Loading...
6 Petting Farms Amendment .~ to CITY OF CHANHASSEH PC DATE: 1/19/00 6/06/00 CC DATE: 6/26/00 "' REVIEW DEADLINE: - Z =t :.J J 1.. L ::( :( - ~ 1.1 - - () STAFF REPORT CASE #: ZOA 00-1 IUP 00-2 By: Kirchoff PROPOSAL: Request for a(n): (1) Zoning ordinance amendment to allow petting fanns as an interim use in the A - 2, Agricultural Estate District; and (2) Interim use permit to operate a petting fann. LOCATION: 7461 Hazeltine Blvd. APPLICANT: Susan McAllister (Miss Rosie's Fann) 7461 Hazeltine Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 474-5099 PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estate District 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential, Low Density ACREAGE: 6 acres DENSITY: ~, N/A SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant would like to operate a petting farm on a parcel currently utilized as a hobby farm and zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate District. The zoning ordinance does not permit this activity, so the applicant is requesting an amendment. Staff supports the idea of a petting farm in this district, but only as an interim use. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has limited discretion in approving or denying conditional use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision. 7461 Ha~~I.~i~e Blvd. H .5 \ ,,; Future _ Street Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On June 6, 2000, the Planning Commission reviewed this item and recommended approval of the zoning ordinance amendment by a unanimous vote. The interim use permit for the petting zoo was approved by a vote of 4 to 1 (one commissioner abstained from voting, thus counting as a positive vote). One commissioner did not support the level of activity proposed on the site. In terms of the zoning ordinance amendment to allow petting farms, the Planning Commission had concerns with staff's limit on the number of employees and types of animals. They recommended that 3 full-time employees be permitted per 5 acres, based upon the applicant's request. Further, they cited dangerousness as the criterion for limiting animals, rather than by type (e.g., wild or exotic). The definition of petting farm was also altered. These recommended changes are in bold. Sec. 20-267. Petting Farms. 1. The site must be on and have access to a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. 2. The minimum lot size shall be five (5) acres. 3. The applicant for the interim use permit shall reside on the site. Only ene (1) three (3) full-time equivalent non-resident or contracted employees may be employed on the site per five (5) acres. 4. Only ellDtemary fillHl !IfIimals shall èe allewed en the site. Wild er c¡wtie Dangerous animals shall be prohibited. 5. All structures and storage areas must be set back fifty (50) feet ITom public or . private rights-of-way, and three hundred (300) feet from an adjacent single family residence or a minimum of fifty (50) feet ITom a side lot line, whichever is greater. The city council may require storage areas to be completely screened by one hundred (100) percent opaque fencing or berming. , 6. Parking areas shall be screened ITom public or private rights-of-way and adjacent single-family residences. 7. Hours of operation shall be ITom 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The city council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. 8. No outdoor speaker systems shall be allowed. 9. Signage shall comply with article XXVI of the zoning ordinance. 10. Retail sales shall be limited to three hundred (300) square feet in area. Retail sales shall be limited to petting fann related items. 11. Animals kept outside must have continual access to shelter to protect them from the elements. If ehains eenHne IIfIimals they mUDt èe attoohed in slleh a manRer aD te net èeceme eat!lflgled with ehains ef ether animals. .^.Riæals and must be in a confined area with fencing. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 3 12. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Prior to the permit expiring, the applicant may request an extension to the interim use permit by submitting a new application. The renewal application will be subject to all city ordinances including any new ordinances enacted after the original approval. Section 20-1. Defmitions. Petting fanns means "any activity whereby non-dangerous animals eu5temarily anà histerieally asseeiateà with èeing FSiseà en agrieeltIHaI prepefties in the Uaiteà States are exhibited and allowed to closely interact with visitors, regardless of compensation." Section 5-76 (1) of the City Code defines dangerous animals as "any animal with a known propensity or disposition to unprovoked attacks, to cause injury to or to otherwise endanger the safety of humans or other domestic animals." However, this definition only refers to dogs and cats, not to animals in general. Thus, there will be difficulty determining whether an animal as part of the petting farm is dangerous, so the zoning ordinance will need to be amended to include a definition. Staff recommends that the definition of dangerous animal be included in Section 20-1 (Definitions) that states the following: "Dangerous animal means any animal with a known propensity or disposition to unprovoked attacks, cause injury to or otherwise endanger the safety of humans or other domestic animals or animals that are noisy or disruptive in behavior." If the City Council does not incorporate the Planning Commission's recommendation in the approval, this definition will not be necessary. Staff does not support changing the number of employees and the type of animals permitted with the use or the definition of petting farm. However, Standard number 11 has been changed as recommended by the Planning Commission. The Commission also recommended that the permit termination period be extended , from five to seven years. Staff does not have any issues with extending the term for an additional two years. This has been changed in the conditions of approval. Since the Planning Commission reviewed this item, the City became aware of the applicant's septic system failure. The system will have to be brought into compliance prior to any petting farm activity taking place on the site. This staff report has been updated. All new information is in bold and all outdated information has been struck through. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 4 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant would like to operate a petting fann on property currently utilized as a hobby fann. The zoning ordinance does not permit this type of activity on property zoned A-2, Agricultural Estate District. Thus, the applicant is requesting a zoning ordinance amendment to permit petting fanns. The site is 6 acres and is to be accessed via the extension of West 78th Street and TH 41. The property is currently accessed via TH 41 (or Hazeltine Blvd.). Staff supports the idea of a petting fann as an interim use in an agricultural district and has prepared standards for the use. The standards address access, minimum acreage, setbacks, number of employees, types of animals permitted and retail sales activity. The standards apply to any petting fann operation in the A-2 district, not just the parcel requesting the amendment. Staff believes that petting fanns should only be permitted as an interim use permit so a termination date can be specified. The A-2 district is essentially a "holding" area for urban development. As development occurs within this district, a petting farm may be incompatible with surrounding uses. The site is bordered by the Meadows at Longacres on the north, the proposed Pulte development on the south and east and TH 41 on the west. All surrounding properties are guided residential, low density. Staff recommends approval of the zoning ordinance amendment and interim use permit with the standards and conditions outlined in this report. BACKGROUND On March 15, 2000, the Planning Commission preliminarily reviewed a zoning ordinance amendment for a petting fann in the A-2, Agricultural Estate District. In general, the . commissioners supported the concept, however, they requested additional information about the specific proposal requesting the amendment. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed zoning ordinance amendment and interim use permit on April 19, 2000. The majority of the Planning Commission maintained support for the amendment and proposal and had concerns regarding staffs standards and conditions of approval. The Commission tabled the requests so the applicant could meet with staff to discuss dividing issues. The applicant and staff were in disagreement as to the type of animals and the number of employees that should be permitted in conjunction with the business. Staff met with the applicant however, no agreements could be made. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 5 The report attempts to separate the zoning ordinance amendment ITom the applicant's request, as this amendment would impact any property in the A-2 zoning district. An analysis of the zoning ordinance amendment to allow the use is first presented, and then in the following section Ms. McAllister's proposal is discussed. ANALYSIS (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT) The purpose of a zoning ordinance is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. Ultimately, the zoning ordinance intends to protect residentially properties ITom uses that may become nuisances, such as those that produce a large amount of traffic or noise. Although the proposal that initiated the request proclaims itself to be a "petting fann," it will still impact surrounding properties. That is, the increased traffic, noise and odors may become a nuisance to the neighbors. The intent of the A-2 district is to preserve rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single family development (see Attachment 4). In essence, existing agricultural uses may remain, however, single family residences have the right to locate within this district. A petting fann is certainly consistent with the intent of the district; however, problems may arise with this type of activity operating adjacent to single family homes. For instance, the City has received numerous complaints regarding a small 5 acre fann nestled in a single family development. The property is not accessed through the development and a business is not operated on the site, yet staff received complaints about animals visiting the neighborhood and noise created by the fann animals. This is an example of how a quaint, rural activity can be deemed a nuisance by a neighbor. The zoning ordinance does not permit business activity on residentially zoned property, with the exception of home occupations, which are required to be ancillary to the primary use ofthe site. This aims to protect residential uses ITom the negative impacts of other non-residential uses. The proposed zoning ordinance amendment to permit petting fanns as an interim use could permit a commercial activity to be the primary use of the site and alter policy in this district. Meaning, if the acreage of the parcel is small, the business , will quickly become the dominant use of the site. This would not be permitted in any other residential district. It is staff's opinion that a petting fann is appropriate on a large operating fann. If one would consider a petting fann to be a fann-based business, then the use would be secondary to the operation of a large actively fanned property. The activity would be supporting a larger agricultural business and would be ancillary. This is the optimal scenario. Many of the existing businesses operating in an agricultural zoning district are legal, non- conforming uses. That is, they were operating prior to an ordinance being adopted that prohibited the activity. They would not be permitted under the current zoning ordinance. Essentially, the agricultural zone is a transition or "holding zone" between rural and urban uses (particularly those properties north of Lyman Blvd). The agricultural use Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 6 remains until the site is developed according to the comprehensive plan. Since most of the properties zoned A-2 are in this "transition" area, staff is recommending the activity be permitted as an interim use rather than a conditional use. An interim use is more appropriate for this type of activity because of the potential negative impact on residential properties. Staff will be able to place a termination date on the use, so that after surrounding parcels are developed (or another event occurs) the use will cease. A conditional use permit is inappropriate for this use because it can operate without a termination date. The following standards attempt to ensure that a petting fann located in an agricultural district will not become a nuisance to the neighbors and limit the activity to an accessory use. Since this is a request for an ordinance amendment, staff can create any standards deemed appropriate to protect adjacent uses. The purpose of each standard is explained after each requirement. These standards have not been changed since the Planning Commission meeting on April 19, 2000, except for the criterion that the number of employees be based upon parcel area. A definition of petting fann is also included. Sec. 20-267. Petting Farms. The following conditions shall apply to petting farms: I. The site must be on and have access to a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. Purpose: To limit traffic conflicts, provide appropriate vehicular approaches and to provide access to the site without guiding traffic through a residential area. . 2. The minimum lot size shall be five (5) acres. Purpose: To limit nuisance complaints and provide separation between two possibly incompatible uses. , 3. The applicant for the interim use permit shall reside on the site. Only one (I) full-time equivalent non-resident employee may be employed on the site per five (5) acres. Purpose: To limit the intensity of the use and to allow more employees on larger parcels, thus lessening nuisance complaints. 4. Only customary fann animals shall be allowed on the site. Wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited. Purpose: To ensure this activity is not operating as a zoo and incompatible with surrounding uses. Staff does not recommend that wild or exotic animals be Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 7 permitted with this type of activity to prohibit the use ITom evolving into a zoo. Further, staff does not recommend that wildlife rehabilitation be allowed as requested by the applicant, therefore limiting the intensity of the use. Individual applicants may wish to request additional activities once their operation is running smoothly without complaints or problems. 5. All structures and storage areas must be set back fifty (50) feet ITom public or private rights-of-way, and three hundred (300) feet ITom an adjacent single family residence or a minimum of fifty (50) feet ITom a side lot line, whichever is greater. The city council may require storage areas to be completely screened by one hundred (100) percent opaque fencing or berming. Purpose: To limit odors and noise complaints. 6. Parking areas shall be screened from public or private rights-of-way and adjacent single-family residences. Purpose: To maintain the character of an agricultural or residential area. 7. Hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The city council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. Purpose: To limit the possibility of nuisance complaints and intensity of the operation. \ \ . 8. No outdoor speaker systems shall be allowed. Purpose: To limit the number of nuisance complaints. , 9. Signage shall comply with article XXVI of the zoning ordinance. Purpose: To ensure compatibility of signage with other agricultural or residential uses. 10. Retail sales shall be limited to three hundred (300) square feet in area. Retail sales shall be limited to petting fann related items. Purpose: To limit the intensity of the use. II. Animals kept outside must have continual access to shelter to protect them from the elements. If ehaiRs eenHne !IfIimals they HHlst èe Mtaeheà in saeil a Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 9 The site plan indicates that an existing barn, stable, garage as well as a future retail building and summer kitchen will be utilized for the operation. Four to five employees are proposed for this year round business. Miss Rosie's Fann is planned to operate ITom 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., 5 days per week and 7 days in the future. The operation entails the display of76-83 animals typically found on a fann including ponies, a donkey, a horse, pigs, sheep, goats, rabbits, a calf, geese, ducks and chickens. These animals are typically found on a fann. In addition, the applicant wants to show exotic and wild animals like chinchillas, a red fox, hedgehogs, peacocks and prairie dogs. Staff does not support the exhibition of these animals due to potential enforcement problems. The peacocks, for instance, are known to be loud and disruptive. The City has received complaints about other peacocks within the City. Further, if these animals are permitted the use will be deemed a zoo. Staff will support a petting fann, but not a zoo. (Webster's Dictionary defines a zoo as "a place where a collection of wild animals is kept for public showing.") The intent of the A-2 district is to preserve rural character while allowing residential development. Staff believes that a petting fann is compatible with that intent. Although the idea of a petting fann is fine, the applicant's request is a commercial activity disguised as agriculture. It is much too intense to be ancillary to the residence and will most certainly impact surrounding parcels. In order for staff to fully support the proposal, it must comply with the conditions of approval. Staff has not changed the conditions of approval of the interim use permit. The conditions attached intend to mitigate any negative impacts that a petting fann may have on neighboring sites. UTILITIES The site is currently serviced by a private well and septic system. The City has recently been notified that the septic system has failed and must be brought into compliance. Water service will be available in conjunction with the extension of West 78th Street in . 200 I. (The project is scheduled for December 2000 bid letting with completion in late 2001 or early 2002.) Sec. 19-19 of the City Code states that issuance of building permits for new construction where the property is within 150 feet of the water system shall be conditioned upon connection to the system. Further, it states that new wells shall not be permitted in this instance and that connection to municipal service will be required upon failure of the private water supply. The City is currently conducting a feasibility study for the extension of sanitary sewer in that area. Sanitary sewer may be available to the site in summer 2001, if the City authorizes the project. (Note: Typically, the termination date for an interim use is based upon availability of municipal services. In this instance, municipal water will be available soon.) Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 10 PARKING The applicant anticipates parking for 20 vehicles and 2 buses and has indicated that no more than 100 people will be on the site at anyone time. The parking area is proposed along the extension of West 78th Street. Staff cannot support this size of an operation on only 6 acres. Only 10 parking stalls and 1 bus will be permitted as part of this permit. Usually, staff requires curb and gutter to be installed for parking areas for a site plan. Since it is an interim use of the site that is not practical. LANDSCAPING The plan indicates that a large wooded area will be removed for construction of a parking area, outbuildings and two horse rings. The tree preservation ordinance does not apply to this situation; however, staff recommends that the applicant submit a landscape plan to the city. There are a number of opportunities throughout the site to use landscaping and tree planting to replace some of the lost canopy cover. The parking area adjacent to West 78th St. will require landscape screening. Staff does not feel daffodils will provide the necessary buffer ITom the parking lot views. Staff recommends overstory, evergreens and shrubs be added to the daffodil planting in order to provide year-round interest and screening. Additionally, depending on the total square foot size of the parking lot, landscape area and trees may be required for that as well. ACCESS The site is to be accessed via the future extension of West 78th Street and TH 41. As part of the construction of the access boulevard for TH 5, the access ITom TH 41 will be eliminated. The applicant cannot have access for buses as shown on the site plan. The purpose of eliminating the access off of TH 41 is for safety and an adequate vehicular approach. LIGHTING/SIGNAGE Lighting and signage are both proposed for the petting fann. The zoning ordinance requires shielded, cut-off fixtures. Staff does not recommend a large amount of lighting, except for safety reasons, so the operation maintains the rural character. The site plan indicates a 32 sq. ft. (4-foot by 8-foot) sign is proposed at the West 78th Street entrance. The ordinance permits a 24 sq. ft. monument sign on properties zoned A-2. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 12 2. Conforms to the zoning regulations. 3. The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district. 4. The date of event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. 5. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future; and 6. The user agrees to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for permission of the use. Finding: Once the zoning ordinance amendment and interim use permit are approved and the applicant complies with the conditions of approval, the operation will conform to the above standards. Sec. 20-232. Conditional Use Permit, General Issuance Standards An interim use shall meet the standards for a conditional use. The Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: I. Will not be detrimental to or damage the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood of the city. Finding: If the intensity and level of use is reduced consistent with the staff tecommendation it should be compatible with the neighbothood. The applicant wiJI . have to ensure that the operation of the use is not a nuisance. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. '" Finding: The City's comprehensive plan states, "the city does not provide for purely agriculture land use but supports the preservation of this use in the greater Carver County area." This area is guided for low density. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. Finding: The original use of the property was part of a larger farmstead. The applicant is seeking to preserve "the 1920's farmstead look and lifestyle." Staff is recommending conditions that should make the use compatible with the surrounding land use. Currently, there are limited neighbors so there maybe few complaints. AI; this area Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 13 grows, the use may not be compatible. Thetefore, a 5 year termination date appears reasonable. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Finding: Recommended conditions should minimize annoyance in the area. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fIre protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. Finding: Neighboring property owners have petitioned for sewer and water. This could be allowed to remain as is for the 5 year interim use and when the use of the property changes, municipal services will be required. No additional wells or ISTS will be allowed. The existing septic system has failed and must be brought into compliance. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding: No additional services are required with this use. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and condition of operation that will be deµimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, . rodents, or trash. Finding: The staff has limited the animals and added conditions to mitigate the impact of smell and noise etc. Violations of noise and smell, etc. should be grounds for terminating the use. . 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property that do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Finding: The site will have access off the new West 78th Street. Until this road is built and access is gained, the business should not operate. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Finding: Staff is recommending more preservation of trees as well as additional plantings. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 14 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. Finding: It is intended to have a fannstead use and lifestyle. II. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. Finding: Staffhas provided conditions that should mitigate any negative impacts. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. Finding: With the new standards for petting farms that staff has prepared and proposed conditions it should be compatible. Sec. 20-267. Petting Farms. The following conditions shall apply to petting fanns: I. The site must be on and have access to a collector or minor arterial as ideritified in the comprehensive plan. Finding: The petting fann will have access via W. 78th Street, a collector street. 2. The minimum lot size is five (5) acres. Finding: The subject parcel is 6 acres. 3. . The applicant for the interim use permit shall reside on the site. Only one (1) full- time equivalent non-resident employee may be employed on the site per five (5) acres. , Finding: The applicant's proposal specifies 4-5 employees. The operation will have to be scaled down to meet this requirement. The Planning Commission recommended that 3 full-time employees be permitted. Staff does not support this change. 4. Only customary fann animals shall be allowed on the site. Wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited. Finding: The applicant proposes to have wild and exotic animals in addition to the more traditional fann animals. Staff does not support the wild or exotic animals because of potential problems and nuisance complaints. The Planning Commission recommended that the standard be changed to prohibit non- Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 15 dangerous animals. Staff maintains the idea that wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited because of the potential for enforcement problems. The applicant would also like to rehabilitate wildlife on the site. Staff believes that this is too much activity for the 6-acre parcel. However, in the future, once the operation is operating without any problems, the applicant may request that wildlife rehabilitation be permitted. 5. All structures and storage areas must be set back fifty (50) feet ITom public or private rights-of-way, and three hundred (300) feet ITom an adjacent single family residence or a minimum of fifty (50) feet ITom a side lot line, whichever is greater. The city council may require storage areas to be completely screened by one hundred (100) percent opaque fencing or berming. Finding: The applicant's proposal indicates that all setbacks, but the 300 feet ITom an adjacent single family residence can be maintained. 6. Parking areas shall be screened ITom public or private rights-of-way and adjacent single-family residences. Finding: A condition of aßProval requires additional plantings to buffer the parking area ITom West 78t Street. 7. Hours of operation shall be ITom 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The city council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. . Finding: The applicant indicates the petting fann will operate ITom 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 5 days per week year round. 8. No outdoor speaker systems shall be allowed. . Finding: The applicant does not propose to use outdoor speaker systems. 9. Signage shall comply with article XXVI of the zoning ordinance. Finding: The applicant proposes a 32 sq. ft. monument sign. The zoning ordinance permits a 24 sq. ft. sign not to exceed 5 feet in height. All signage requires a sign permit prior to installation. 10. Retail sales shall be limited to three hundred (300) square feet in area. Retail sales shall be limited to petting fann related items. Finding: The applicant proposes a 300 sq. ft. retail building. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 16 II. Animals kept outside must have continual access to shelter to protect them ITom the elements and must èe in a eenHneà ar~1l '/lith fcneiag. If ebains eeßHne animals they mast 13e aueeked ¡Ii sHah a ffiQßßer as t8 Bet 13eeeæe eatangleà .....¡jti1 ehains ef ether aniæals. Animals and must be in a confined area with fencing. Finding: The site plan indicates that all animals have shelter, except for the mini sheep. Staff assumes that the sheep will be housed in the barn. 12. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Prior to the permit expiring, the applicant may request an extension to the interim use permit by submitting a new application. The renewal application will be subject to all city ordinances including any new ordinances enacted after the original approval. Finding: The interim use permit shall terminate in ~ 7 years. The Planning Commission's recommended changes are not incorporated into the standards and conditions, with the exception of number 11 in the petting farm standard and 7 year termination date specified in conditions of approval for the interim use permit. Staff supports the zoning ordinance amendment and interim use permit subject to the conditions outlined in the report. Should the standards for petting fanns or conditions of approval of the interim use permit be altered significantly, staff may not support the requests. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motions: , "The City Council approves Zoning Ordinance Amendment #00-1 to allow petting fanns as an interim use in the A-2, Agricultural Estate District, as shown in Attachment 3." "The City Council approves Interim Use Permit #00-2, subject to the plans dated February 22, 2000, for the operation of a petting fann with the following conditions: I. The site plan shall comply with Sec. 20-267. Petting Fanns as prepared by staff. 2. Accumulation offeces shall be located at least 200 feet from any well. Accumulation offeces shall be removed at such periods as will ensure that no leaching or objectionable odors exist. The premise shall not be allowed to become unsightly. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 17 3. Parking shall be limited to 10 stalls with the provision for only 1 bus. 4. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the proposed development. The applicant shall show the location, size and species of proposed trees and shrubs. 5. Landscaping shall be added to the area between the parking lot and West 78th Street to provide a buffer. Included in the plantings shall be overstory trees, evergreens and shrubs. 6. Landscaping may be required for the parking lot if it exceeds 6,000 square feet. 7. The site shall only have access ITom West 78th Street. 8. A dead animal disposal plan shall be submitted to the city for review. 9. The permit shall be reviewed annually to determine compliance. 10. The applicant must apply and obtain all necessary permits ITom regulatory agencies such as Carver County, DNR, USDA, etc. 11. The interim use shall terminate in ~ 7 years. 12. The Building Official's conditions are as follows: a. All public buildings must meet code requirements as required for new buildings because of the change in occupancy classification. b. All buildings and areas intended for use by the public must be on an accessible route and accessible to people with disabilities. c. Two accessible parking spaces must be provided. d. Accessible sanitation facilities must be provided. The number of fixtures , required will be determined after specific use information is provided. If this fann is intended to be used on a short term, seasonal basis portable facilities may be provided, any other use would require permanent facilities. If permanent facilities are required, two acceptable septic sites must be evaluated and located by a licensed designer. e. The food preparation facilities require approval ITOm the Minnesota Department of Health. f. Structures intended for public use must be evaluated by a structural engineer to determine if the building is safe for occupancy. 13. The Fire Marshal's conditions are as follows: a. A 20 foot wide fire lane shall be provided. Petting Fanns ZOA and Miss Rosie's Fann June 21, 2000 Page 18 b. The Fire Marshal shall review the existing buildings to be utilized for the petting fann to determine code compliance. c. Smoking is prohibited in any building used in conjunction with the business. d. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs shal1 be installed on the fire lane. e. Any new driveway must be designed to support the weight of a fire truck year round. f. Any new driveway must be instal1ed prior to the removal of the existing driveway. g. The amount of combustible material (i.e., hay, straw, etc.) on the floors of any buildings used in the business must meet fire code requirements. h. Al1 electrical wiring must meet code. 14. The septic system shall be brought into compliance prior to the operation commencing on the site." Attachments: 1. Application 2. Site Plan and Description of Use 3. Ordinance Amendment 4. A-2, Agricultural Estate District 5. Memorandum ITom Steve Torel1 dated May 8, 2000 6. Public hearing notice and property owners list 7. Minutes ITom April 19, 2000 Planning Commission meeting 8. Minutes from the June 6, 2000 Planning Commission meeting 9. Article II. Division 5. Dangerous Animals g:\plan\ck\zoning ordinance amendments\petting fann in a-2. 2nd.doc ..¡~ CHAlllrl.............., ..,..,,,........LJ¡;...r (DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION f· t(. A , MAC2¥6I2f) APPLICANT: 5£;isA N MeA t..U':5rËí2.. OWNER: 5UbA tJ MtAl-USJE¿(L ADDRESS: 1tf(p1 8A'1£l---íINË- "BL-\/r:) ADDRESS: ï4h1 ItA'ZEL:-tLN~ 'P-i-tA) GtfANKA~t-J ~~, TELEPHONE (Day time) ß7Lf- ~or TELEPHONE: tf74- - Æ:::; Cqq CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 r.''''V'''''' ~I-IA"IHAc;~EN FEB 02 2000 _ Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ Temporary Sales Permit L Conditional Use Permit' 40ft? - Vacation of ROW/Easements - Interim Use Permit - Variance _ Non-conforming Use Permit - Wetland Alteration Permit _ Planned Unit Development" _ Zoning Appeal _ Rezoning j( Zoning Ordinance Amendment 1þ q){) \ \ _ Sign Permits .' _ Sign Plan Review _ Notification Sign ~ - Site Plan Review" ~ Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP/SPRlVACNARlWAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) - Subdivision" TOTALFEE$ f57?" .CD . A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be Included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. 'Twenty-six full size ~ copies of the plans must be submitted, Including an 8v." X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. "" Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. , PROJECT NAME MISS ' ZDSIG<S FAI\2M lOCATION ....î.tflP I itA '"2EL-"Í I ''-It;.. 'Br-1!1/. ) OO,[JN ftA-f:.st=:.qv LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEC-T-·01 ""íwP-/l¿, (2AfJ6.-E;-O.2:~ Plo NSN ~ '/4 D6"'Sc..As~ COmfY! AT NE c<JIW t-JtK¡.'";7WJ[¡. ílt? ok) e.. (..fI..(; Nr:.-t '7w{ 1302/m Szq,¡<(,V 5</D''--rD ProF . / 07 Ac(l.€S "B85-Tft tV B«>D'TtJ fJ<f5Jt W 1;'5' Tft'S~q~ IV TOTAL ACREAGE ~. PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING À VÞt M';- A WETlANDS PRESENT A?u YES ;( NO ~L.{p. 1A1'vÞsaz. A:L Pl,=,mc:r PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION A'bD I TV&- A C, UP· U Ivb5(.L A;z. :br's;[l2!cr REASON FOR THIS REQUEST _16 o-p6!2f:\T6 A -PG"\TI f\.G-. 1=.4 RI'V\ This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompa¡:¡ied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and ltIe fee owner has also signed this application. 1 will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate priortolo any authorizati In to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the"best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by t~icant. -(ffU)'0 - o/3/ö ~ Dat, :?/3LðD Óate Receipt No.:ç;¡::; 'fI=-. yq Signature of Fee Owner Appflcation Received on d-' I q. (X) Fee Paid Cb61t:7 The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. é\1"I'"C!JF©'IA"NlHA"i\&1:!\I ¡:'P::EIVED FEB 2 2 2000 CM;..''''.,..........,., -o."..."