4.3 BASR 10-25-2016Request for Action
To
Item Number
Board of Adjustments
14.3
Agenda Section
Meeting Date
Prepared by
Public Hearings
October 25, 2016
BrieAnna Simon, Planner
Kristin Mroz, Environmental Technician
Item Description
Reviewed by
Gayle Murry —19262 Ogden St NW
■ Wetland setback variance, Case No. V 16-14
Zack Carlton, Planning Manager
Reviewed by
Action Requested
Approve, by motion, the variance request by Gayle Murry to allow a fence to encroach 45 feet into the
required 45 foot wetland setback for the following reasons:
1. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance are met.
2. The property has a land use of residential and the use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
3. The proposed use is reasonable and is permitted in the zoning ordinance.
4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of
the petitioners own action or inaction.
5. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
If the Board approves the request, staff recommends the following conditions:
1. The area within the 25 foot wetland buffer strip is not to be maintained as yard area (no mowing,
no planting, no landscaping and must be left to grow naturally.
2. The 25 foot wetland buffer strip area must be signed to identify the buffer edge and note that
maintenance is not permitted within the area.
3. No animals will be permitted within the wetland while surface water is present.
4. All conditions and best practices outlined by the Wetland Conservation Act —Technical
Evaluation Panel decision shall be met.
5. A manure management plan is required to be completed following the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency Technical Guidelines for Manure Management and Applications.
6. All standards described in Section 30-803 — Animals of the city code must be achieved for the
2.32 acres of fenced pasture land.
7. If the number of agricultural animals exceeds the permitted number of animal units for 2.32 acres
of fenced pasture land, the variance will not be recorded until a Conditional Use Permit is
obtained. Compliance shall be established, or a permit applied for no later than November 29,
2016.
8. If there is a change to the configuration of the fenced pasture land, a new plan is required, and
must be approved by the city.
If the Board of Adjustments denies the request, or an appeal is made by any interested party by
November 8, 2016, the application will automatically be forwarded to the City Council for consideration.
That meeting will be held on Monday, November 21, 2016, at 6:00 p.m.
I
�JA'TUR�
Background/Discussion
The property owner, Gayle Murry, is proposing to construct a fence within the wetland buffer area to
protect the wetland from the agricultural animals located at 19262 Ogden St NW. The property consists
of 5.0 acres and is located in the Single Family Residential (RI-a)zoning district. Approximately 66
percent of this property is covered in wetland which translates to 80 percent of the property being
restricted by the wetland setback.
City ordinance identifies two wetland buffers: first, a 25 foot no mow/maintenance buffer, which
prohibits alterations to the established vegetation, and second, an additional 20 foot buffer prohibiting
structures but allows fences. The proposed fence extends 20 feet into the wetland setback area, which is
permitted, and extends 25 feet into the wetland buffer area. The ordinance establishing both of the buffer
areas was adopted in 2006. This lot has not been platted meaning that a variance for the proposed use
would not have been required when the house was built.
Section 30-1852 regulates wetland setbacks as shown in the image below. The fence will encroach into
the 25-foot wetland buffer strip (red), but the fence is permitted within the required 20-foot wetland
buffer (strip) setback (orange). The applicant is asking for a 25 foot variance from the 25-foot wetland
buffer strip setback which does not allow fences. Staff has no concern with issuing a variance for the
fence as proposed.
The applicant has worked with the Sherburne Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) to develop a
Conservation Practice plan and cost -share application for wetland and wetland buffer restoration. Kristin
Mroz and SWCD staff have visited the property multiple times to determine the best solution for the
property.
As a part of the project, that applicant has applied for a Wetland Conservation Act Decision under
exemption of conservation practices. The applicant received an approval decision on 10/19/2016.
