Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br />also suggested a "fly away" barrier be required but the task force did not include this as <br />part of the recommendation. In addition, the task force recommended the City should <br />encourage best practices for the keeping of bees. <br />Chickens and fowl were recommended as an activity to be regulated by an 8 to 2 vote, 2 <br />members voting for status quo. The task force directed staff to research the chicken and <br />fowl issue in more depth and make recommendations from a public health, aesthetic, and <br />nuisance perspective. The task force wanted all recommendations for chickens and fowl <br />to be based on facts not just what other communities were doing. Staff researched <br />chickens and fowl and prepared the April report with references to research papers <br />regarding the best practices for the keeping of chickens and fowl. Staff developed a tiered <br />system, instead of a static number, for the number of fowl allowed to be kept on each lot <br />in New Brighton depending on lot area. The reasoning for the tiered system is a larger lot <br />may be able to support larger numbers of fowl without having the activity become a <br />nuisance issue for neighbors. There was a suggestion by a task force member that there <br />could be a limit on the number of coops or flocks instead of the tiered system. Staff also <br />included recommendations regarding coops, runs and pens, roosters, and the keeping of <br />birds. Some task force members felt chickens should not be regulated and have the City <br />only recommend best practices. There was also concern about how any new regulation <br />may affect those who already have chickens or fowl. Staff suggested Council could delay <br />the date of any new regulations going into effect in order to give time for residents to <br />comply as grandfathering doesn't legally apply to this topic. Ultimately, the task force <br />decided by consensus on the following recommendation for chickens and fowl, with <br />exceptions noted, with debate happening during the April and May meetings. The <br />recommendation for chickens includes coop requirements and a fowl tiered matrix. The <br />recommendation is as follows. <br />Coons must be <br />o Clean and sanitary <br />o Made of sound construction and craftsmanship <br />o Be maintained <br />o Protect the birds from the weather <br />o Meet a 5 foot setback (2 members suggested 10 feet for setback) <br />o Not located in the front yard of a residence <br />o Have a minimum of 3 square feet per chicken <br />o Not be located in a primary residence <br />o Follow best practices for nests and roosts <br />Chickens and fowl should be restrained to the owner's property at all times. The task <br />force felt fowl should be kept on the owner's property. Whether the resident decided to <br />have a fence, pen, run, or other type of restraining method would be left to the resident. <br />The task force felt residents should not allow their fowl to leave their property. <br />Fowl is defined as all domesticated barnyard and water fowl. There was discussion by <br />task force members to ban water fowl and possibly have a different table for different <br />types of fowl. Ultimately, the group agreed on the following table. There were a few <br />