......vc::t'T MISS ROSIE'S FARMqþ The purpose for my request is to enable me to operate a petting farm from my existing hobby farm. My goal is to preserve the farmstead look and lifestyle with an historically correct (as much as possible) 1920's genre. Visitors will be charged a small fee and in return will receive an enriching experience for children and adults alikenan unforgettable way to have fun without superheroes or violence. Initial year around activities will include such things as: Hands on petting farm opportunities Pony rides Goat milking Learning about the farm life through stories read and told Playing old farm games Educational opportunities through Carver County 4-H animal projects (ability to lease livestock and bring them to the Carver County Fair, potentially qualifying for prizes and to go to the state Fair. Barbecues in the summer kitchen. Future activities may include all or some of the following activities or related activities: View photos of wildlife rehabilitation projects currently being conducted at Miss Rosie's Frog pond catch and release Bluff Creek nature walks Picnic lunches-to-go Picnics in the woods - blankets, not tables. , . There will be farm-related items for sale including: The adventures of Miss Rosie's Farm (storybooks written by Miss Rosie) Natural fertilizer (creatively packaged) Fresh eggs in brown, mint green, light blue, pink and olive green colors Farm- related giftware and momentoes Antique farmhouse treasures Preserves Garden vegetables Potted herbs and plants such as goatsbeard, hens and chickens, etc. Bluff Creek (trademarked) stepping stones offered in 2001 Bluff Creek (trademarked) pottery, note cards and other selected merchandise, 2001 (Of the Bluff Creek sales, a percentage of profits will be donated to maintain the Bluff Creek Headwaters, Woods and Bluff Creek Area) Examples of special events: Winter: Summer: Live Nativity, Christmas Caroling - Christmas Holiday Season Sheep shearing demonstrations with children participating in gathering and bagging the wool for market. Learn how to swing lariats and lassos with a real cowboy FF A one-day workshops Hours of Operation Days of Operation Season of Operation 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Initially: 5 days/w'eek; Future: 7 days/week Year around Parking Location No. Vehicles: 20 plus 2 buses 10 cars and 2 buses - See Site Plan for current and future locations Additional overflow: 10 stalls along driveway coming to farm from W. 78th St. Note: Tours and visits will be planned so that no more than a maximum of 100 people will be on-site at anyone time. No more than a maximum of20 cars are anticipated at anyone time. Description of Existing Buildings: House Barn - 2-stories (upper level is not currently used but may be used in the future for small gatherings such as birthday parties) Lower Level - walk-through animal viewing Existing garage - Product sales. (Future product sales from expanded garage or similar larger building to be acquired/constructed.) Pump House Pony Stable (not enclosed/pole type) approx. 20' X 20' Chicken Coop , . Future Buildings: Summer Kitchen 10' X 12" Chicken Coop - to replace existing which will be used for storage Wildlife rehabilitation building, approximately 10' X 14' Summer Kitchen Building - Approximately size of a single garage, to be used for food items, BBQ's and other packaged picnic items Potential addition to house of approximately 1/2 existing footprint to be used for home office Additional Elements: Windmill and potentially a silo Signage: Identification at W. 78th Street Driveway, approx. 4' X 8' Upcoming Special Events Chalk Board 12" X 18" signs including for example: Absolutely No Smoking, Bathrooms, 2 MileslHr, No Customer Animals Allowed, Store, Do not Climb Fences, Chalk Board, Overflow Parking, Etc. Lighting: Existing: 2 Mercury vapor lights (J mounted on pole and I mounted on barn) shielded to direct lighting downward. Future: Decorative street lamp at yard entry 4 Low level wattage exterior lights on east elevation of barn I Mercury vapor light on northern driveway Number of Employees: Currently: 2 Future: 4-5 ,¡; . Example of Animals to be Available: (Note: This list is an example only, exact numbers of species will vary from time and species selection will vary ITom time to time, but is not expected to vary dramatically from the list set forth below.) Species Quantity Shetland Size Ponies 6 Mini Donkey 1 Mini Horse 1 Potbellied Pigs 3-4 Feeder Pigs 4 Sheep 6 Pygmy goats 4 Milking Goat 1 Rabbits 6 Chinchillas 2 Red Fox' 1 Hedgehogs 2-4 Young Calf 1 , Gaggle of geese 8-]2 . Ducks 3 Chickens 20 Exotic White Peafowl 2 Red Golden Pheasants , ~ Prairie Dogs 2 Various Rehab Animals such as squirrels, chipmunks, fox, coyote. (These animals require a separate building so that they can be segregated from the animals viewed by the customers.) Miss Rosie's Farm is a registered trademark with the U.S. Trademark and Patent Office. Several of Miss Rosie's stories have been written in a series entitled The Adventures of Miss Rosie's Farm. They are stories oflife from the animals' perspective. Giftware items might include milk stools, goats milk soap, wool batts made of sheepswool. prairie dresses, reproduction prints of early 1900's old masters depicting farm livestock and poultry varieties, etc. Miss Rosie's Farm has been USDA approved for the care and feeding of animals for purposes of a commercial petting farm. With respect to compliance with the City's general standards for issuing conditional use permits, the applicant believes that: I. The farm is and will continue to be operated in a way that is not detrimental to nor will it endanger the public health, safety comfort and convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. 2. Upon approval of the application it will be consistent with the zoning for the property. , -'. \ \ The locations of buildings on the site will not be changed immediately and any future. addition of buildings as set forth on the Site Plan submitted will not dramatically change the appearance or character of the site. By preserving this site as a 'farm' the City will be preserving some of the romantic qualities of the rural flavor, rolling and wooded countryside which the residents ofChanhassen find so compelling. . . 4. The farm is now and will continue to be operated in a manner which is not hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighborhood uses. There is a significant buffer at the north and east property lines comprised of wetlands, hills and tree canopy. There are no plans to clear these areas. The west and south property lines will abut existing and/or proposed roadways. 5. The use requires no increase in public utilities, police or fire protection or other public services. 6. As stated at NO.5 above, the approval of this application will not create excessive (no additional) requirements for public facilities and services and it will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, rather it will be an enhancement. 7. Similarly the use will not produce excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents or trash. Management practices have been put in place to curb the potential existence of problems from odors, rodents and trash (manure). 8. The verncular approaches to the property are those which currently exist and/or which will be created at the time of the completion of the frontage road wrnch will abut the property. No traffic congestion will be created nor will the surrounding public thoroughfares be negatively impacted. 9. The use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or rnstoric features of major significance. ] 0 and 11.. It will continue to be aesthetically compatible with the area and will not depreciate surrounding property values. See answer at NO.3 above. 12. Upon approval of the modification requested, the use will meet standards prescribed for certain uses set forth in the Code. , · , i +"4000 I RI - d I d Iii.: B n!!!~ i q Ii U II r Iii i ~ ~ I ", i ¡ ~ I . I : I , I i ' . I : I t ~ -'" / / / . I "" ..J .~ I ~~ \," i~ '\šl ~"""'l/'"'' W11 \ ' I \" I \ \ ". '.. ., '. '::.:.::.:........\.... \ .... <:..... ....... ~ .! í , r ~ I . " :+-""00 Or i çr g ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ I ~ B :,. ~ . 0 ~ I -1-111100 c:::::J :; ~ . ---, _rçcJ~, ) ,,~ ) \ I ./ 0 II " II ¡¡Pc "] I: . " "Jj=:o:~ I o~ . 01 I ì' .N:· \,\ k~. , \ \, \ 8 ! +113000 , ," ~ ~1,! ~. . , ,.: ~ ~ e ~ ,; '" a ..' a Ii a I! II ~! i -c. ,~ -. CD - II CJ II o .. .. o - Z 'õ ~ ö. .; ~ I ~II iCD C >- 1:: CD Co o .. Co ~ ~ . ~ , ¡ ¡ , .. .. , t c:> , "" i f n- o .. ~I ~ ~ !r ~I \%~\ _ 0 ",éE ~¡)"'" Ul 2+C~ ~ -- ~N /7 ¡<.j7)!H;:l/-1 Jr.w:5" ,¿O/ . .,. ,0'11' ."t"' , "\ ~ ~ <J ~ "" \. ,t8- ... 1\) \¡I +cç , ~ ! _.__..............._--~..,- '.-"--~ 'H'_~ ')!~ ''':': ~ I .~ ~-v; ~4- ~\ ~'. ::¡ ~ t:J.... n ~ ~~ s.: ~\ ~It @ "J'tú ... U. ~J\ , ~ g § K) , Q !;) :< < "~ i ~t ~ ~~? f i1\~~ ~~\<? "t ~~,i~ ~ % ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ '< « t- ~Jf.;:S- I\) ~ !:;J ~ "" ~re ~œ !ii' :Sf,"'" ~ \ (j~~ 'gl) ~ ìi1 ~ ~ - .... <, «.j, ;;\( )j( nI 7) fig .='0 ;?J)<;' .Jc.V;;J ----..---- .-.--..--.--- . . ,E.ÇI ,<;9 J ~ Z \..... -' ,'. N .<: {I~ª ~ Q- ::J'¡() " .... \{\ IV (\ '1- -. ...' f' .¿ ~~ªw;-- J 0(\ (>... . "I; :;c.,.. :<- '" IU n ~; X <:i1ì" ,,11'1",,1'- ?I.'WI<1 <I~ ÇJç g¿ n7) I CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE THE ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the following definition: Pettinf! farm means any activity whereby animals customarily and historically associated with being raised on agricultural properties in the United States are exhibited, regardless of compensation. SECTION 2. Article IV., Division 3, Standards for Agricultural and Residential Districts, of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amended by adding the following section: Sec. 20-267. Petting Farms. The following conditions will apply to petting farms: I. The site must be on and have access to a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. 2. The minimum lot size shall be five (5) acres. 3. The applicant for the interim use permit shall reside on the site. Only one (1) full time equivalent non-resident employee shall be employed on the site per five (5) acres. , 4. Only customary fann animals shall be allowed on the site. Wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited. 5. All structures and storage areas must be set back fifty (50) feet ITom public or private rights-of-way, and three hundred (300) feet ITom an adjacent single family residence or a minimum of fifty (50) feet from a side lot line, whichever is greater. The city council may require storage areas to be completely screened by one hundred (100) percent opaque fencing or berming. 6. Parking areas shall be screened ITom public or private rights-of-way and adjacent single- family residences. 7. Hours of operation shall be ITom 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The city council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. 8. No outdoor speaker systems shall be allowed. 9. Signage shall comply with article XXVI of the Zoning Ordinance. 10. Retail sales shall be limited to three hundred (300) square feet in area. Retail sales shall be limited petting farm related items. II. Animals kept outside must have continual access to shelter to protect them ITom the elements and must be in a confined area with fencing. 12. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Prior to the permit expiring, the applicant may request an extension to the interim use permit by submitting a new application. The renewal application will be subject to all city ordinances including any new ordinances enacted after the original approval. SECTION 3. Section 20-576 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the following interim use: (9) Petting farms. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. .2000, by the City Council of the , Scott A. Botcher, City Manager Nancy K. Mancino, Mayor g:\admin\ord\petting farms.doc A-1TÄ.G#Me'J'jT i ZONING § 20-572 (4) The maximum lot coverage is three (3) percent. (5) The setbacks are as follows: a. For front yards, one hundred (100) feet. b. For rear yards, one hundred (100) feet. c. For side yards, fifty (50) feet. (6) The maximum height is as follows: a. For the principal structure, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet. b. For accessory structures, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 2(5-2-5), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-556. Agricultural preservation lands. Properties designated under agricultural preserve status as provided for by Minnesota Statutes chapter 473, shall be zoned A-I Agricultural Preserves until such designation is requested by the landowner to be removed. No application fee is required for rezoning the property from A-I to another district. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 2(5-2-6), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-557. Interim uses. The following are interim uses in the "A-I" District: (1) Mobile homes (compliance with section 20-905 is not required). (2) Bed and breakfast establishments. (Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90) \ \ Sees. ·20-558-20-570. Reserved. ARTICLE X. "A-2" AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT . . Sec. 20-571. Intent. The intent of the "A-2" District is preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single-family residential development. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 3(5-3-1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-572. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an "A-2" District: (1) Agriculture. (2) Public and private parks and open space. (3) Single-family dwellings. Supp. No.9 1205 § 20-572 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (4) State-licensed day care center for twelve (12) or fewer children. (5) Utility services. (6) State-licensed group home for six (6) or fewer persons. (7) Temporary real estate office and model home. (8) Arboretums. (9) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 3(5-3-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 7, 11-12-96) Sec. 20-573. Permitted accessory uses. The following are pennitted accessory uses in an "A-2" District: (1) Accessory agriculturaJ building. (2) Garage. (3) Private stables. (4) Swimming pool. (5) Tennis court. (6) Signs. (7) Home occupations. (8) One (1) dock. (9) Roadside stand. (10) Private kennel. (Ord. roo 80, Art. V, § 3(5-3-3), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-574. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses in an "A-2" District: - . (1) Reserved. (2) Reserved. (3) Reserved. (4) Cemetery. (5) Reserved. (6) Reserved. (7) Reserved. (8) Reserved. (9) Electrical substation. Supp. No.9 1206 ZONING § 20-576 (10) Reserved. (11) Churches. (12) Recreational beachlots. (13) Group homes for seven (7) to sixteen (16) persons. (14) Golf courses. (15) Towers as regulated by article XXX ofthis chapter. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 3(5-3-4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 80-E, § I, 11-16-87; Ord. No. 96, § 1,9-26-88; Ord. No. 103, § I, 5-22-89; Ord. No. 120, § 4(2), 2-12-90; Ord. No. 240, § 16, 7-24-95; Ord. No. 259, § 8, 11-12-96) State law reference-Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595. Sec. 20-575. Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "A-2" District subject to additional requirements, exceptions, and modifications set forth in this chapter: (1) The minimum lot area is two and one-half (2'12) acres, subject to section 20-906. (2) The minimum lot frontage is two hundred (200) feet, except that the minimum lot frontage oflots fronting on a cul-de-sac shall be at least two hundred (200) feet at the building setback line. (3) The minimum lot depth is two hundred (200) feet, except that lots fronting on a cul-de-sac shall be at least two hundred (200) feet at the building setback line. (4) The maximum lot coverage is twenty (20) percent. (5) The minimum setbacks are as follows: a. For front yards, fifty (50) feet. b. For rear yards, fifty (50) feet. c. For side yards, ten (10) feet. (6) The maximum height is as follows: a. For the principal structure, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet. b. For accessory structures, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet. (7) The minimum driveway separation is as follows: a. If the driveway is on a collector street, four hundred (400) feet. b. If the driveway is on an arterial street, one thousand two hundred fifty (1,250) feet. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V. § 3(5-3-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 170, § I, 7-23-92; Ord. No. 194, § I, 10-11-93) . . Sec. 20-576. Interim uses. The following are interim uses in the "A-2" District: (1) Reserved. Supp. No.9 1207 § 20-576 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (2) Mineral extraction. (3) Reserved. (4) Mobile homes (compliance with section 20-905 is not required). (5) Bed and breakfast establishments. (6) Commercia1 kennels, stables and riding academies. (7) Wholesa1e nurseries. (8) Golf driving ranges with or without miniature golf courses. (Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90; Ord. No. 140, § 1,3-11-91; Ord. No. 240, § 17,7-24-95) Sees. 20-577-20-590. Reserved. ARTICLE XI. "RR" RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 20-591. Intent. The intent of the "RR" District is to provide for single-family residentia1 subdivisions intended for large lot developments. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V. § 4(5-4-1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-592. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an "RR" District: (1) Single-family dwellings. (2) Public and private parks and open space. (3) State-licensed day care center for twelve (12) or fewer children. (4) State-licensed group home serving six (6) or fewer persons. (5) Utility services. (6) Temporary real estate office and model home. (7) ~culture. (8) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V. § 4(5-4-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 9, 11-12-96) . . Sec. 20-593. Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in an "RR" District: (1) Garage. (2) Storage building. (3) Swimming pool. Supp. No.9 1208 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 City Ctnttr Drive. PO &x 147 Ch4nh4ssm. Minntsotll55317 Phont 612.937.1900 &neral Fax 612.937.5739 Engintering Fax 612.937.9152 Public s"ftty Fax 612.934.2524 wtb www.a.chanhfJJJen.mn.us .....,... ,.,.., , '" MEMORANDUM TO: Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner II ~ Steven Torell, Building Official 7 I May 8, 2000 FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Site plan review for: Miss Rosie's Fann I have reviewed the plan for Miss Rosie's Fann, a proposed petting zoo, and have the following comments based on the limited information provided: - All buildings must meet code requirements as required for new buildings because of the change of occupancy classification. All buildings and areas intended for use by the public must be on an accessible route and accessible to people with disabilities. Two accessible parking spaces must be provided. Accessible sanitation facilities must be provided. The number of fixtures required will be determined after specific use information is provided If this fann is intended to be used on a short term, seasonal basis, portable facilities may be provided, any other use would require permanent facilities. If permanent facilities are required, : two acceptable septic sites must be evaluated and located by a licensed designer. Food preparation facilities would require approval from the Minnesota Department of Health. Structures intended for public use must be evaluated by a structural engineer to determine if the building is.safe for occupancy. G/safety/stfrnemoslplanlrnissrosiesfann .". . , ~..,.