Loading...
02-15-22 Planning Comm Agenda Packet CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2021 7:00 P.M. DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Maddy called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Maddy; Commissioners Eggenberger, Huskins, Gault (arrived at 7:05 P.M.) and Riedel; Planning Director Darling; and, Council Liaison Johnson Absent: Commissioners Huskins 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Riedel moved, Eggenberger seconded, approving the agenda for November 16, 2021, as presented. Motion passed 3/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  October 5, 2020 Eggenberger moved, Riedel seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2021, as presented. Motion passed 3/0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - NONE 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS – NONE 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Subdivision Variance Applicant: Zehnder Homes, Inc. Location: 24835 Yellowstone Trail Planning Director Darling explained the request to subdivide the property into two lots and for a variance to allow the easterly lot to be 99.65 feet wide when 100 feet is required. She noted that this property was originally two lots that were then combined into one larger lot. She stated that the lot width regulations and how they are measured have changed since the original lots were created in the 1950s. She stated that other than the lot width requirement, the subdivision is routine. Staff recommends approval of the requests, subject to the conditions as included in the staff report. There has been one letter received noting concerns with the subdivision causing a decline in their property values. Commissioner Gault arrived at the meeting. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 2 of 9 Commissioner Riedel noted that one of the conditions includes removal of an accessory shed and asked if it was because if this subdivision is allowed that would leave an accessory structure on a lot that has no main dwelling. Planning Director Darling confirmed that this was the reason for this condition and noted that it was also not compliant in terms of setbacks. Commissioner Eggenberger asked about the well and the condition to identify the location of the well on future Lot 4. Planning Director Darling explained that the City wants to ensure that each lot has its own functioning potable water source. Commissioner Eggenberger confirmed that this meant that there was not City water connected to this property and if someone were to build on Lot 3 they would have to dig their own well. He asked what would happen if it was found that the well was located on Lot 3. Planning Director Darling stated that they would have to dig a new well for Lot 4. Commissioner Riedel asked about the right-of-way to access Lot 3. Planning Director Darling stated that when they install a new service connection for sewer they will need a right-of-way permit in order to do so. th Eric Zehnder, Zehnder Homes, 10300 10 Avenue N, Plymouth, noted that he has been able to determine that the well for Lot 4 is located on Lot 4 and is shown on the survey. Commissioner Riedel asked if the property owner had any objection to removal of the shed. Mr. Zehnder stated that they do not have any objection to that condition. He noted that the current renter for Lot 4 is planning to purchase the home. Chair Maddy asked if there was anyone present who would like to comment on this application. Dale Schrode, 24755 Yellowstone Trail, stated that he thought his neighborhood was a mature and established area. He stated that he has liked all the settings for the home and never imagined that there would be room to squeeze another home in. He stated that this request seems to be out of place and stated that the proposed home will obstruct his view to the west and feels the limited visibility will increase the danger of entering the road. He stated that he also has concerns with changes in the landscape and the environmental impact because that small piece of woods offers a huge sanctuary for an array of wildlife, such as owls, pileated woodpeckers, wild turkeys, and deer. There is also a whole ecosystem there with tree frogs and other insects. He stated that it would be a shame to lose the existing habitat and collapse the ecosystem. He read aloud a quote from the Shorewood website about it being a ‘little bit city and little bit country’. He stated that he understands that there is a plan to replant trees but that means that the habitat won’t return until 50-100 years from now. He stated that he does not see this project as improving or adding benefit to the community or neighborhood and will have an awkward, misfit appearance. He asked that the City adhere to its minimum lot standards and not approve the variance for subdivision. He stated that that the neighborhood has been long established and believes it should stay that way for the next generation to enjoy. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 3 of 9 George Greenfield, 24715 Yellowstone Trail, asked if the Commission was aware of the nature of the wooded ravine on the west boundary of the property. He stated that about 3 or 4 years ago, the conservation district, in conjunction with the new development on the golf course, redid the drainage system that goes through the ravine from the Country Club to Lake Minnewashta. He stated that the stated size is misleading because that area cannot be disturbed without wrecking the new drainage system. He stated that it appears that the existing driveway will remain and asked if the driveway for the new home would run parallel to Yellowstone or perpendicular. He stated that, as Mr. Schrode pointed out, that will disrupt the conformity and symmetry of the neighborhood. He stated that a variance of 4 inches sounds minor, however one of the things that he