Additionally, Section 30-803 — Animals of the city code outlines the regulations which allow the keeping
of animals within the city in a safe, clean and healthy manner. Agricultural animals are permitted under
Section 30-809(d)(2) of the city code. This section limits the keeping of agricultural animals to one animal
unit per acre of fenced pasture land. With the current location of the fenced in area, 19262 Ogden St NW
can have 2.32 animal units. The applicant has stated that the limit of 2.32 animal units is currently being
exceeded. To establish compliance within the ordinance, a conditional use permit will be required to
increase the permitted number of animal units, which includes a manure management plan. If the
N:\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\V\V 16-14 Gayle Murray\3-Planning Commission\V 16-14 sr BA 10-25-16.docx
applicant wishes to go above the permitted 4.64 animal units they have two options. They can either
apply for a variance to increase the number animal units or fence additional pasture land. If the applicant
chooses to add pasture land, the new plan must be approved by the city.
Applicable Regulation
(The applicant's responses are italicized with staffs notes after.)
Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that the variance satisfies all five of the criteria
described below. The variance is:
We are requesting a variance on ourpropery to put a negative fill8" pride crossing through the south side of
the vet land. This avill allow an access lane to move from the front of the back property to the backside of the
back properly allowing us to use the back side of that piece of ourpropery svtthout traveling through the
wetland so as not to disturb the vegetation and possibly create issues with in the wetland itself. This would
require 2,160 square feet of fill. We are requesting to put a fence on both sides of the south side negative fill as
well as the north side of the wetland to insure the integrity and stability of the wetland only allowing needed
access when necessary, thus maintaining the integrity of the wetland area and its vegetation, causing no damage
and minimising access This project mould include a 25 foot wide vegetated fzlter strip on both sides of the
wetland to minimise the adverse effects of the fill on the wetland to hep keep it in compliance with all codes.
We are working avith Bill at the Soil and Water Conservation District to he p accomplish this goal. This
project has been approved by the county at this point, the abplication has been submitted.
The wetland outlets to a county the line that drains to the Elk River. Excluding un-necessary travel and
limiting the travel to one area from the front side of the back proper y to the back side of the back property as
well as the actual wetland itself, establishing a filter strip will improve water quality by reducing usage and
sediment entering the wetland and the tile.
1. Is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance, and
This jar ject will protect the wetland from un-necessary crossings throsrgh the wetland limiting the crossings to
the one safe area. Giving a safe, passable cro.rring to the back side of the back proper that willminimise any
damage by not having to go directly through the wetlands. Heoing to maintain the vegetation andprotect the
quality of the water in a manner that complies to all codes
Planning
The intent of the wetland setbacks is to protect wetlands from negative impacts of building
too close to them. The applicant has worked with the Soil and Water Conservation District
to formalize a plan to provide protection for the wetlands on the property. The general
purpose and intent of the ordinance are met with the developed plan.
Environmental
The intent of the wetland setback ordinance will be met with this project. Although the
ordinance does not allow for fences in the wetland setback, this project has gone through the
proper Wetland Conservation Act requirements and creates the most minimal impact as
agreed upon city and county staff.
N:\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\V\V 16-14 Gayle Murray\3-Planning Commission\V 16-14 sr BA 10-25-16.docx
2. Is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan.
This properly today is a proposed residential use property in the comprehensive plan and is consistent with the
city of Elk River and should be maintained as a residential properly in the future, through this variance, we
are asking for it to remain residential.
Planning
The property has a land use designation of residential, which permits agricultural animals and
the proposed residential use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Environmental
The property has a land use designation of residential, which permits agricultural animals and
the proposed residential use is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Conservation
practices are desirable projects according to the comprehensive plan.
Variances may be granted when the petitioner establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying
with the zoning ordinance. Practical difficulties mean that:
3. The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the zoning ordinance;
This request is not excessive and is within the honing ordinance of Elk River. We are asking for an increase
of fencing and fill on the south side to give the least amount of impact by the horses on the wetlands and
maintaining accurate Zoning rules, as the honing code allows for horses So as to allow safe travelfrom the
front side of the back properly to the back side of the back pmpery without directly through the wetland,
maintaining the integrity of the vegetation and seater. We are requesting twofences on the south side fill (on
each .ride of the south side fill) as well as one fence on the north side of the wetland.