~._J'. ~ ...~ - .-'-"'~ NonCE OF PUBUCH&UUNG PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, .lUNE 8, 2000 AT 7100 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 890 CITY CENTER DRIVE .;~ ;........,,(( .,.~,x;.~ - PROPOSAL: ZOning Ordinance Amend......t APPUCANT: Susan McAllister ancllnlerlm UN P......1t LOCATION: 7481 Hazeltine Blvd. NOTICE: You are Invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal In your area. The applicant, Susan McAllister, Is requesting an amendment to the City Code to allow petting farms as an Interim use In the A2, AgrIcultural Estate District and request for an interim use pennlt to operate a petting farm In theA2 District, located at 7461 Hazeltine Blvd. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing Is to Inform you about the developer's request and to obtain Input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chelr will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing Is dosed and the Commission discusses project. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, It Is helpful to have one copy to the department In advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing hes been published In the Chanhassen Villager on May 25, 2000. \ \ SII8 "= , A __I 1_ ,'.,,,,,,,.",,,,,",-,_.,,- œ09t5 Ja5e" . s aqel ssaJpP'd' IiJAU!II\vll'·¡ ,. -.,...~~ WESTWOOD 7801 PARK DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MERALD A & ELAINE A 7460 HAZELTINE BLVD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JACOB 0 CROOKS & MICHAEL A & 7450 HAZELTINE BLVD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JOHN P SA V ARYN C/O PAUL 9950 NORTII SHORE RD WACONIA MN 55387 CHARLES W MARKERT 7461 HAZELTINE BLVD PO BOX 311 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BYRON A & MARY M 7331 HAZELTINE BLVD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 \ REGENTS OF UNIV OF C/O REAL 319 15TH AVE SE 424 DON HOWE MINNEAPOLIS MN 55455 . . MILLS PROPERTIES INC A1TN: TOM PO BOX 971 BRAINERD MN 56401 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 REGULATED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA'S WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Dave Hempel presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions of Dave? Thank you. Motion and a second for a public hearing. Kind moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This item is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission please come forward and state your name and address please. Kind moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Public hearing closed. Commissioner comments. Anything? Kind: I think the staff report looks complete to me. Peterson: Ditto. Motion please. Kind: I move the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit #99-1 subject to the following conditions I and 2. Burton: Second. Peterson: Any discussion? Kind moved, Burton seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit #99-1 subject to the following conditions: I. Wetland Conservation Act and the City ofChanhassen Surface Water Management Plan. requirements. 2. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Type ill erosion control fencing will be required around the existing wetlands. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO ALLOW PETTING FARMS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE A2. AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT AND REOUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A PETTING FARM 21 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 IN THE A2 DISTRICT. LOCATED AT 7461 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD. SUSAN MCALLISTER. Public Present: Name Susan McAllister Uli Sacchet Vernelle Clayton Boyd Peterson Address 7461 Hazeltine Boulevard 7053 Highover Court 422 Santa Fe 9860 Pioneer Circle Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions of Cindy? Burton: Mr. Chair I have a question. I may have missed it in the papers. Are they still, is the applicant going to live in the house? Yeah? Kirchoff: Yes. Burton: Okay. And then I'm struggling with the home business ordinance and I'm wondering if, does the interim use permit kind of trump that ordinance? Is that how it works? Aanenson: Right. And that's when Cindy did the original research on this, that was part of our discussion to say that, it doesn't fit into the home occupation. There's no way. That's why we developed a separate interim use under the A2 district. Some of the things we struggled with is that you have to keep in mind, whatever we put here, it can also be applied in any other A2 district that would meet the same criteria. Peterson: Other questions? . " Kind: Yes Mr. Chairman. Rain, Snow or Shine, is that what it's called? Yeah. They have an interim use permit. How long is theirs for? What's the sunset? Aanenson: It's outside of urban services. It was never our intention to provide municipal services to that. That's an anomaly in the fact that it does have an interim use. More than likely, and our comprehensive plan doesn't propose putting urban services south of existing 212. It's predominantly flood plain. Most of that property there is in the flood plain. So it's a little bit different but we do have that there is a date on that. Until urban services or the character changes so more than likely it may never change. What we struggled with on this is that right now if you go out to it, it is vacant but we project with this property going in and the ITontage road, that over the next few years it's going to change significantly and there may be more complaints when you look at the proximity of some of those farm uses. 22 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Kind: What I'm wondering about is if the applicant needs to wait until West 78th is put in. She can't even start her business right away so you know, 5 years now is 4 years or dare may I even say less. Aanenson: That was our concern... Kind: So yeah, I'm not sure if 5 years is the right number either but I don't know how you arrive at the right number. Aanenson: Until they have access off of West 78th. From that date forward. That was our concern if the use was going on now and. Kind: So if the use is going on now, can't the access be 41? Aanenson: .. . sight lines. I'll let Dave comment on that but that's a good question. Kind: Yeah. Yeah. Just one more before Dave jumps in. Just kind oflooking at some of the differences between staffreport and what the applicant has requested. Give me a little rationale for number of employees that are non-residents. Kirchoff: We were trying to limit the intensity of the use and that is what is permitted as part of the home occupation ordinance. So I think allowing more employees will increase the intensity of the use. It's only 6 acres and ifit's supposed to be a rustic farm type of activity on only 6 acres, you want to limit that activity. If they have 5 employees, the intensity of the operation may be increased. Kind: The parking controls that somewhat, yeah. Kirchoff: Yeah. Kind: Okay. I think that's all. And then Dave, do you want to talk to the 41 thing? , , Hempel: Sure Mr. Chairman, commissioners. Access control along 41 is under the jurisdiction of Minnesota Department of Transportation or MnDOT as we refer to them as. The access control that's currently in place is for single family farm resident. This proposed application I would assume greatly intensifies that access. It may not be permitted by MnDOT. MnDOT is in negotiations with the applicant to relocate their driveway from Trunk Highway 41 to West 78th Street. The time line for that however most likely will not occur until the year 2001. So she will have her existing driveway through the year 2000. At least. So I had some reservations speàking on behalf of MnDOT on that control access point of her driveway. I would assume that they would not want to intensify the use of that property through that access point. My opinion. Thank you. Kind: Thank you. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Peterson: Okay, other questions? Sidney: Yes Mr. Chair. Thinking here, and I'm not sure if! quite understand. I'm trying to think about a petting fann in general and what a definition of a petting fann might be. On page 3 you talk about exhibition of animals, retail activities and special events and yet on the applicant's brochure I see day camp as well. Could you speak to that? Will children be there all day and what are the activities and such things? Kirchoff: The information that's located in the staff report was given to us by the applicant. The brochure was more for informational use for you. And as far as we're concerned, this would only be approving the petting farm and not a day camp. Sidney: Okay. Does a day camp require a different type of? Kirchoff: Well that's a more intensity of the use. Sidney: So it's a question for the applicant I guess. Okay. Peterson: Okay, anything else? BIackowiak: Mr. Chair I've got a couple questions. Cindy when you were talking about conditions, did you say II? And if so, did 1 miss something? Kirchoff: Yes, they're misnumbered. The first condition is supposed to be the site plan. Show compliance with Section 20-267 for petting fanns. That was supposed to be condition I and it started with the following. Blackowiak: Okay. I understand that then. Got it. Aanenson: So first we develop standards because we don't have any standards in place. Then we added conditions specific to this one. . . Kirchoff: I apologize for that. BIackowiak: Okay. I just thought I maybe had missed something. Okay, so back to Section 20- 267. We talked a little bit about hours of operation. I assume you mean 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on page 8. And it also says that the Council may further restrict hours of operation if use is located adjacent to property guided residential. This property is located adjacent to property guided residential. So what, give me a for instance. The council could say what? 9:00 to 5:00? 10:00 to 4:00? I mean kind of whatever works for them or would they, if they were there "first" would they have a little more say? How does that, it looks like a rock, paper, scissor. I mean who trumps ultimately? I mean who wins? Aanenson: Well I think in deference to the applicant...give some standards to follow. If you're not meeting the standards, ifthere's complaints or something there, I think you have to go back 24 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 and readdress that, which you have a right to do, but I guess when we were looking at it, if you have kids in activities with a lot of animals, it could be noisy and that's the concern that we had. Is that noise at 8:00 p.m. Obviously in the winter I don't think you're going to have a lot of, again we tried to keep the lighting down but in the summer. Blackowiak: Okay. Would the noise and nuisance ordinance also apply to this so when we look at hours of operation and that type of thing, that could also be used for guidance? Aanenson: Or establish those. Blackowiak: Okay. Then one more question. Oh yeah this is back to this, on West 78th versus Highway 41. I think this is for Dave. Currently the applicant does have two driveways on 41 so MnDOT affectively could come in and say you can't have either? I mean what's, theoretically. I mean I don't want you to speak for MnDOT but could they take both of those accesses away from the applicant? Is that within their jurisdiction? Hempel: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. I don't think they would take it away. Not total access anyway. I think the secondary access has not really been used much and is under, from previous discussions with the applicant and MnDOT, is in question whether it's been an actual permitted through the State, an access point. I mean it just happened there someday. It may not be an approved access point from the beginning. There's being some research done on it. I don't think that access point either has been used much. It would be, some maintenance done to move that but as far as your question goes, I think it would maintain the current access there obviously until the new frontage road's in. Peterson: Okay, thanks. Other questions? Would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If so, please come up forward and state your name and address please. Susan McAllister: My name is Susan McAllister and my address is 7461 Hazeltine Boulevard. And I'm here because I knew way back in 1989 or 1990 I was going to be standing here trying to figure a way to preserve my fann because I love it so much. I love the ambience that goes with il. You know the tranquility that's left in that corner goes with it. The green space that goes with: it. The historical building. The life style that came with our fore fathers and the way that we say that we're proud of our heritage. I'm here to protect that and to try to figure a way to make it work and I put together this plan that I believe will do all of that. I think it'd be a great asset to the community. I have a narrative in there that I believe has, you know I don't know, I hope all of you have read it. I also have some letters that I would like to hand out or some information that appeared in the newspaper but just as a handout when I'm referring to it with, you know as I'm addressing the concerns. Also I have some photographs of the area. The petting farm and so on, and some photographs regarding the parking that there would be a concern with the 100% or whatever coverage of storage areas or whatever. Or not parking but of the pink trailer that I have. So do you mind if! hand that out? Peterson: Go ahead. Okay I guess I'm, this has got quite a few different issues that are of concern with people. I need to let you know up front that I'm approved by the USDA as a person 25 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 that maintains and keeps my animals and handles them and I have strict guidelines to follow with them, you know because I'm exhibiting animals. I currently and have for years had a petting zoo that traveled. A petting fann or a petting zoo because I'm not you know traveling the fann, so it's considered a petting zoo and I travel to different, you know like festivities in Excelsior or wherever. I've gone to many nursing homes. A lot of things like that so that's what I currently do. And I'm trying to simply have the public come in and enjoy what I'm doing and share it because I think it's so wonderful. So I'll start with addressing the concerns I guess. Okay, number one was, they're not necessarily in the order but intensity of the use of a 6 acre parcel. Number two would be the parking limited to 10 stalls with the provision for only one bus. Number three, only one non-resident employee shall be employed on the site. Wildlife or exotic animals was another issue. And then the 5 year interim permit instead of a conditional use. I need to tell you also that I did apply for a conditional use. I am here requesting a conditional use permit. I am not here trying to get an interim use, but in the concerns I think it will address it a little bit but ifthere's not a clarity, I want somebody to be able to ask me what it means, okay? Okay, number one. Intensity of the use on a 6 acre parcel. I am assuming that the concern is that the property might be physically too small for this type of an operation. The facilities on the site are estimated to be well below the maximum coverage allowed of20% in the A2 zoning code. From the diagram I have attached of the farm, you can see that the majority of the area remains as pasture, wooded areas and adjacent wetlands in the Bluff Creek Watershed. This shows, I mean wherever there's not, you know the dark buildings are the only thing that are there right now and all this other, you know area is basically, it's green. I mean it's basically green. I'm just going to add a little, a summer kitchen which means that you know with the old fanns they had you know grandma, or mama when she cooked wanted to keep the house as cool as possible without any air conditioning so they would cook in the summer kitchen. It's approximately 10 x 12 feet, and I would be serving like bar-be-ques and pre-packaged like foods like chips and so on out there. It's a very simple type of thing. And then also where the garage is situated right in this area would be a little bit of a larger you ~ow like, well there's going to be the retail area and the pony ring but so I mean basically as we go through, these dots don't mean any physical building. It just meatls an area that I'm pointing out. Okay. I'm estimating that there would be no more than 100 visitors at one time. They would be broken up into smaller and more manageable groups of 10 or 20 people for touring. So the property will easily accommodate that number of visitors without causing any crowding. For a comparison as a coincidence actually, I have found: this copy of the article ITom the Villager which was dated, and you've got a copy of it, April 6th, that talks about the Wells Fargo Family Fann that is actually being built at the Minnesota Zoo. So what they're doing is they're re-creating a fann. It says they're re-creating the guests will be immersed in a rural experience to celebrate Minnesota's agricultural heritage and future. It's on an 8.5 you know, 5 acres the fann is situated on and will have several more buildings according to the article than my plan and will also include crop plots, flower beds, vegetable gardens and an orchard. It is estimated, according to the article to have 1.2 million visitors a year. My little fann will have fewer facilities and a lot fewer visitors. I mean they are actually attached to the Minnesota Zoo. So what I'm doing is basically what they're attempting to do but what they've kind of like changed the buildings a little bit. The kids can be, it says in here for the grain elevator, visitors can learn about the development of rural communities and how the grain elevator works. Kids will become grain as they climb the leg and slide into the binds. My barn is an actual, authentic one. It's, you know you get there by a country road and path. They've got 26 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 a fann house. They've got a chicken house where visitors can explore the chicken's life cycle. This is what I'm going to be doing. Kids can experience life as a chicken on kids size roosts and on kid size nest boxes. I don't have that and I'm not going to attempt that. Dairy barn. In the actual barn as you can see here, the barn is actually a gabled barn like I have and that, in the dairy barn visitors will be seeing calves and their family cows in their tie stalls. In the milking parlor visitors can observe daily cow