believes perturbs many residents is that the City rarely acts on principle and everything is done ad hoc. He stated that 4 inches is a violation of the City Code. He gave the example of the request that was denied to divide a parcel into smaller lots along Seamans and noted that he sees a constant inconsistency in how the City acts. He stated that if the City does approve this request, he believes they should let everyone in the Deerfield Addition know that their property will be susceptible to subdivision into two lots. Mr. Zehnder stated that he can address a few of the concerns that have been raised. He noted that if you look at an aerial photo, the house setbacks on the homes in that area are widely varied. He stated that regarding the concern about an obstructed view, there are currently a lot of trees there and they plan to leave many of them in place and the home will be built approximately 60 feet off the street. He stated that they could move the lot line 4 inches to have a conforming lot, but they felt it was a lot of work for 4 inches and felt it was easier to leave it where the original lot line division was located. Commissioner Gault confirmed that the reason for asking for this variance was that Mr. Zehnder was using an existing property description for Parcel A. Mr. Zehnder confirmed that was correct and this was a previously platted lot that had been combined at some point and this is just to return it to that original split. Commissioner Gault stated that it appears as though Mr. Zehnder is asking for the variance to avoid the expense of creating new property descriptions and new surveys. Mr. Zehnder stated that he would not say it is the expense, but just extra work, because everything has already been done. Commissioner Gault stated that the only reason this is here is because of 4 inches. Mr. Zehnder noted that when he purchased the property, they were under the impression that Parcel A was 100 feet wide because that is what is shown on the Hennepin County site. He stated that it was a pretty big surprise when the survey came back and it was 99.65 feet and was told by Planning Director Darling that it would require a variance. Commissioner Riedel stated that in the addition to the cost of surveying, there is also the argument to be made that having parallel lot lines in consistency is desirable. Chair Maddy closed the public input at 7:23 p.m. He gave an overview on how the City regulates housing and lot splits. He explained that the Commission’s hands are kind of tied for saying that they do not want more homes in this neighborhood, because Mr. Zehnder has enough area for two homes per the zoning. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 4 of 9 Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he does not see 4 inches as being enough to recommend denial of the variance request. Eggenberger moved, Gault seconded, recommending approval of the Minor Subdivision and Variance to Lot Width at 24835 Yellowstone Trail, subject to the conditions included in the staff report. Motion passed 4/0. Planning Director Darling that she will discuss the drainage concern that was raised by one of the residents with the City Engineer prior to bringing this to the City Council. B. Variances for Second Driveway and to Front Yard Setback Applicant: Zehnder Homes, Inc. Location: 4990 Shady Island Point Planning Director Darling gave an overview of the request for a variance to allow a new home to be built at 25 feet from the front property line rather than 35 feet and a variance to allow a second driveway where the regulations allow one. She stated that this property is unique in that it has a very narrow roadway that serves as the public street. She stated that the road is about 10 feet wide which is grounds for supporting the second driveway connection. She noted that the homeowner had submitted a letter earlier today that stated that moving the home back would require removal of a large, mature, catalpa tree that they would prefer to save and changing the location would place the home in an area with suspect soils. Staff followed up with the applicant who attested that the ground water is high on the property and is about 5 feet below the surface where they are proposing the new home. She noted that the City’s requirement is that the home has to be a minimum of 4 feet above ground water. Staff found that some of the criteria were met to allow the variance for front yard setback and all criteria were met to allow the second driveway. Staff received two letters of support for the requests from nearby neighbors to the property. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that the proposal is for the home to be further back than the existing home. Planning Director Darling explained that the proposal is for the home to be substantially further back than the existing home. Commissioner Eggenberger confirmed that information plays no part in this issue because they would still need a variance. Planning Director Darling stated that if they had plans to keep the existing footprint of the home then they would not need a variance. She explained that when you tear down an old home and build a new home, it is very hard to keep to the existing footprint. Chair Maddy stated that he thinks the Commission can recognize that their proposal would lessen the non-conformity. th Eric Zehnder, Zehnder Homes,. 