Planning
The proposed residential use and the agricultural animals is reasonable and is permitted in the
zoning ordinance.
Environmental
The proposed residential use and the agricultural animals is reasonable and is permitted in the
zoning ordinance.
4. The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a
consequence of the petition's own action or inaction; and
The wetland cuts the back half of the properly in half. Bunning right through the middle of it. This project,
fill and fences, avill assist in keeping the wetland properly maintained by creating one safe path to the back.
Not accessing the back is an issue avithoutgoing directly through the wetlands causing damage to the vegetation.
Allowing a proper, safe area to move from the front to the back portion of the land and help to maintain the
quality and integrity of the wetland as well as its vegetation. Giving us access and allowing as to use the back
side of the property.
Planning
Although new wetland classifications and restrictions have been established since the
applicant purchased the property in 2007. Due to the proximity of the house and barn in
relation to the wetland, the proposed location is perhaps the best area on the property to
N:\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\V\V 16-14 Gayle Murray\3-Planning Commission\V 16-14 sr BA 10-25-16.docx
construct a pasteurized area for agricultural animals as it has less wetland impact. The
applicant has been working with the Soil and Water Conservation District along with City
staff to develop a plan that ensures the quality and protection of the wetland for a pasteurized
area. Wetlands are not unique to properties in Elk River. The subject property has
approximately 66 percent of this property covered in wetland and approximately 80 percent
of the property is encompassed by the wetland setback. As the ordinance is written today a
pasture area would not be feasible on the subject property.
Environmental
Wetlands are not unique to properties in Elk River. However, the wetland on this property
spans the full width of the property, making the upland beyond the wetland inaccessible by
animals or humans. This project has been developed in coordinate with the Sherburne SWCD
to develop a usable portion of land for pasture and upland access, while improving the water
quality of the wetland.
5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
To the best of our knowledge, fencing has existed on theproperly since it was built. Theprojerty is not and
will not be altered from itsprevious state by this variance, rather, the quality of the wetland mill be increased.
By alloaving this variance, it will protect the quality of the wetland and vegetation by creating this fenced path,
limiting travel through the wetland by follouring through with this project. Completing it according to code with
an eye on keeping it safe to move from the back to the front.
Planning
The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed fence would
be consistent with other pastured land in Elk River and will provide increased protection to
the wetland.
Environmental
The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed additional
fence would be consistent with other pastured land in Elk River and will provide increased
protection to the wetland. The water quality and appearance of the wetland will improve
dramatically.
Financial Impact
None
Attachments
■ Location Map
■ Applicants Narrative
■ Site Plan Exhibit
■ Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision
■ Section 30-803 — Animals
N:\Departments\Community Development\Planning\Case Files\V\V 16-14 Gayle Murray\3-Planning Commission\V 16-14 sr BA 10-25-16.docx
z � L
11i} -r � '
yam•"'
rt
. r _
� •
��r
Wetland Variance Narrative
Gayle and Chris Murray
19262 Ogden St NW
Elk River, MN 553330
We are requesting a variance on our property to put a negative fill 8" wide crossing through the south
side of the wet land. This will allow an access lane to move from the front of the back property to the
back side of the back property allowing us to use the back side of that piece of our property without
traveling through the wetland so as not to disturb the vegetation and possibly create issues with in the
wetland itself. This would require 2,160 square feet of fill. We are requesting to put a fence on both
sides of the south side negative fill as well as the north side of the wetland to insure the integrity and
stability of the wetland only allowing needed access when necessary, thus maintaining the integrity of
the wetland area and its vegetation, causing no damage and minimizing access. This project would
include a 25 foot wide vegetated filter strip on both sides of the wetland to minimize the adverse effects
of the fill on the wetland to help keep it in compliance with all codes. We are working with Bill at the Soil
and Water Conservation District to help accomplish this goal. This project has been approved by the
county at this point, the application has been submitted.