milking demonstrations. I have goat milking demonstrations. The swine barn. Throughout the summer the swine barn will have litters of piglets you know with their mother in the fairing pin and they can see that. Then they've got the machine shed, the goat and sheep barns so basically you know what it is, for $750,000 to start out with, they came up with a new barn you know and they've got like a little more land, 8.5 acres and they've got the, which I'm sure that they put in the flower beds and vegetable gardens. I only have a little over 6. If! take out the flower beds and the vegetable gardens I believe that I have basically the same size that they're trying to accommodate with their plan. So I believe that I definitely can make my little fannstead work. There's been comments about the, you know like maybe not enough land or so on but actually when you look at the farms without the part that you plow and the working area for the tractors and so on, the fields, the actual barn yard is the part I'm trying to preserve and that kind of was 5 to, you know like maybe 10 acres at the most for like the fann animals. I'm trying to preserve a snippet of what's left to preserve and I don't have an option of buying any more land. I've tried. It's not available. Okay. I have reviewed my plans taking staff's comments into consideration and I believe that my request is reasonable for this size property. Especially considering the amount of open space that will be preserved in the proximity of the Bluff Creek Watershed. Anything less than my proposal could negatively impact the experience that I am trying to create for visitors in the community. As an example an acre equals 43,560 square feet times 6 is 261,360 total square feet on the property. And it's the 20% ratio is 52,272 or 1.2 acres. I haven't even calculated the impervious surface because it's basically open area, okay. And keep in mind I'm living there and I want to keep it looking like a 1920's farm. Like I said, I want it to look like that and I don't want it to look like Camp Snoopy so it has to have that old farmstead look. Okay, number two with the parking limited to 10 stalls with the provision for I bus. Assuming 5 people per car, 20 cars would accommodate 100 visitors. Assuming 50 people per bus, two buses would accommodate 100 visitors...I would appreciate it being included in the motion as approval for staged construction. I can then start out with smaller parking facilities and add to it as the need exists. As in this time right now there's daffodils having, you know they're planted right where the parking would be. And at this point people can park in the circular driveway. I'm not having an enormous amount of people coming to come over there right now. It's just, I need to work into it okay. Okay, so I'm asking to change point number 2 on the recommendations on page 9 of the staff report. So let's see where are we at? Okay, parking should be limited to 10 stalls with provision for only I bus. So you know, okay. Number three. Only one non-resident employee shall be employed on the site. Okay, this standard was determined by the home occupation ordinance that applies to a business being run out of a single residence. Okay, that refers to staff report page 3. The nature of this facility requires help with a variety of tasks. If you read my description in my little brochure it's really a colored version ofa business plan is what it is. There's more than one activity going on at a time and besides that there's cage cleaning and maintenance, animal cleaning and grooming, yard, pasture and ground maintenance. Retail shop would have sales, stocking, bookkeeping, etc. On-site demonstrations and tours. And the USDA license requires ample people to care for . , 27 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 animals in supervised public involvement. My current fann activity currently requires 2 employees with a future estimate of 4 to 5. According to my rules and regulations book of the USDA that I absolutely have to follow, it says for employees. A sufficient number of employees shall be utilized to maintain the prescribed level of husbandry practices set forth in this sub part. Such practices shall be under the supervision of an animal caretaker, who I am you know. Who has a background in animal husbandry or care. So I cannot physically be down at the barn, let's say I'm down at the barn. There's kids coming through or whatever. I have to make sure that they're not teasing the animals and they're not doing anything to cause any injury or any kind to anybody, including the animals. And the pony rides have got to be like led by a person. You know when you open up the little gate the ponies know that that's the only way they can go is around in a circle. Okay, you have to be there. That doesn't just go by itself. Then there's going to be like goat milking demonstrations. Not every day but there will be. People taking, you know like somebody taking the money or leading the tour so the Bluff Creek possibly water, you know the Bluff Creek area okay. And the store. I mean there's no physical, possible way that I could do that with only one person. On an every day basis. There's no way. Okay. Okay, this is a reasonable request to meet the USDA requirements and properly service a 6 acre petting fann. This will require either changing the ordinance point number 3 or the recommendation for this permit on page 9 of the staff report to allow for 4 to 5 employees. And that, like you know, it might not be 5 and it might not be 4 but I need to have, you know like I'm hoping that it could be 4 if I choose it. But I need to like I said to have, you know I can't have a liability situation like that. It's something that I absolutely have to have to meet the requirements of the USDA. Whether I'm you know like, even when I go out I have to have somebody helping me with the little small one. Okay, number four. Wildlife or exotic animals. In our last meeting there was some concern about whether or not my petting fann would include animals that might be dangerous. I think we're all aware of some incidences recently that involved private citizens who, on TV, who had purchased dangerous animals, a panther and a tiger specifically I recall, and were housing them on their properties. This is not in Chanhassen okay. Just so you don't get a little þit nervous. It's not in Chanhassen. I believe that those incidents and the city's experience with prior "nuisance" complaints about other properties has resulted in the restrictions being placed on my application. I would like to propose what I think might be a reasonable compromise to that. I reviewed the city's animal and fowl ordinance which is Chapter 5 of the C (Jde Book which includes a section on dangerous animals. And the City's nuisance ordinance, ~. Chapter 13. There is nothing in those two chapters that would prohibit a resident ITom owning a wild or exotic animal anyplace. In fact, many residents have pets that would fall under that heading such as and including, parrots, ferrets, chinchillas, hedge hogs, doves, pigeons, snakes, lizards, iguanas and so on. All can be purchased at local pet stores and just for your knowledge, if anybody is holding a DNR permit that they are allowed to have like the Canadian Geese or whatever as a native to our area. A Canadian Geese are exotic because they migrate and they migrate to Mexico sometimes so they're definitely considered an exotic bird. I've checked all this out with a vet so. Okay. In fact according to the City ordinance to own a "dangerous" animal a resident just simply has to register it with the Public Safety Department and provide proper housing. And if you look at the ordinance that's hardly anything, okay. And all it requires a 4 foot leash and muzzled if possible. When in public. Okay. So I'm well within any laws that are in place. I mean I'm not even teetering on breaking anything. Okay. My application includes animals that are not necessarily considered customary fann animals but they 28 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 are certainly not considered dangerous. They are animals that are of interest to the public or are available to the public that can learn about and experience first hand while visiting my petting fann. There would also be animals that would only be on my property temporarily. I am a qualified wildlife rehabilitation provider. I'm in the process of getting my license ITom the DNR. That means I would nurse local wildlife patients back to health for transportation and release back into the wild. This might include fawns, squirrels, birds, mink, ground hogs, coyote, or coyote, however you want to say it. Fox, etc. My license requires that they be kept from the public to avoid imprinting. So they would be housed away ITom the public and other animals. That means that the public cannot look at them because if they get used to the public, they don't know how to live wild. Okay, so they're going to be housed there but they are not going to be interacting with the public, okay. Wildlife rehabilitation is a service that is grossly under provided in Minnesota so I will be providing a much needed public service. I'm also located in a really nice area where the Bluff Creek Watershed is. The head waters. There's a lot of wildlife there. Every day almost I see the coyotes. I definitely see the fox. There's wild turkeys. There's a lot of you know like deer or the fawn. When you hear like a gun shot at night, I didn't really always know what that was but I found out from the police that it was, they were putting them out of their misery because there was not place to put them. So any deer or fawn that gets injured automatically you know, if they can't walk away ITom it, they're dead. You know that's just the way it is. And there was an incident in Plymouth where a coyote jumped through some bakery's window. I can't remember. It was McGlynn's Bakery's window. And you know, the wildlife are getting displaced and this is going to be happening more and more. You know where they think they see themselves in the mirror and they get scared or else they think that's something else in the mirror off of a window and they you know, are curious or whatever. I don't know what reasons but anyway I'm just saying that as we take away their area where they're used to being, they're going to get displaced and they're also getting more friendly because I actually had a coyote, and believe this or not. When I had my 3 goats, I got up at, you know I always get up early in the morning and I happeneµ to look out and I saw my 3 goats, well there was 4 of them there okay. and I only have, at that time I only had 3. I've got 4 now but one was sitting on it's hind legs and I walked away from the window and I go wait a minute. Wait a minute. Goats don't sit on their hind legs and I came back and the coyote was sitting right next to my goats which was just amazing. So I mean I definitely, if any wild animals, I can tell you I've got them right where I'm at. Okay, the existing city ordinance addresses nuisance situations that might arise and include provisions for enforcement. City ordinances also address situations involving dangerous animals. So I would like to propose rewording point number 4 of the ordinance to the following. Are you familiar with the point number 4? Do I read it or do you, okay. Customary farm animals and other domesticated animals will be allowed on the site. Large carnivorous animals such as lions, tigers and bears will be prohibited. Okay, did you get that? See because anybody right now could get any kind, I could right now just go to Stacy, Minnesota or down to southern Minnesota or whatever without breaking any laws. I'm not even coming close to it, and come back with a lion, tiger, bear, bobcat, lynx, you name it. Boa constrictor. I can have it and anybody can have it in the city so, it's not anything I did. It's something that was put in place a long time ago. Okay, the recommendations for this permit could then include a condition that reads, rehabilitating wildlife will be restricted to non-public areas and housed according to DNR and USDA standards, which is page, you know refer to page 9 of the staff report. So that would . . 29 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 then allow me, allow you people to feel more safe, okay. But allow me to do the rehabilitating of the wildlife, so that's my proposal on that. Aanenson: Mr. Chairman can I just, before we lose track of this whole issue. This is an interim use. Staff can apply conditions we think as reasonable. We just think that it's way too much for us to try to regulate who can be seen. Who can't be seen. That was our recommendation. I won't address the points but just the number and the type and the different standards. Certainly she can have that but because she's asking for something different on the interim use we can adopt standards and that's where we were coming ITom,just so you understand that issue. Burton: Mr. Chair, I know this is going out of order but I'd like just to ask a question to follow up while we're on this. I'm looking at what they have what the staff recommended and it says it's subject to the plans dated February 22nd. So I'm not sure which, are the plans dated February 2nd the plans that are followed or the? Aanenson: This site plan, right. Burton: But her, this, Miss Rosie's fann thing that says what they're going to do, that's not the plan? Aanenson: That's her, that was her proposal. The staff developed criteria based on what we felt what was reasonable and meets with the property and to mitigate those impacts and that's what we're saying. She could do that now. There's certain things you can do in any residential zone but what we're saying is since she's asking for a certain permit, we can set up standards. We're saying it's way too confusing to try to keep track of all that. To go out and inspect and what can be seen. What can't be seen. All that. Burton: The other thing that's confusing me Mr. Chairman is that it's date stamped says February 22nd on here and I'm not sure when it says subject to the plans dated February 22nd. Does that mean that? Kirchoff: That's the site plan. . . Burton: Not these plans? Aanenson: No, the site plan. Susan McAllister: Okay Kate I need you to clarify what you're saying. I don't, you know I want it clarified a little bit more. Aanenson: You're asking for a change in the zoning ordinance. It's staffs job to review that application and recommend standards. That's why our proposal is recommending standards that we think are manageable. Although they may not be in concurrence with what your ultimate wish is. We think that those are manageable standards. The Planning Commission and the Council mayor may not agree with those conditions but we think that that is something that we 30 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 can get our hands on. The depth of your proposal we think is too intense and we can't manage something that big and that was our recommendation. Where we were coming rrom. Susan McAllister: Okay, but we just talking about, weren't we just talking about. Aanenson: Animals. Susan McAllister: Yeah. Aanenson: Your point was that you could have all these animals. Yes you can but you can't have a petting zoo or a petting fann. Susan McAllister: Okay, but if! don't you know, if! decided that I'm going to go away here and get nothing you know rrom you or we can't work it out, then you can't even regulate my manure right now because Chanhassen doesn't have you know a feedlot ordinance. I don't think they do. I'm trying to work it out with you but. Aanenson: We're trying to too. We're trying to avoid the situation that we just had the first item of business of the, ifit's a conditional use then it's, you can't have people to your property right now to do the petting zoo. That's what we're trying to allow. But in order to do that we're trying to mitigate, what scale is it going to be? We've already heard a horror story today of a situation that's incompatible and that's what we're trying to avoid. Ifwe give it a conditional use, if she sells tomorrow that conditional use runs with the property. And that's what we're saying. That mayor may not be the best decision. It's hard to look 5,10,15 years down the road. I was just trying to explain... Susan McAllister: Right, but getting back to the animal situation. I travel with my petting zoo, okay. I can keep taking my show on the road and not, you know we might not come to any workable arrangement here whatsoever. And if! can come to an arrangement, or if we can work this out with you, or if! can work this out with you, then you can put conditions on what I'm doing now. Right now nobody's, you know there's, you know there's been no nuisance cl\mplaints, okay. I've got, you know I've had no problems. You can't regulate. I could come, : please don't take this wrong. I do not plan on coming home with a bear, okay. But you can't regulate anything that I'm doing right now and I'm not trying to be brazen, believe me I'm not. I'm trying to be workable but all I'm trying to do is say that I would like the public to come and enjoy the experience. That allows you to put conditions on what I'm already doing now and doing in the future. So, okay. All right, I'll go on. Five year interim permit instead of a conditional use permit. My application has been submitted for a conditional use permit due to the large financial investment that will need to be made to provide the "historical preservation of the existing fannstead". In a friendly conversation with staff I have speculated that one never knows what might happen and this is how this became like an interim use type of thing, I think. Maybe I would move on in 5 years. That's kind of, you know that's basically what I said. I did not intend for that comment to be used to restrict the timerrame for my business and the use of my property. I have contemplated setting up this business for a number of years now and I am committed to seeing it done right. That means a significant financial and personal investment on 31 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 my part which gets into historical preservation. I mean you know as time goes, it's going to be, it's going to end up getting to that okay. So I am requesting that the city grant my request for a conditional use permit. If that is not possible the interim use permit should remain in effect until such time as the property no longer complies with the conditions of the permit or becomes a public nuisance in violation of the city's nuisance ordinance at which time it will revert to it's current zoning and use. I could agree to a condition that would allow that after 10 years of the original permit being granted the city has a right to review the conditions of the permit and make changes consistent with the existing city