10300 10 Avenue N, Plymouth, explained that when he first wrote the variance application, he focused more on the fact that they are making the current situation better which he felt was a strong and compelling argument. He noted that he had lost sight of the fact that they want to save the large catalpa tree. He stated that as they move closer to the lake there is also a concern that it would be even closer to the ground water and noted that they are unsure about those soils because they tested where they would like to put the home, but did not test back further than that. He stated that only about half of the proposed new home would be past the setback and noted that it will be at 25 feet where the existing home is only CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 5 of 9 setback 5 feet and feels that their proposal is making the situation much better. He stated that many times people try to get closer to the lake, but they are trying to get further away from the lake which he feels is unique. He stated that another thing to consider is that if the home is pushed back, they will need to add hard cover to the driveway area. He stated that the property owners have spoken to four neighbors who are in support, two of which have submitted letters to the City. Commissioner Riedel asked where the catalpa tree was located. Mr. Zehnder pointed the tree out on a map and noted that the property owner had already spent money to fortify the roots so it can be saved and their plans will be to fence it off to keep construction activity away from it. He stated that if the home is pushed back that tree along with a few others would definitely be lost. Chair Maddy opened this item up for public input at 7:40 p.m., however there was no one present to give input. Commissioner Gault stated that he understands the regulations, but the fact that the new proposal reduces the infringement by 20 feet he feels is a point he sees in favor of granting the variance. Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he agreed that reducing the non-conformity is a favorable factor for him to vote in support of it. Commissioner Riedel stated that he disagreed. He stated that this is not an easy case and does not think the legal non-conforming or the grandfathering concept applies here if you are removing a house because then it becomes like a new construction project. He stated that there is plenty of room on this lot for a fully conforming residence. He stated that the only reason he is hesitating is because of the potential ground water issue which could sway him. He stated that he would like more information on the ground water issue. Commissioner Gault stated that he is curious about the other homes on this road and where they fit into the lots. Planning Director Darling stated that she did look to see if the homes were generally meeting the setback from the public street and found the other homes in the area do, with one garage located fairly close to the street. Commissioner Gault asked if those homes were built under the new regulations and were newer homes. Planning Director Darling stated that she did not check the construction dates of those homes. She explained that the rules changed in the mid-1980s to the setback from the water level of the lake. She stated that now the setback is based on an elevation point for the lake so it stays consistent. Chair Maddy stated that he has been on the Planning Commission for 9 years and has never seen anyone try to get farther from the lake. He stated that this is definitely a unique situation in the City. Commissioner Gault asked about the rationale of the home being at an angle and noted that if the home was rotated and moved back slightly, it would probably meet the requirements. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 6 of 9 Mr. Zehnder stated that he thinks there would still be the issue of getting closer to the lake, the catalpa tree would be in danger, and the view was why they were proposing that particular angle. He stated that it is his fault that they did not focus on the ground water issue and the catalpa tree as part of their variance application. He stated that he simply focused on the fact that they would be getting the front yard setback so much better than it currently is and further from the lake. He stated that he does not want his lack of diligence in that manner to harm the homeowners chance for the variance. He stated that it was not just a fabricated reason because of Planning Director Darling’s recommendation because the ground water issue and the catalpa tree are legitimate concerns. Commissioner Gault stated that he likes the fact that they are increasing the setback by 20 feet, but feels that Commissioner Riedel has raised a valid point about them taking down the home and being considered as new construction. Commissioner Riedel noted that he still may be inclined to vote against this request, but feels an argument could be made for it being such a unique road that has many structures that are quite close to the small road and the neighborhood does not have consistent setbacks. Commissioner Gault asked about the existing shed that is located in the right-of-way. Planning Director Darling explained that that shed has been there since before the shoreland ordinance prohibited sheds by the lake and the City is not asking them to remove the existing shed. Eggenberger moved, Gault seconded, recommending approval of the variance requests for front setback and a second driveway, subject to the conditions included in the staff report. Commissioner Gault noted that the address of the property was not mentioned in the motion. Motion amended by Eggenberger, second amended by Gault, to recommend approval of the variance requests for front setback and a second driveway, for property located at 4990 Shady Island Point, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Motion passed 3/1 (Riedel opposed). C. Variance to Minimum Home Width Applicant: Ben and Meghan Becker Location: 6180 Cathcart Drive Planning Director Darling explained that the property owners are proposing to remove all the existing structures from the site and build a new home with a variance request to build a home 20 feet wide where 22 feet is required. She stated that the new home would have two detached garages that they would use to store their personal vehicles and equipment. The