The wetland outlets to a county the line that drains to the Elk River. Excluding un-necessary travel and
limiting the travel to one area from the front side of the back property to the back side of the back
property as well as the actual wetland itself, establishing a filter strip will improve water quality by
reducing usage and sediment entering the wetland and the tile.
(1) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance.
This project will protect the wetland from un-necessary crossings through the wetland limiting the
crossings to the one safe area. Giving a safe, passable crossing to the back side of the back property that
will minimize any damage by not having to go directly through the wetlands. Helping to maintain the
vegetation and protect the quality of the water in a manner that complies to all codes.
(2) The variance is consistent with the City of Elk River comprehensive plan.
This property today is a proposed residential use property in the comprehensive plan and is consistent
with the city of Elk River and should be maintained as a residential property in the future, Through this
variance, we are asking for it to remain residential.
(3) The petitioner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning
ordinance;
This request is not excessive and is within the zoning ordinance of Elk River. We are asking for an
increase of fencing and fill on the south side to give the least amount of impact by the horses on the
wetlands and maintaining accurate zoning rules, as the zoning code allows for horses. So as to allow
safe travel from the front side of the back property to the back side of the back property without going
directly through the wetland, maintaining the integrity of the vegetation and water. We are requesting
two fences on the south side fill (on each side of the south side fill) as well as one fence on the north
side of the wetland.
(4) The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the
petition's own action or inaction; and
The wetland cuts the back half of the property in half. Running right through the middle of it. This
project, fill and fences, will assist in keeping the wetland properly maintained by creating one safe path
to the back. Not accessing the back is an issue without going directly through the wetlands causing
damage to the vegetation. Allowing a proper, safe area to move from the front to the back portion of
the land and help to maintain the quality and integrity of the wetland as well as its vegetation. Giving us
access and allowing us to use the back side of the property.
(5) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
To the best of our knowledge, fencing has existed on the property since it was built. The property is not
and will not be altered from its previous state by this variance, rather, the quality of the wetland will be
increased. By allowing this variance, it will protect the quality of the wetland and vegetation by creating
this fenced path, limiting travel through the wetland by following through with this project. Completing
it according to code with an eye on keeping it safe to move from the back to the front.
Thank you for your consideration, please feel free to contact me with any questions. My cell phone
number is 612-619-993 5.
Chris Murray
it t
WATERS S:FACE ELP.'.AMN
EL= 916 22
CFE. �E,�l - lNTME: 2 -------
jjj �IIC7P�
v
E^lEa
Z.-
'As 1
PROPOSED
WEST UFFER 5
722"GSF
A-
:128
(NOTE) ERWHER IUBE
PR OSED
p—
M5 SF
-
FEE
7,7_1
/o
WEII-ANa
33
ISO
-W WATER
EL=921.
X
"F
05—A
E
SNl
P.
A OF P
LEGEND
CONTOUR ELEVAIION
SOiL SORM
I PROPOSED TILE:
EMS -MG 11LE
PROPOSED ACCESS- LANE Ex
TOPELEV-9�5.0 P !STJNG F NCE
TOP WMTH�� DROPOSED FENCE
l` FEND
CE
FRCPOSED CULVERT S
�L
5,XI6, omp EXI TING/PROPOSED GRACE
1
IVEI
R�po
W- AND ,F
'NG;FOF
iNEiESOTA. SITE AN
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Decision
Local Government Unit (LGU) Address
City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
I- PROJFVT INFORM A TInN
Applicant Name
Project Name
Date of
Application
Chris and Gayle hurray
Murray Conservation
Application
Number
9-21-16
WCA 1 6-
08
® Attach site locator map.
Type of Decision:
F-1 Wetland Boundary or Type F-1 No -Loss Exemption ❑Sequencing
R Replacement Plan ❑Banking Plan
iecnnicai rvajuation ranee retain s anti Kecommendation (ii an ):
❑ Approve 0 Approve with conditions ❑Deny
Summary (or attach): See attached letter.