ordinances. And that's referring to recommendation number 10 of the permit. Okay. Hang on a second. Okay, there was a location concern at one point, adjacent to Highway 41 and the 78th Street rrontage road for Highway 5 so access transportation needs are easily accommodated in this location. Adjacent to the Bluff Creek Watershed which will preserve additional green space and add the natural and historic character of this area. And it's located in the proximity of other significant recreational and educational destinations such as the Arboretum, Minnewashta Regional Park, Carver Park Reserve and the Loring Nature Center. I'm a really good fit to this area, okay. The residential development proposed on the adjacent property is buffered by the large pasture on the east side of the site. Okay. This is the east side of the site so right here. And these are where the Pulte Homes are proposed to go in here. Okay, in fact the conceptual proposal only located two townhome buildings adjacent to the property line. Do you, I'll show you a map of that. I don't think you're going to see this but there is two strips going right here, okay. So this is the east side and this is the two strips, okay. West 78th Street separates the development to the south and the boulevard plantings provide additional buffering. Only the end units of three buildings will parallel this property. The residential development to the north is buffered by a large wetland complex which is the Bluff Creek Watershed. The corner of Highway 41 and 5 has been referred to as the entrance to the city. 1 believe that the historical preservation of a fannstead in this location would further enhance this entry point to our community. And that's basically, I guess we can, if you have any concerns about the pic~ures, you want to see, you know ask any questions, I'm glad to answer ¡mything. But what I'm trying to get at is for the significant amount of money I'm going to have to invest in this to keep the buildings going and everything you know to look still good, it's going, I can't afford to be there for 5 years and then even if you want to force me to not be able to have you know people come over for, until my driveway's there, that's going to take up another year which allows me 4 years. So that's my concern. . . Peterson: Any questions of the applicant? Sidney: Yes Mr. Chair. I alluded to a question about day camp. I guess what is your intention for, you know would buses of kids come in for the day? Susan McAllister: There's no day camp with this. Like I said no. I mean that brochure, I just, I was putting out things. I'm an artist type of person. I can see things better like that and Ijust thought you know this would make the beginnings of my brochure and so you know, that's changed and it's not a day camp. It's only a petting fann. Sidney: So what is the nature of the business then? Do people just come in unannounced so to speak or do they set up appointments for car loads? 32 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Susan McAllister: Yeah, they would set up appointments and they also could come in unannounced and you know, be able to have a really enjoyable experience. It's non-violence. It's something that's totally different than what people are used to doing here and have the kids actually interact with the animals. Be able to groom the animals. See a milking goat demonstration. It's a hands on petting fann is what it is so they can like feel the fur of the chinchilla. You know like especially for like blind kids or something. They need to touch animals that are not big, lumbering pigs you know, so I need to have those little animals there. And you know, I'm going to have a bird, aviary in the basement of the barn where I'm going to be housing the peafowl which includes one peacock and two peahens. Some Chinese Golden Pheasants which are native to Asia. The original, what the heck is it? Jungle fowl that is, as part of my teaching program to kids, the jungle fowl is a very, the roosters and all the hens that we've got now originated from the jungle fowl so it's considered an exotic bird. Sidney: Okay so bottom line is no day camps? Susan McAllister: No, no day camps. I'm sorry.. .I'm trying to sell this thing. Sidney: But 1 do want to make one comment which I guess you missed the last Planning Commission about the iguana but 1 do want to ask about prairie dogs because how do you keep prairie dogs you know without letting them, or if they can get out and... Susan McAllister: No, they would be in an appropriate size pen. Sidney: So it's not a prairie dog town or anything? Susan McAllister: Oh absolutely, 1 hope not. You know all the animals that I have are going to be like in tpeir proper area where they're not going to be running at large you know, so that. And 1 have to. I can't do that and be licensed by the USDA. I can't. That's not, that just wouldn't. I'd get in trouble with the nuisance ordinance you know and animal at large ordinance so. Sidney: I guess what I'm having trouble with is your expectations for the intensity and I guess I : don't feel that staffis really supporting that because 1 have a feeling like you do need more employees for the amount of activity that you're talking about. Susan McAllister: Well it's, according to my book it describes that I absolutely have to so. Ijust can't physically do that with only one other person. It's just not possible so I don't know, I don't know what to say about that. I guess I've said what I need to and that's what I need to say so. Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Kind: Yes Mr. Chairman. You mentioned that you have peacocks right now. Have you had any complaints about them? 33 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Susan McAllister: No. I have not. None, absolutely. I don't think. I mean nobody's ever approached me with anything. I don't know how I could because the only, when I was here the last time I told you know the staff and so on, whoever needed to know, that peacocks, the male peacock will scream you know like at night or whatever in the day, but ifit's at night it's sort of an eerie sound actually and it's a very wild sound. And you know, he's trying to impress his mate. I know a lot of other people that are like animals that do it every day but this guys only does it 6 weeks out of the year so I think that's pretty good. Kind: And you keep him closed in when he's doing that? Susan McAllister: Yes, I do. It's from the middle of March til the first, or no. It's rrom the middle of April to the first week in June, so that's about 6 weeks so, because like if. Kind: I get the drift. I get the drift. Susan McAllister: Okay, I'm just saying if you have animals and you don't know about them, you're going to have problems. Kind: You answered my question. And my other one was related to, on the site plan there's no public restroom facilities. When all these kids are there, where do you propose for them to go to the bathroom? Susan McAllister: Well I'd have like a porta-potty there so. Kind: Like the Bifs or something like that? Susan McAllister: Yeah, something like that, right. Kind: And then, one that just came up. When you put down that site plan that had the Pulte development on there, that looks really amazing to me. You're like a little oasis right there with all of the, does that look scary to you at all? . . Susan McAllister: Well that looks like a people zoo. I'm an animal zoo and they're a people zoo. I mean the best way to resolve this whole thing is to just you know zone the northeast side of you know or the west side as a zoo of some sort and just have us live happily ever after and interact with each other. Kind: It's just when you put that down I just went wow. You're going to be surrounded. And you're okay with that? Susan McAllister: I don't know about okay. I don't want to go on and on but I just, you know if I, where I'm at I'm trying to protect the fannstead look. If this is what it takes to get all these houses there to preserve the trees, if that's what it is, then I have to accept it. It's sort of like the laws of nature. The sun rises and sets at this time of the day at this month, okay. If that's what that comes to to be able to protect the green space for the wild animals and the beautiful trees that 34 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 we're never going to have unless we protect them, then that's what it comes down to. And I have to really work hard and I'm prepared to work hard. I've been doing it for like 15 years almost to maintain my animals and do a really good job. I'm a very responsible person. I believe in the community values of this community and so on, about the citizenship and respect for the other person and basically if! want somebody to treat me the way I would want to be, you know treat them like I'd want to be treated and I am trying, you know I'm willing to try to work out and be very responsible. Kind: Okay, thank you. Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Thank you. Motion and a second for a public hearing please. Sidney moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commissioners, please come forward and state your name and address please. Boyd Peterson: Yeah, Boyd Peterson, 9860 Pioneer Circle, Chanhassen. I think everybody in this room should applaud this lady for going through what she's going to go through for this community. I'm a father of four kids. I mean none of us are kids here but animals to kids, it's like you know candy. Sounds like she's willing to put herself on a year by year, 5 year, 10 year look at me. What do you think? Am I doing it right? Am I doing it wrong? If I'm doing it wrong, I'll leave. She's opening herself up. You know what more can we want you know. Gateway to the town, perfect. You know they've got communities all around that would love to have a place and a person like that that would go on a limb and put something like that in there. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. UIi Sacchet: I'm Uli Sacchet. I live at 7053 Highover Court. I think this is a really valiant eftort here that deserves to be supported in every which way. I'm concerned when I see so many : conditions put on this effort. I understand where you're coming from with trying to balance it in the context of the ordinances and also in terms of future, where that would lead eventually and that's certainly a liability that has to be looked at carefully. But I think there's a superceding thing which is we can't, such a fantastic effort curtail it to the point that it couldn't even support itself. .. . cutting down staff to the point that it's not workable. I mean I work with animals myself as a hobby and it's a lot of work and to put something out there that is presentable and conforms with the regulation on a State level, needs people to help. And also in order to make it at least somewhat able to carry itself on a financial level, there has to be room for cars to park for the people that want to come, whether it's a bus or two. So I would certainly encourage you to look at that as an important thing to make this possible. To support an effort like that because we're going to look back in two days and you put a very good comment, it's like an island. You have a lot of people coming to this city and most of these people come out here because they want to be a little more in the rural setting. And it's kind of a dichotomy what we have here and 35 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 we have this exploding development, and it's wonderful. It's a great community. It's good people. People come out here to be a little bit out of the rat race. Little bit in the rural community and here is somebody who's going out of their way and willing to make a tremendous sacrifice to preserve a little island of what most of us brought us out here so I would urge you to consider that. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Vernelle Clayton: I'm Vernelle Clayton, I live at 422 Santa Fe Circle and you've seen me here many times but tonight I'm here as a mend and fellow fanner. And I told Sue that I would address one particular issue, partly because Ladd brought it up last time and now he's not here but I thought I would do it anyway. I had a couple other comments that I thought I'd make... and what she actually has out there now and what she can continue doing. But I think that's all cleared up so I won't belabor that point. So I will just focus on what I thought I would tell Ladd. And that is he was a little concerned about the size and Sue addressed it a little bit too and it's probably clear in your minds now without any comment rrom me, but as she is enamored of rural life, so am I. She's willing to risk a great deal financially and spend an awful lot of time to preserve it. What I do is I risk a little financial stability and security by buying out my siblings so that I could in fact keep the farm that I grew up on because once you live on a farm, you never really want to totally give it up. So I go out there rrom about now on until about the end of October every other weekend and we fann. And so to put the size of her operation into perspective and I know that some of you have fann backgrounds so I don't need to tell you this. 6 acres is quite a lot of space for what she wants to do. And so I'm concerned when we address, I'm not quite sure what it is we're talking about when we talk about intensity. To put it in perspective on my fann which is basically a cattlefann. Cattle and previously sheep. We used to have a lot more types of things. We just have cattle now but when we had more things, over winter which is what I consider a comparable situation for Sue. Over winter is when animals don't go to pasture. They don't need the extra space. You feed them right in the yard and they don't leave. In fact you don't want them to leave. The gates are shut. Over winter we had at times in the range of 125 cattle. Let me back up. We had about 8 acres of farm yard and a large part of that was mowed, house, yard and approach and garden. On that then, in our barns we k<?pt, in and around our barns, approximately 125 heads of cattle. It varied. About 75 head of sheep and because we just had a small chicken house, we only had about 100, but as you know you can keep an awful lot of chickens in a small space. We didn't have anybody occupying for most of the time. One site was over about the age of 10, the horse barn so that was still unused, and we had two buildings fully filled with machinery. So that gives you some kind of perspective. She's talking about upwards of80 I think, and that includes some little bitty animals. Now we had 125 cows so if you get the idea, she's got much more space. I would say there is no intensity. If there's intensity to be considered I would think the traffic, the people coming, but not the animals. I also wanted to say that I don't want to speak for Sue but I think there are things that could be worked out that may a bit better for both the city and her than might be presented to you tonight. For example, my grandparents fann now is owned by someone who specializes in raising emu. Only a few miles away rrom my fann. Within a few miles there are people that have buffalo, lama, ostrich. Often there are pheasants being taken care of for fall release. Rabbits. Pet skunks. When I was little we had among other things, as my dad happened . ~ 36 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 to run over with a lawn mower with a mower, or whatever, 10 and behold we would have a wild duck, wild geese. At one time we had a pet coyote. Turtles, lizards, so all of these things are from time to time fann pets. That's my point. Fanning these days, and this is not a relevant point because she's wanting to replicate a 1920's fann, but fanning these days is emphasizing alternative uses and alternative products so to speak. Animals and poultry and so I don't think if you expand it you are talking about a zoo. These folks that raise lamas are not considered to be raising zoo animals. So I think there are some language that can be cleared up that would benefit both the city and Sue. And don't be amid. I think that two things, don't be so restrictive that she can't succeed. And two, don't be afraid of this. This can be something good for Chanhassen. You can have enough restrictions. She's offering to let you have restrictions. But don't be afraid. Go boldly with this. It can be really fun and really great for Chanhassen. Thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Susan McAllister: I'm not going to talk long but I just want to reassure you that, well I want to inform you that there's people that, I hear them say they're coming to Chanhassen and I say why do you come to Chanhassen? Just, I'm curious. For the country feel. For like the feel of the country. We like the look of the open fields and so on. I want you to realize that the country is not Chanhassen anymore and the country is only where you're going to allow it to be so that's where the country is and that's what I'm trying to preserve and I want to preserve it forever so that's what my real thought is. Peterson: Anyone else? Kind moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Anyone want to jump into this one? Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman I have a question of staff before we start. I need to kind of get something clarified. The home occupation ordinance we looked at tonight, from my perspective was talking about restrictions on property zoned residential, okay. Now we're talking about some property that's not zoned residential? ~ . Aanenson: A2 is also a residential zone. Blackowiak: It is a residential zone? Aanenson: Yes. It does not meet the home occupation ordinance. You've got activities outside the principle structure. Home occupation has to be in the home. That's why we're coming up with some different standards. Blackowiak: So then the one employee that we used for the home occupation really doesn't apply to this. It's just a number that you chose? 