structures would have cedar-stained lap siding with metal roofs. Staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions included in the staff report. She noted that although the applicant does not meet all the variance criteria, the applicant has indicated that they have designed the home to maximize solar and energy efficiency which is encouraged by the City’s ordinances. Ben Becker, 6180 Cathcart Drive, explained the thought process behind the home width is related to solar, energy efficiency and passive heating which are important to them. He stated that their architect believes that 20 feet wide is optimal to allow for passive heating as well as allow natural CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 7 of 9 light to enter the home. He read aloud a portion of a biography written about their architect David Salmela. Commissioner Eggenberger asked why they would not just change the design and increase it by 2 more feet. Mr. Becker stated that it is possible, but they are respecting the architects design who feel this was the optimal size to allow light to flood it and allow for passive heating. Chair Maddy asked if this was approved how soon they planned to break ground. Mr. Becker stated that they would like to break ground as soon as possible. Chair Maddy opened this item for public input at 8:02 p.m. George Gleason, 6130 Cathcart Drive, stated that his only concern is for the water table and run- off because he has always had problems in his basement with sump pumps constantly running. He stated that when the change overs happened across the street and the new water tower went it, it made a big difference at his place, but he still gets flooded in the spring. He stated that if Mr. Becker is putting a full basement, his concern is how high it will have to be and would require extra landfill which then would cause run-off to come to his property. There being no additional public input, Chair Maddy closed this portion of the meeting at 8:03 p.m. Chair Maddy asked about the current amount of impervious surface versus what is being proposed. Commissioner Riedel stated that it is 7% versus 4%. Chair Maddy stated that is almost cutting the home in half. Commissioner Gault stated that when he looks at A 100, it appears as though someone is planning to divide this lot which will impact the impervious surface. A woman spoke from the audience (inaudible). Planning Director Darling stated that the current amount of impervious surface on the property is 7.6% and they are proposing to reduce the amount of impervious surface coverage. She stated that her recollection is that this home is not proposing a basement because of the high water table in the area. Mr. Becker stated that was correct and they were not proposing a basement even though there is currently a basement. Commissioner Eggenberger asked how the City came up with the width requirement of 22 feet. Planning Director Darling stated that there were several changes to State statute in the mid- 1970s-to mid1980s regarding manufactured housing and mobile homes. She stated that most cities put the minimum house sizes into their ordinances at that time just to make sure that the housing stock remained on permanent foundations and was large enough to maintain stable CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 8 of 9 property values. She noted that the City’s minimum house size is 22 x 30 which is about 660 square feet. Chair Maddy stated that he does not like the minimum requirement and would like to find a practical difficulty to support the request. He stated that he feels this is a really interesting design for aesthetics and energy efficiency which he would like to encourage. Commissioner Riedel stated that he would echo that sentiment. He stated that he disagrees with a restriction on somebody building an energy efficient, innovative home. He stated that he feels that if somebody wants to have a small home, they should be allowed to have a small home and should not be forced by the City to have a larger home. He noted that he is also struggling to find a rationale for granting the variance because this is all new construction. Chair Maddy stated that he feels the ordinance was written to prevent depreciating housing stock which typically things like mobile homes do. He stated that this home is the opposite of that situation. He stated that the Commission could recommend denial based on a strict interpretation of the ordinance and hope that the Council reverses it, or they can say that the practical difficulty is that they are trying to do something innovative and smart. Commissioner Gault stated that he and his wife love the low winter sun that streams through their home and love it in the summertime when it is high enough that it doesn’t stream into the house and over heat it. He stated that their home is 26 feet wide, but they are not using it for passive heating. He stated that he doesn’t really buy into the fact that 2 feet makes that much of a difference in the passive heating capability, particularly with the windows proposed in the design. He stated that he understands both sides of the argument, but questions where this will stop and noted his concern for consistency in rulings and recommendations on these requests. He stated that he is not adamantly opposed to the request but is also not gung ho on it. Commissioner Riedel asked about the minimum width of 22 feet and whether any portion of the home could be more narrow than that measurement. He asked if a two-foot bump out would satisfy the requirement. Planning Director Darling read aloud from the ordinance which states, “not less than 30 feet in length and not less than 22 feet in width over the entire minimum length. Measurements shall not take into account of overhang or other projections beyond the principle walls.” Mr. Becker stated that efficiency of resources such as the solar and passive heating is one thing but there is also efficiency of materials that should be considered. He stated that increasing it by two feet is another 200 square feet of materials and that is unnecessary for them and their needs. Chair Maddy stated that he will vote to recommend approval of this request and would like to add discussion of the minimum requirement to the City’s work plan. He stated that if people want to have a small home, he feels they should be allowed to as long as it doesn’t depreciate property values. Commissioner Riedel noted that perhaps it could just explicitly prohibit mobile homes because he thinks was the whole rationale for this language. Chair Maddy stated that there are now some very high end manufactured homes, so he feels it is worth a conversation in the future to discuss this issue and potential improve the Code. