.Animals Amendment.docx
ECty lk - _ Request for Action
River
To Item Number
Planning Commission 4.2
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
Planning Items November 25, 2014 Zack Carlton,Planner I
Item Description Reviewed by
Ordinance Amendment Modifying Setback Jeremy Barnhart, Deputy Director CODD
Requirements for Agricultural Animals Reviewed by
Public Hearing, Case No. OA 14-12
Action Requested
Recommend, by motion, modifications to setback requirements regarding the keeping of agricultural
animals in all zoning districts.
Background/Discussion
The recent ordinance amendment regarding boundary fences raised concerns about the minimum setback
for agricultural animals in the R-1 Single-Family Residential zoning districts, and staff was directed by the
City Council to evaluate the setbacks for the keeping of agricultural animals.
The current ordinance requires the keeping of livestock be setback at least five (5) feet in the R-1a zoning
district, and 100 feet in the R-1b, R-1c, and R-1d zoning districts. The setback is in place to protect
neighboring properties from the impacts (odor, noise, biting) of agricultural animals.
The larger 100 foot setback in the developed/urban areas of the city is in response to the increased
density, smaller lots (approximately '/4 acre) and small setbacks of these neighborhoods. The side yard
setback in these districts is 10 feet, and a reduction in the setback would bring livestock uses closer to the
home.
The R-1a zoning district has minimum lot sizes of 2.5 acres and larger side yard setbacks. Potential
impacts to homes in this district are minimized due to the larger lots and setbacks. The smaller setback
reflects these differences.
Staff compared our livestock/agricultural animal setbacks to those of nearby cites. The result of this
research is outlined in the following table. The peer comparisons may be used as a guide, however each
city is different and any amendment to Elk River's ordinance should be evaluated based on what is
appropriate for our city.
Municipality Required Livestock Setback
Big Lake 300 foot setback
75 foot setback for stables and barns, 10 foot setback from property line. Additional
Ramsey setback of 30 feet from inhabited structures.
Blaine 100 foot setback
Buffalo 100 foot setback
Albertville I Match residential building setback
P 0 W I R E 0 R 1
Template Updated 4/14 I'N"A f UR
Staff's professional recommendation is to leave the ordinance as written. The five and one hundred foot
setbacks are appropriate for the current uses and interactions between agricultural animals and residential
development will increase with development.
Financial Impact
None
Attachments
■ None
N:ADepartments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\OA\OA 14-12 Ag Animals\OA 14-12 PC Livestock and Fencing.docx