37 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Aanenson: ...we've fiamed this up on intensity. Intensity isn't just animals. It's the activity level on the property. How many employees are there? How many kids are there? What are the hours of operation? Those are all factors of intensity. While I appreciate the comments on the fann, I don't think those fanns are in close proximity to houses such as this is going to be. Again, if you, if we look to 5 years down the road, this is going to be different. We certainly want to preserve the agricultural of this property. That's why we're bringing this forward. We're trying to strike that balance as what is the right amount of intensity on this property and again if you give it a conditional use, you cannot revoke the conditional use. It runs with that property forever and that was our concern. We're going out there and we don't know the ramifications. We're going into a, all we can tell you is rrom our past experience where there's conflicts. And we're saying we anticipate that and I think if we were to start smaller and say you know build on that, we'd be, the staff would be much more comfortable with that. But say there's 5 employees and then you have two school buses and, you're having 50 kids, 60 kids, 75 kids during the day on that running around. I don't know. I don't know what the implications are. You don't do that on a normal fann. There's a commercial store that you need to have somebody running. It's a lot different than just preserving agricultural and so, there's some ramifications. The traffic, all that. So that's what we were looking at intensity. Not just the number of animals. I'm certain that that is probably the least of the problems. While there may be some nuisance with noise, with peacocks, there are. Because we have that complaint already in the city with that noise. Peterson: Other questions of staff before we give comments? Alison, do you want to begin the commentary? Blackowiak: I should have kept quiet. Peterson: See that you should have. \ \ Blackowiak: Got you looking this way didn't I? Peterson: Yep. Biackowiak: Sure I will. This is a tough one. I certainly applaud the idea. I think that it is : important to try to preserve some type ofChanhassen's history. I'm not sure of the location. It is going to be an island, definitely. If indeed that proposed development goes through. We're going to have all kinds of neighbors that are going to be right up next door and there will be complaints and that's just a given. It's going to happen. Regardless of the fact that she was there first, there are going to be people that are not going to be happy about it. I understand why she would like a conditional use permit versus an interim use. From a purely business point of view however I would feel uncomfortable if I were trying to go into a new business with an interim use, with simply an interim use permit, for only 5 years. I just don't think that that's really something that would give her the comfort level she might need to spend the time, money and energy necessary to get something like this up and going. So I don't know that this is necessarily even what she would want or accept in terms of a solution that would be acceptable to her. I have some problems with some of the conditions. Specifically number of employees. Specifically parking. I don't think either is enough to support what she wants to do, but the 38 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 question I'm still struggling with is if she has enough with, to achieve what she wants to do, is it going to be too much for this site and I guess I don't have that answer right now. One of my main kind of problems to myself is, the 78th Street access. I don't like that at all. Especially since we're talking about that neighborhood being there. I think that that's going to potentially raise more problems than an access off of Highway 41 would simply because you've got residential neighborhoods. You've got, you know I assume pedestrian traffic, children, etc so for me I would be more comfortable hearing staff recommend something off of 41. Dave, you're shaking your head. I understand that but. Aanenson: The sight line is terrible. Blackowiak: I understand but I'm just saying that West 78th I don't think is going to be much better. That's my opinion. I mean right or wrong. I mean I'm not an engineer but that's just kind of what I'm thinking in terms of the neighbors. When there are neighbors there. It's going to be a problem for them having traffic going through their neighborhoods and that's why I would almost prefer doing something off of 4 I. Bottom line is, I just don't know what to say. I wish she had 40 acres. That would be wonderful. I'm sure she does too. But I guess I am struggling with the idea that we're not giving her enough to succeed. Yet if she does get enough to succeed, it might just be too much for the site so I'm going to listen to the other comments and hopefully get some more insight. - Peterson: And to that point, any other comments by commissioners? Kind: Yes Mr. Chairman, I'll continue down the line here. I like the idea of supporting, preserving little oasis, oasi. Oasises. And it is a nice little fann. I like the idea. I too am concerned about the conditions, limiting it too much to where it's not a going venture. So I'd like to see the parking increased to what the applicant has recommended or asked for, which is 20 cars orhmd. It's not clear to me actually, would the buses go where the cars are so it's either or deal? Or both? It's both, okay. So I'm torn on that. Because if you have all of that, that's 200 people. That's way more so actually I like it the way it was. Never mind. I think that's how you restrict the use is by the number of parking and that we should increase the staff, the number of people who can work there which was point number 3 under the petting farm. I don't know how you call it. The ordinance. The section for petting fanns. I would like to see it four non- residents of the place because that's what it sounds like it would take to make a go of it. What else do I have here? Oh, and then the length of the interim use. Since the applicant has expressed a willingness to be revisited, every 10 years or whatever the number is, I guess I'd like to see it be longer than 5 years. I think 5 years is just not sending a very positive signal to the applicant that she can really establish a business and build buildings so I like the idea of it being more like 10 years or something like that. And have it relate to after the installation of the driveway on West 78th. I like the entrance on West 78th. Sorry Alison. Ijust think it takes it off the rray of 41. And until that road is built, she'll just have to take the show on the road or do some of her prep work. It probably will take her that long to prepare to open this business anyway so those are my thoughts. . . Peterson: Okay, thank you. Other comments? 39 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Sidney: Yes, I'll make some comments Mr. Chair. I like the idea of a petting zoo. Excuse me, a petting fann. Should choose my words more carefully here. I was thinking it would be a really fun place to bring my niece and I was so excited about it when I first saw that brochure and stuff. I think that'd be a really fun place to go in the community for little children. I think we need more of those types of areas. And I was thinking about you know intensity, is it activities and I was thinking particularly in Stone Creek there's a small park with kids and it's just over run with kids. It's very loud. There's a lot of noise and it goes on all day and into the night and I'm wondering if we're really going to have anything more noisy than that with a petting fann. Probably not. Or a ballfield if you've been around ballfields, you know with screaming kids. If this were planned to be a park or a ballfield would we feel differently? And I think maybe not. I think the petting fann is probably going to be in that same realm. Probably even more quiet. Maybe not as intense in terms of activities and so I'd be certainly in favor of the interim use permit for this particular use. I do like, would like to see the condition on the number of employees changed and increased so that we have no more than 4 maybe listed, and I guess that's part of the description of the petting fann. Also I made a note here about, I also would like to see under petting fanns the condition 4 address the request about being able to rehabilitate wildlife so that only customary fann animals and the rehabilitation of wildlife shall be allowed on the site. And then strike wild but leave exotic animals shall be prohibited. Those are my thoughts for now. Peterson: Thank you. Burton: Mr. Chairman I'll jump in. I agree on the employee issue. I think it should be 4. On the parking, I like starting off where it is but I would, I would guess the applicant could always come back every year if she wanted to or even more often and ask for new things. So she can always come back and ask for more parking. I don't know about the access issue. The access issue just kills it. lfit's limited to 78th Street then, and there is no 78th Street there, then this thing's not happening'for quite a while anyway. But I also understand the concerns on 41 so I'm stuck there. I do like the project. I think it's nice to have a petting fann. I'd like to have a petting fann there. I'm not concerned about the size. I think it's pretty obvious that the applicant values the rural life and animals and she's not going to do anything to undermine those things so I'm not really worried about that. I do have another comment on the definitional part. When you limit wild and exotic animals, I think we need to work on the definition because if you limit exotic animals out of there too, you really, it seems to me we're just basically carving out maybe some peafowl and chinchilla or two rrom what she's planning. But I don't know, I think maybe, I don't know if we can work on some definition that really excludes the type of animals that we don't want there. You know the lions and tigers and bears type stuff. I would rather work on the definition to keep those out but let her have some flexibility on some of the fun little animals. I guess that's it. I don't know what we'll do tonight. I feel like if we pass, if this passes to staff what's suggested, which I think is a good recommendation, that it really doesn't allow for it to go forward because first of all we've got the street issue. But I don't know where to go and I guess I'll look to the fellow commissioners on what we should do or can do here. I'm kind of stuck. . . 40 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Peterson: Okay. Boy, I guess I'm going to buck the trend. Even from the first session where we had a working plan I wasn't enthused with either the site or the location and I'm not any more convinced tonight that it's the appropriate of this site. But more importantly Ijust don't see the location as being conducive for what we want to, or what she really wants to try to accomplish, and more importantly how we want to transition from, if Pulte goes through and if that's a pretty abrupt transition which I don't think is appropriate. I'm sensing that there's going to be more traffic to the area than I did before. I see that as a negative so I guess keeping my thoughts succinct, site plan. It's marginal for what I think should be there. Or conducive for a petting fann and the location just doesn't work for me. I love the idea. I think it's a fantastic idea, just the wrong spot so. I know I sense from my fellow commissioners that we want to make that work, but in my heart I can't move ahead because it's just the wrong spot. So I'll be happy to entertain a motion. Blackowiak: Excuse me Mr. Chairman. Kate, I need to ask one question. Do we have any kind of a legal time limit on this? Aanenson: Yes. Blackowiak: So what is there, what's our time line? Kirchoff: June 2nd. Blackowiak: So even if it's a zoning ordinance amendment we still have to? Aanenson: Yes. It's a request, correct. Blackowiak: So we have to act wi~hin that time or else it automatically. Aanenson: Well we will. We would give you, tell you to make some recommendation, either approve or deny and send it forward to the City Council is what we would recommend. Not tonight. - . Blackowiak: Not tonight? Aanenson: You have time yet. Blackowiak: Okay. That's what I wanted to know, thank you. Well then I would like to make a motion that we table this for tonight. The reason being is that I'm sensing, I think Ladd would like to be here really. And also, I think that staff and the applicant need to get together and to further determine whether or not they can agree on interim use versus conditional use and a time for the interim use. And really hammer out some of the conditions that would be acceptable both to the applicant and to the staff, and then come back to the Planning Commission with a more concrete plan that is acceptable to both parties. Peterson: Is there a second? 41 Planning Commission Meeting - April 19, 2000 Kind: I second that. Peterson: Any discussion? Sidney: I agree. Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission table the request for a zoning ordinance amendment to allow petting farms as an interim use in the A2 District. All voted in favor, except Peterson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Peterson: I would nay for the reasons already noted. So what should we have Susan do in the interim? Just work with you? Aanenson: Yes. Peterson: All right, thank you. NEW BUSINESS: Peterson: Any new business Kate? Aanenson: Yes. I'll tell you what's coming up on the next meeting in May. Marsh Glen subdivision. Was on again, off again, on again, off again. It appears that it's going forward now as a traditional single family RSF subdivision. A lot of negotiations between Mr. Kroiss and the... property owner. We haven't seen that also and we won't because they don't have to... subdivisioµ so we don't know. We just know what the lots will look like. We have two variances on and then we're also going to put a kind of open discussion just talk about lighting. We'll try to get that on.. .and just talk about the impacts oflighting. There was an article in the paper recently on that same discussion. Should I move to ongoing? , . Peterson: Please. ONGOING ITEMS. Aanenson: Okay. We did hire a new storm water, or excuse me. Water Resource Coordinator. Laurie...and she starts next Wednesday so we'll have her meet with you at the next meeting. We're excited to have her on board. I wanted to let you know that on May 1 '\ that's a work session. The City Council will be interviewing all of the Planning Commission candidates, and you're interviewing some more tonight but all of them will be going to that meeting. May ¡'t. And then on May 15th there's a tentative, I think you were told this before, a joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting. I'll let you know but it looks like we're like third on the docket so I'll let you know approximately what time. The Senior and Park Commission, and Environmental will also be going that night too. As far as the ongoing items for the meeting in, 42 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Peterson: Okay, thank you. Next item is Old Business. CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO ALLOW PETTING FARMS AS AN INTERIM USE IN THE A2. AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT AND REOUEST FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A PETTING FARM IN THE A2 DISTRICT. LOCATED AT 7461 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD. SUSAN MCALLISTER. Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of Cindy. Blackowiak: Mr. Chair. Cindy, I have just a quick question here. You have a note in the staff report that talks about a termination date for interim use permits that typically are based on availability of municipal services. Do we normally follow that standard or do we, have we in the past specifically put the number of years into conditions? Aanenson: Generally in the past, interim use was put in place to allow reasonable use of the property until such time that sewer and water became available. For example, Swings was given the driving range here, to give a reasonable use to the property based on it's location. So now that sewer and water will be coming through, that use goes away. The reason we didn't want to put a conditional use on the property is that runs forever on the property so if this owner were to sell, somebody else would come in. We felt that was too intense. The interim use has a drop dead date. Generally it's tied to urban services. Could we put something in there? Some other mechanism. Possibly. I guess our concern was that there is some reviewal period and that it not be locked in forever on that piece of property because we're going on uncharted waters on this one and we have some apprehension. Blackowiak: I guess my question, maybe more specifically was. Aanenson: Can we force them to hook onto utilities? Blackowiak: Well it says, you know municipal water will be available soon. Is that, if we're not requiring tlie interim use to stop when services are available, is that running counter to our current code or rezoning? Aanenson: The ordinance says when it gets within so many feet we can require them to hook up. . Blackowiak: Maybe you have the option. Aanenson: Right. But generally if there's assessments also then the clock is running on those too. I'll maybe let Dave speak a little bit on that. Hempel: Mr. Chainnan, Planning Commissioners. City ordinance, with regards to hook-up to utilities, I'll just reiterate what Kate was saying there. Water main, you have to hook up to it if it's a new dwelling within 150 feet. An existing dwelling and the well fails, then you would have to connect. Otherwise it's status quo. Sanitary sewer is basically the same. One exception, sanitary sewer you would have 12 months to hook up to it if you're on an existing septic system, even though the septic system is functioning properly. There's been variances in the past where somebody's put in a new septic system and then a year or two sanitary sewer comes by, the City Council can grant a variances to that. Assessments against the property as a result of extension of sewer and water will occur. Typically those 25 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 sewer and water assessments will be deferred against a property ifthere's no development occurring in residential, commercial. But if like a green acres status or a farm, it will stay mostly likely deferred but the interest clock continues to run on those assessments. Blackowiak: Okay, thanks. Aanenson: So it could be deferred. That's where the time clock, when maybe we put in when such time that that changes. It's no longer a farm use or whatever. Peterson: Other questions of staff? Burton: Mr. Chairman I have a quick question. The proposed ordinance for the pet farms is one full time equivalent non-resident employee may be employed on the site per 5 acres. And based on another question, but in this case then she'd be allowed to have one full time employee? Aanenson: Or two part time. Burton: Okay. And I guess, I assume the term resident means living on that property? Kirchoff: Correct. Aanenson: Correct. Again, that's where we struggled with, if you look at the intent ofthe A2 district, you're living on the property and so how can you separate what someone else is trying to create similar that wasn't living on the property. Now it really becomes commercial. Most commercial property you don't live at the same residence so we're trying to make sure we're staying on that same track. Kind: Mr. Chair I have a question about animals. Currently the applicant has animals on the site. Does she have special permits for any of those or are they all just regular animals that you're allowed to have in a A2 district without permits? Kirchoff: She doesn't have any permi1s ITom the City. Sacchet: She doesn't need any. K irchoff: Yes. . Kind: Yes she does need some? Kirchoff: I'm sorry, I was answer his question. She doesn't have any permits ITom the city because we don't require any. Kind: Okay. So all the animals that are there are currently allowed in the A2 district? Kirchoff: The animals that I saw are permitted in the A2 district. Kind: Okay, thank you. 26 Planning Commission Meeting-June 6, 2000 Sacchet: I have a lot of questions about this one so I apologize in advance. First of all, the staff report doesn't give a picture of the planned development next to it. It was my understanding that has not been approved. Aanenson: Correct. Sacchet: But is being considered. And so that's to the south and to the east. Do we have any visual aid that would show that? Aanenson: No we don't. This Planning Commission had seen that before but it is, as proposed, around this area would be up to I believe, south of that property would be like four-plexes, eight-plexes. Adjacent further would be some duplexes so there will be. Sacchet: And they would be right adjacent? Aanenson: Exactly. That was our concern. Changing character and we're going to introduce some conflict. Peterson: Within 200 or 300 feet as I recall. Aanenson: Probably less than that. Peterson: So there is some buffer. Not very much buffer. Aanenson; Right. Sacchet: The interim use permit cannot be renewed? Aanenson: Yes it can. Sacchet: It can? Aanenson: Yes. Sacchet: How? . Aanenson: You can ask for an extension. Sacchet: The interim permit expires, the applicant can come back and start a new interim use permit? How does that work? Aanenson: Part of the interim use is there's ongoing inspections too. Assuming that there is compliance and we haven't had complaints. Again, the intention, while we know this area is changing, again we know we're going to introduce conflict, we want to see what that is, and that's why we're saying we'd like to start with the lowest intensity and see where we go. Sacchet: But we're willing to have it start and possibly grow into something if there is no complaints and so forth? 