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2021 Page 9 of 9 Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he would not want to vote to recommend denial with the hope that the City Council would overturn that recommendation. Eggenberger moved, Gault seconded, recommending approval of the variance request to minimum home width for property located at 6180 Cathcart Drive, subject to the conditions as included in the staff report. Motion passed 4/0. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. REPORTS • Council Meeting Report Council Liaison Johnson reported on matters considered and actions taken during Council’s recent meeting. • Draft Next Meeting Agenda Planning Director Darling stated there is a Special Home Occupation permit and a Commercial site plan slated for the December 7, 2021, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Gault commented that the information regarding North Oaks included was very interesting reading and asked why it was provided to the Commission. Planning Director Darling explained that when she first started at the City she had gotten feedback that Commissioners would benefit from having some educational materials and have her share news articles that were pertinent to Planning Commissions. She stated that this particular article was included in their packet materials because she thought there were some interesting points in the article after their land use training session provided a few weeks ago by the League of Minnesota Cities. Commissioner Gault stated that it shows that elections have consequences with the change in their council. He stated that the prior council had approved it and the new council shot it down. He stated that he suspects that there will be a lawsuit over this issue. Planning Director Darling noted that the article indicates that they are being sued. 8. ADJOURNMENT Riedel moved, Gault seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of November 16, 2021, at 8:29 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. 7D MEETING TYPE REGULAR City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title/Subject: Urban Farm Animals Discussion Meeting Date: November 22, 2021 Prepared By: Marie Darling, Planning Director Attachments: Potential Ordinance Amendments for Urban Farm Animals Background: In September of this year, the City Council adopted some additional standards for urban farm animals, but listened to concerns from residents regarding nuisance issues like chickens flying out of enclosures and escaping during coop cleanings, etc. Staff has researched means to contain chickens and other fowl. Below is a summary of the research and recommendations on how to proceed. Restrict lot size for fowl and increase setbacks to property lines for enclosures and coops. Staff re-reviewed many of our neighboring cities’ ordinances for examples on lot area and setbacks to see how other cities regulate them. Minnetonka requires one acre to have any farm animals, including fowl. Chanhassen regulates the number of chickens based on the size of the lot – four for properties under an acre, eight on properties of 1 to 2.5 acres, etc. Setbacks vary by city, with suburban cities having greater setbacks than urban cities. See next page for a table summarizing the cities’ setbacks. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. City Side abutting Side Rear Adjacent Water nd a street (2 Home bodies front) Bloomington 50, but not in 30 30 50 front yards Chanhassen Same as 10 10 25 house Chaska Not in front 10 10 50 15 yard Eden Prairie Not in front 10 10 50 15, not in yards buffers Minneapolis Not in front 10 10 20 yards Minnetonka Not in front Farther yards than from owner’s home Plymouth Not in front 20 20 Not in yard buffers Shakopee Not in front Not in side 10 50 yard yards Shorewood Not in front 10 (in rear Same as Farther yards yard) house than from owner’s home St. Paul 5 5 Staff recommendation: o An increase in the setbacks from the side property lines to at least 30 feet to provide greater distance from the enclosure to the property line to reduce the likelihood an escaped fowl would cross the property lines. o A minimum lot size of one acre (43,570 square feet) to ½ acre (21,780 square feet) so that the lots are large enough to have space for the enclosures, coops and setbacks. Require chicken coops and enclosure areas to be fully enclosed with nets or screens to prevent fowl from escaping. Bloomington, Chanhassen, Chaska, Plymouth and Shakopee require enclosures to be fully enclosed or to have nets over the top. Staff recommendation: o Add a definition for fowl enclosure/run that requires the confinement area to be fully enclosed with nets or screens on the top. o Consider adding a minimum size for the enclosure/run based on the number of chickens. Require wing clipping. None of the other cities that staff reviewed required wing clipping or even mentioned it. I reviewed two websites (Raising Happy Chickens and Backyard Poultry) and it seems very common. It involves trimming the