2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION
Date of Recision: 10-19-16
ElApproved ® Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied
LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary):
TEP members have visited this site a number of times. The applicant has received a Canservation Practice
plan and cost -share assistance with the Sherburne SWCD. The applicant is required to submit a manure
management plan to the city for approval of a Land Use Variance.
Additional conditions include:
-All other local, state, or federal permits are obtained, as necessary;
- The application, as reviewed by the TEP, is followed as submitted, with any changes to the permitted
plan to be brought back to the TEP for review and approval.
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 1 of 3
For Replacement Plans using credits from the State wetland Bank:
Bank Account #
Bank Service Area
County
Credits Approved for
Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest .01
acre)
Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the
approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following:
❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial
assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule
8420.0522, Subp. 9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings).
❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that
the BWSR `'Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and `Consent to Replacement Wetland's
forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located.
❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that
BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved
replacement plan.
Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met!
Signature Date Phone Number and E-mail
10-19-16 763.635.1000
KMroz@ElkRiverMN.gov
THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT.
Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all
appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands.
Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period
for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant may be
responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts.
This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the
TEP and specified in this notice of decision.
3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION
Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a
petition for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of
this Notice to the following as indicated:
Check one:
❑ Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send ❑ Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send
petition and fee (if applicable) to: petition and $500 filing fee to:
Executive Director
Minnesota Board of water and Soil Resources
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
BWSR. Fonn4 7-1 -10 Page 2 of 3
4, LIST OF ADDRESSEES
SWCD TEP member: Bill Bronder
BWSR TEP member: Cade Steffenson
Z LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact): Kristin Mroz
DNR TEP member: Mark Pelham
DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member)
WD or WMO (if applicable):
Z Applicant and Landowner (if different)
[] Members of the public who requested notice:
2 Corps of Engineers Project Manager
❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan decisions only)
5, MAILING INFORMATION
For a list of BWSR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA areas.pdf
-For a list of DNR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mii.us/wetIands/wca/DNR TEP contacts
);;-Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices:
NW Region:
NE R
Central Region:
Southern Region:
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
Div. Ecol. Resources
Div. Ecol. Resources
Div. Ecol. Resources
2115 Birchmont Beaeb Rd.
1201 E. Hwy. 2
1200 Warner Road
261 Hwy. 15 South
NE
Grand Rapids, MN 55744
St. Paul, MN 55106
New Ulm, MN 56073
Bemidji, MN 56601 1
1
1
For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see: http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr- regions. vdf
For a list of Corps of Project Managers: www.myp.usace.aniiy.mil/regulato!y/default.asp?pageid=687
or send to:
US Army Corps of Engineers
St. Paul District, ATTN: OP-R
180 Fifth St. East, Suite 700
St. Paul, MN 55101-1678
;0- For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to:
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
Wetland Bank Coordinator
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
6. ATTACHMENTS
In addition to the site locator map, list any other attach-ments:
ACOE Letter 10-14-16
M
BWSR Fonils 7-1 -10 Page 3 ol'3
M ate.
)U 39#13 3.5'NW
7
r-125-1402 �
=42 01
75-130-4106 -*' C)
MURRAY, CHR ISTOPHER & GAYLE
19262 OGDEN 5T NW
5M Acres Value S206 400
vie o- .
133Dft a
Parcel ID 75-130-4106 Alternate 1Dn1a
Sec/Twp/Rng �0-33-26 Class 201-ResidentiaiIunit
Property Address 19262 OGDEN ST Nth! Acreage 5
ELK RIVER
District ELK RIVER CITY
Brief Tax Description n/2
%ate: Nct to he usee on `eiral documents`
111",.it LI
Owner AddressMURRAY. CHRISTOPRIER & GAYLE
19262 OGDEN STREET NW
ELK RIVER MN 55330
a
0
DEPARTMENT of THE ARMY
ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
160 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 700
ST. PAUL, MN 56101-1678
OCTWLYTO 14 2016
ArMUM of
Operations Division
Regulatory Branch (2016-03457-LMG)
Mr. Chris Murray
19252 Ogden Street NW
Elk River, Minnesota 55330
Dear Mr. Murray:
This letter concerns your request for Department of the Army authorization to discharge fill
material into 0.05 acre of wetlands for the purpose of constructing a farm road. The project site
is in Section 30, Township 33 North, Range 25 West, Sherburne County, Minnesota.
The discharge of dredged or fill material in waters of the United States, including wetlands,
for the construction or maintenance of farm roads, forest roads, or temporary roads for moving
mining equipment is exempt from the Clean Water Act regulation, provided that you comply with
the Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in the enclosure. If your project meets these
BMPs, a Department of the Army permit is not required to do this work.
This letter is valid only for the project referenced above. If any change in design, location, or
purpose is contemplated, contact this office to avoid doing work that may be in violation of
Federal law. Please note that this confirmation letter does not eliminate the need for state,
local, or other authorizations, such as those of the Department of Natural Resources or your
county.
The decision regarding this action is based on information found in the administrative
record, which documents the District's decision -making process, the basis for the decision, and
the final decision.
If you have any questions, contact LeeAnn Glomski in our 8t. Paul office at
(651) 290- 5324 or LeeAnn. M. Glomskl'@usace. army. mil. in any correspondence or inquiries,
please refer to the Regulatory number shown above.
SincerelyAte
,
4.
Kristen Hafer
Chief, Southwest Section
Enclosure
cc:
Kristin Mroz, city of Elk River
Lynda Peterson, BWSR
Operations Division
Regulatory Branch (2016-03457-LMG)
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
FOR DISCHARGES NOT REQUIRING PERMITS
(1) Permanent roads (for farming or forestry activities), temporary access roads (for mining,
forestry, or farm purposes) and skid trails (for logging) in waters of the U.S. shall be held to the
minimum feasible number, width, and total length consistent with the purpose of specific
farming, silvicultural or mining operations, and local topographic and climatic conditions;
(2) All roads, temporary or permanent, shall be located sufficiently far from streams or other
water bodies (except for portions of such roads which must cross water bodies) to minimize
discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S.;
(3) The road fill shall be bridged, cuiverted, or otherwise designed to prevent the restriction of
expected flood flows;
(4) The fill shall be properly stabilized and maintained during and following construction to
prevent erosion;
(5) Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States to construct a road fill
shall be made in a manner that minimizes the encroachment of trucks, tractors, bulldozers, or
other heavy equipment within the waters of the United States (including adjacent wetlands) that
lie outside the lateral bound -cries of the fill itself;
(6) In designing, constructing, and maintaining roads, vegetative disturbance in the waters of the
U.S. shall be kept to a minimum;
(7) The design, construction and maintenance of the road crossing shall not disrupt the
migration or other movement of those species of aquatic life inhabiting the water body;
(8) Borrow material shall be taken from upland sources whenever feasible;
(9) The discharge shall not take, or jeopardize the continued existence of, a threatened or
endangered species as defined under the Endangered Species Act, or adversely modify or
destroy the critical habitat of such species;
(10) Discharges into breeding and nesting areas for migratory waterfowl, spawning areas, and
wetlands shall be avoided if practical alternatives exist;
(11) The discharge shall not be located in the proximity of a public water supply intake;
(12) The discharge shall not occur in areas of concentrated shellfish production;
(13) The discharge shall not occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River
System;
(14) The discharge of material shall consist of suitable material free from toxic pollutants in toxic
amounts; and
(15) All temporary fills shall be removed in their entirety and the area re -stored to its original
elevation.
Page 2 of 2
Sec. 30-803. - Animals.
(a) Definitions. The definitions in section 30-1 are applicable in this section.
(b) Purpose. It is the intent of this section to establish regulations which will allow the keeping of animals
within the city in a safe, clean, and healthy manner. The city recognizes that certain types of animals
require regulations and standards to ensure that the health, safety, and welfare of the public is
protected and to promote the compatibility of land uses as it relates to the keeping of animals.
(c) Applicability of other regulations. The provisions of this section relate to the regulation of animals in
the context of land use compatibility. These standards and provisions are not exclusive of other
regulations set forth in this Code. The provisions of any other ordinance, statute or rule which impose
other or greater restrictions shall also apply.