first 10 feathers at the end of one wing so that the bird lacks the balance needed for flight. According to both websites, the practice does not harm or hurt them because the quills lack blood supply and nerves. Because the wing feathers molt and grow back each year, the wing clipping must be repeated annually on the new feathers. Some chicken owners are opposed to wing clipping for aesthetic or ethical reasons. Staff recommendation: o No amendments to require wing clipping. While the wing clipping may not harm or hurt the animal, if the City requires the practice staff has to enforce it. City staff does not have the appropriate training or the time necessary to catch each bird and verify wing trimming at each annual inspection. Annual inspections for chickens would be more efficient if the inspectors were able to concentrate on the coop/enclosures and nuisance issues and not check all the chickens. Additional recommendation: Add standards for rejecting permit application or revoking permits. Review standards for applicability to rabbits and bees. Financial or Budget Considerations: Cost of publishing any additional ordinance amendments and noticing current permit holders. Next Steps: Subject to Council direction, staff would begin drafting amendments to the ordinance. Some of the above amendments would require a public hearing through the Planning Commission (lot size/setbacks), but others could be approved solely by the City Council (enclosure requirements/wing clipping/permit denial-revocation). CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 22, 2021 Page 6 of 13 D. Urban Farm Animal Discussion Planning Director Darling explained that this item is a continuation of previous discussion regarding chickens and other fowl. She stated that the Council recently approved changes to the standards for urban farm animals, but were concerned after hearing from some residents that chickens are constantly noisy and frequently escape from their enclosures. The Council directed staff to come up with some means of containing the chickens and asked them to look specifically into enclosures and wing clipping. She noted that staff also looked at the possibility of requiring more land in order to be allowed to have chickens or other fowl. Following their research, they are not making any recommendations regarding wing clipping as inspecting and enforcing that practice would be time consuming and an inefficient use of the inspector’s time. Staff is recommending that the lot size and setback be increased from the side property lines to be greater than what is currently in place. She stated that this recommendation would be in the hope that there is more space between the coop and the property lines. They are also recommending that the enclosures be fully enclosed which could include nets or screening over the top and noted that the Council may want to consider a minimum sized enclosure based on the number of chickens and adding standards for rejecting or revoking permits, and exempting rabbits and bees from many of the new standards. Mayor Labadie asked if there was anyone present who would like to speak regarding urban farm animals, however, there was no one present for this issue. Councilmember Johnson stated that his only concern is if the City has any current permit holders that have a lot that is less than the proposed half acre. Planning Director Darling stated that they do and how this would be written up and structured is so that it would apply to new permit requests for a minimum sized lot. She stated that this would mean that all the people who currently have chickens can maintain the same number of chickens until they voluntarily decide to discontinue the practice. Councilmember Gorham asked about the review of enclosures and whether there was generally a minimum size listed. He noted that if the Council were to recommend a size, he does not think he would know where to begin. Planning Director Darling stated that there are several standards based on some of the websites she found. She noted that similar to minimum house sizes, it is a certain square footage per chicken or fowl and is based on maintaining minimum standards. She stated that property owners could go larger if they can accommodate that on their property. Councilmember Gorham asked if they could go larger but would then be subject to accessory structures and building permit limitations. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct. Councilmember Gorham asked if she was looking for input from the Council on a minimum size. Planning Director Darling noted that she plans to propose some options to the Council following her research, if the Council decides to move forward. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 22, 2021 Page 7 of 13 Councilmember Callies stated that she thinks the proposed changes sound reasonable to her, particularly the fully enclosed enclosures. Councilmember Gorham asked if most of the current permit holders have fully enclosed areas. Planning Director Darling stated that most of the current chicken owners have enclosed coops, but there are a few that allow their chickens to free range and are just enclosing them with fencing. She stated that the City will define ‘enclosure’ and require that it either have a top, a screen, or a net on it. Councilmember Gorham expressed his appreciation to Planning Director Darling for how much time she has spent researching this issue. Councilmember Callies asked if her understanding was correct that this that would still apply to the existing permit holders so they would have to fully enclose their coops, but would not have to meet the minimum lot size. Planning Director Darling confirmed that this was a correct understanding. There was consensus of the Council that these recommendations are reasonable and directed staff to proceed with drafting the amendments to the ordinance.