(d) Agricultural animals.
(1) The keeping of agricultural animals in the Al and R-1 a zoning district is a permitted use on
parcels which are five acres or larger and a conditional use on parcels which are smaller than
five acres. In the R-1 b, R-1 c, and R-1 d districts, the keeping of agricultural animals is a
conditional use and shall be limited to parcels which are five acres or larger.
(2) The number of animals permitted shall be limited to one animal unit per acre of fenced pasture
land as outlined in the following table:
Animal
Animal
Unit Value
Slaughter steer or heifer
1.0
Horse
i
1.0
Mature dairy cow
1.4
j Swine under 55 pounds
3
0.5
Swine over 55 pounds
0.4
Sheep
0.1
3
3 Duck
0.2
Turkey
0.018
Chicken
0.01
S
t
S
Note: For animals not listed in this table, the number of animal units shall be defined as the
average weight of the animal divided by 1,000 pounds.
Page 1
The total number of allowed animal units per acre may be increased, provided there is an
approved manure management plan following the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Technical Guidelines for Manure Management and Applications. Such approval may be
obtained through the conditional use permit process as noted in sections 30-651 through 30-
657. In no event, however, shall the increased amount exceed twice the allowed animals as
indicated in subsection (d)(2).
(3) Stables and barns. All agricultural animals shall be provided a shelter under roof appropriately
sized to accommodate the specific animal in a humane manner. For setback requirements see
section 30-1007.
(4) Fences. Agricultural animals shall be enclosed in a pen or corral. Fences for pens, corrals,
pasture or similar enclosures must be of sufficient height and strength to retain such animals.
For setback requirements see section 30-1007.
(5) Sanitation and health standards. Any stable or barn in which animals are kept or maintained
shall be kept clean so as to prevent the transmittal of disease to other animals or persons.
Manure shall be removed from confined areas with sufficient frequency and disposed of
properly to avoid nuisances from odors or breeding of flies. If manure is used as fertilizer, it shall
be turned under immediately if possible, or as soon as the frost leaves the ground. Application
of manure should be conducted in such a manner so as not to permit runoff toward surface
waters. If the city finds that the manure and other waste materials create a nuisance by
attracting flies, other insects, or rodents, or by creating offensive odors, the city may order that
the manure and other waste materials be removed within four days of notice to the owner of the
land.
(e) Dangerous animals. No person shall keep or be allowed to keep in the city any animal which is
dangerous by nature as defined in section 30-1.
(f) Nontraditional or exotic animals.
(1) A person may keep a nontraditional or exotic animal only upon issuance of a conditional use
permit in accordance with subdivision III of division 2 of this article. In determining whether an
animal is considered nontraditional or exotic, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to
supply the city with the necessary data and information to reasonably prove that the animal is
not dangerous in captivity. This information shall he part of the public record and shall be
discussed as part of the conditional use permit review.
(2) If a conditional use permit is approved which allows the keeping of a nontraditional or exotic
animal, this use shall be at a minimum subject to the agricultural standards as set forth in
subsection (d) of this section. In reviewing a request to keep nontraditional or exotic animals,
the city may impose conditions and restrictions as it finds necessary, including, but not limited
to, the following:
a. Restrictions on the number and type of animals.
b. Setbacks greater than those required in subsections (d)(3) and (4) of this section.
c. Restrictions on the size, height and type of enclosures.
d. Screening or landscaping of the proposed use.
(3) The applicant must also submit a copy of all permits required from the state department of
natural resources, United States Department of Agriculture, United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, and any other governmental agency if applicable.
(g) Inspections. The city may at any time inspect the lot and structures where animals are kept to ensure
compliance with the conditions and restrictions of this article and strict compliance with the terms and
conditions of a conditional use permit.
(Code 1982, § 908; Ord. No. 04-21, § 2, 12-20-2004)
Page 2
Cross reference— Animals, ch. 10.
Page 3