27 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Aanenson: Well I think, you can certainly come back and amend the ordinance, but I think you said it at the beginning. We'd rather start small and...and build on that and get out there where we, we don't do animal enforcement. So we do have peacocks. We do get, in the city. We do get complaints on those. So ftom our experience, and noise is a prevailing issue in this community, we're trying to prevent a problem. Sacchet: Well this is very encouraging. So the interim use pennit is renewable. Questions. We're in the question part. Yeah, here's the big question. We really have two things in ftont of us. We have this petting farm set of rules on one hand, and we have the request of the applicant for the interim use pennit. So that's two distinct separate things. We're discussing them both at the same time Mr. Chair? Peterson: Yes. Sacchet: Okay. Because I definitely have comments about both. When we set the limit of one full time equivalent non-resident employee, does that mean there's no limit of resident employees? Kirchoff: Yes. Sacchet: Thank you. When we say only customary farm animals, do we mean non-dangerous animals? That's a tough one. Because I really think in a lot of these instances here, we're not addressing what the real concern is and this is one of them. Aanenson: On the face of it, our intent is to have a zoo. The intent was to preserve agriculture. What was going on the property. When you would define petting, excuse me, not a zoo, at a farm. Okay, we've introduced animals that are not typically found on a farm so herein lies this issue. I mean this is intended to preserve Miss Rosie's Farm. found on a farm so herein lies this issue. I mean this is intended to preserve Miss Rosie's Farm. It's farm property so now we've got things that are partially... Sacchet: Well the reason why I bring this up, I mean in this proposed, what do we call it? The part about the petting farms. That's a standard. That's what you call it? Aanenson: . Right. Sacchet: Set of Standard Rules. You're distinguishing between a petting farm and a zoo. And I have a hard time with that because we're defining a zoo as any park building, cage enclosure or other structure ~ or premise in which live animal or animals are kept for public exhibition or viewing. Necessarily if we have a petting farm, there are going to be animals in a cage and so it's a zoo by definition. So we're trying to make it something in terms of what animals are allowed. I think that's, and that's why we're struggling with it. I think that's where we get into a bottollÙess pit. I mean how we can object to chinchilla? But it's an exotic animal. And ultimately I think if where we have a solid ground under our feet is if we say we don't want dangerous animals there. I think that is enforceable. I think we have a very hard time with saying well you can have a cow, sheep, and goats because there are ostrich farms, buffalo farms, a snake farm. There are you name it. They're out there on farms, and they're being farmed. Now you can say okay, that's not customary or just say well that's not United States historically. But is it our task to restrict it? I really thing it isn't, personally. My opinion is very strong about that. I think we're encroaching here. I'll say more about that when we get later to that. You see then I have a problem when you say well staff supports a petting farm but not a zoo. Well, by definition it's a zoo. It's just a, we're restricting it and I think we're restricting it too far. Questions. We're in the questions part. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 A large wooded area will be removed. What's that based on? Because I went out there and there is a lot of space. I don't think there's that much that needs to be cut down. Aanenson: For the parking lot. Kirchoff: It's based on a site plan. Sacchet: The parking lot? When I was out there it seemed like there's about 3 trees, or how many? tree? 2 trees? I mean is that a large wooded area? I don't quite get it. Kirchoff: The site plan shows canopy coverage and that was reviewed by the City Forester to determine if additional plantings needed to be. Sacchet: Okay, so that's Jill who makes that? Kirchoff: Yes. Sacchet: Access. The future extension of West 78th Street. When is that planned to come in? I guess that's one for you Dave. Hempel: Mr. Chairman, Planning Commissioners. It's kind of a moving target. The last I've heard is the end of June, or first week in August is the letting of the project. It's a two year long project for the upgrade of Highway 5, West 78th Street. I envision it will probably be sometime, summer of2001 for access offof78th Street, or even fall of 2001. Sacchet: So roughly a year ITom now? Hempel: A year from now, right. Sacchet: Okay, thank you. Statement. Keeping abreast of all these issues once this use is operating will be burdensome to staff. In what way? Aanenson: We're not trained to do inspections on wildlife. We'd have to pay somebody outside to say are these animals housed the way they're supposed to be? That sort ofthing. We don't have... Sacchet: Isn't the applicant having USDA, DNR, all these wonderful things that actually regulate exactly" that? Isn't she certified and under a whole set of rules that go way beyond what we could ever think of? Aanenson: We haven't seen anything. Sacchet: Well, I'll ask the applicant when she comes up about that. I think that's, oh for signs. They cannot variance, right? Size of variances. Aanenson: You're developing the standards. You can give her whatever you want. What we tried to do was put something that we believe was reasonable and controllable. You're creating the ordinance. You can do, say whatever you want. Sacchet: I think that answers the question part. Thank you. 29 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Peterson: Okay. Other questions? Would the applicant like to make a presentation? If so, please come forward. Susan McAllister: My name is Susan McAllister. I live at 7461 Hazeltine Boulevard and I really do want to make a presentation because I have more paper than I've ever had. Nothing changes. I just get more paper and my hair gets less blond. Okay. Number one, just to address, I would like to go through this but I just want to address some questions that were brought up. VIi asked if about, or there was a comment made that they don't manage animals and they don't get into that. I have got the USDA that comes two times unpredicted a year, okay. If there's one little complaint and they get it, they come back again. If I don't, you know like make corrections or whatever, I cannot do business until I've made the correction. DNR, you know if I had animals specifically that related to them, they would make inspections unannounced. Carol with the stable permit makes inspections on the horses. So basically you know there's a lot of people that are involved that will mange what I'm doing. And I really am very confident that the city is more fearful than anything and I think that's what really is driving a lot of these rules. Is the fear of it and I can kind of see where they're coming from because years ago I had that happen to me when I, years and years ago when I tried to take on somebody's animals after I had a cesarean and I was taking care of her animals while she was on vacation. There was all this different types offeeds for different types of animals, and I almost had a heart attack. Going I don't know how to do this. This is too much, and then I liked it too much after that so that's how I got to where I'm at. Anyway, UIi asked for, he was asking about interim use and I'm still applying for a conditional use, not an interim use. Ifthere's any types of complaints your nuisance ordinance and, nuisance ordinance and is it the noise ordinance? I can't remember but there's two. I've got them, do you want me to read them or show them to you? I mean they definitely will go way over and above what the problem could be, I can tell you. I mean they will definitely save this place from that. And the animals that, Cindy kind of answers questions in a very tricky way because actually the animals she said she saw are allowed. Well, she was only in the barn for like about 10 seconds and she ran out so. Peterson: Somebody bit her? Susan McAllister: No, so I mean I don't know if! could really see many animals in 10 seconds but all the animals that I have are allowed. There is not one animal, including my little fox that I have, that is not allowed. I mean because I have read the ordinances and I have complied and I have registered my little fox with the city. And so every animal, including the peafowl are allowed. Okay. The definition of a zoo, just as UIi said, there is a problem. It's kind of hair splitting. It's absolutely ridiculous to a point that the real definition of a zoo is animals held in cages for public display. I mean that's what a zoo is. I ~ mean that could be, you know iflike I don't, if! have the fann and I don't want to put the animals in cages, they can be running around and that would be even worst but that is the definition of a zoo. As far as exotic animals. Many, many animals in the United States you know came from different countries. Chicken are actually could be considered exotic because they all derived from the jungle fowl from China. So actually you know like when you want to get into hair splitting, I could really split hairs with a lot of people and like I said before, Canadian geese are considered exotic because they migrate and they migrate to Mexico, a lot of them. So they actually are considered exotic. The next problem is the West 78th Street. The building of West 78th Street. I did contact, I can't remember him name at, what is it? I know you know. What's his last name? It starts with a Van something or other I believe. Well he gave me permission. He said he's writing me a letter. I have not received the letter which is really odd but that I can continue to use the driveway until that road comes in. You know that that's, that he said he mailed me the letter. I don't know where it went but I don't have it yet. Aanenson: That is a true statement. Did you ask him about the intensification of the use? 30 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Susan McAllister: I told him. I showed him, I mailed him a copy of it. You know he said that he was surprised that they were making a big issue of it, but whatever. He said that you know really it's the way it is I guess. Okay, the trees. I'll show you some pictures of the trees that are going to be coming down. And also I'm going to be giving you some letters from somebody. And then here's some copies of the maps that show what I'm going to explain where everything basically is located. How far away it is. Here's, you're going to get copies. You have 7 there. This is the original and you don't need that? Okay. Here's some photographs and you can, well I'll explain to you when I run that. Okay, the trees. Number 8, if you want to look at the photographs show in the wintertime, this was when Alison showed up one day and I don't know, it was the beginning of April it could have been, or end of March. So these photographs are taken, A, B, C and D are taken when there's no leaves on the trees, okay. This is going to show the trees along West 78th Street and it's going to cover the parking I can assure you. It's going to cover the parking area. Okay. Then we've got E with a little circle in it shows one volunteer that was holding up a blue cloth. That was symbolizing a car, okay. And you can't really see that very much and that's in the dead of winter. Okay. N shows you know the way in basically as to where the parking's going to be from West 78'h Street. 0 shows the one, well one tree for sure has to come down and then there's another large tree. That's the only thing that's coming down are those two trees, and yes it's true that the map shows canopy but the canopy comes from a lot of the other trees besides that line of trees along the woods so. And then do you have T anywhere? You don't have T? Peterson: We have some coffee in the hallway. Susan McAllister: I just got it. Alright. This T now is on the northern part where my manure area will be and it's very dense there also. You can, if anybody has T with the little circle in it, there's a pink horse trailer there that you can't really see at all, so. Okay. So what I'm trying to say to you is that I'm only taking down two trees and the trees that I'm taking down, one specifically only has about an eighth of the growth left on it because it's on it's last life cycle and if! don't take it down, a storm's going to easily take it down. And it's right where the parking is going to be so I love trees and believe me, this is really hard for me to take two trees down so I just want to assure you of that. Okay... Okay, well basically I just, you know like, you know she was licensed as a person that did wildlife rehabilitation and I believe that I could you know not, you know I wouldn't have a problem with the DNR because I've already spoken to them about it you know like months ago and explained to them the entire situation so that's the only comment I want to make on this other than that. It's a really good one. Okay. I guess, was there any questions so far, anything or can I kind of go through this real quick? Because I have some comments. Okay. Then the zoning ordinance amendment. It talks about, the city has received numerous. complaints regarding a small 5 acre farm. I don't know where it is and I don't know, you know like it doesn't pertain to me. I am a responsible person. I have not had any problems with my animals. There's been no complaints about any noise or anything like that and I am not going to allow myself to be used okay, because somebody had a problem and was not responsible. That's all it is. It's an example of someone you know that is being irresponsible. I know that every time you have a Planning Commission meeting, you know or City Council meetings, people are always up here talking about people next to them making noise, or people doing this or people doing that. There's tons of those complaints. This is me. I'm responsible. Okay. I don't know who the 5 acre guy is. I don't know. That's just the way it is so. Okay. Petting farms, Section 20-267. Okay, when we come, we did really, I really went up to the City Hall to try to work all this out so we wouldn't have to go through here but they wouldn't budge and I can't, I cannot not have this. I have to have what I have to have or I can't do business. Okay. Number 3. The applicant for the interim use permit shall reside on the site. You know only one full time equivalent non-resident employee, okay. I've got to have 4 to 5 and I'm going to explain to you why. Because according to this map, you've got the color copies of the maps. Okay. Now you've got the explanations 31 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 of the duties that go along with each person. It shows the pony ring. You see the pink circle is the pony ring. It's 25 feet in diameter just hecause of the fact that that's you know, that's that I come up with. Okay, from the center of the pony ring to the pond is 190 feet away approximately, okay. Okay, I'll just keep going and I'll explain what everybody's chore would be. Number 2 person that I need, the retail store area is approximately, I mean these are approximates because they're all about 50 feet from the center of the pony ring and 50 feet from the summer kitchen so that's quite a ways away. I can't have people running back and forth, okay. It's just not possible. Number 3 person. The summer kitchen. It is 50 feet from the pond ring and 50 feet ITom the retail store. The number 4 person, the barn. That's 190 feet ITom the center of the pony ring. We don't even touch on the fifth person that I asked for originally which would be taking care of like the grounds or you know like the leading nature tours of the Bluff Creek woods wetland area. Okay, but now I'm going to explain to you what the duties are and you try to imagine one person who's got this duty going to another duty and doing it. The pony rides. The responsibility is, that person takes the money from each rider. They mount and dismount the children. They have constant and close monitoring of each pony and child to avoid potential problems. A child crying or trying to jump off the pony because off ear or being overwhelmed by this ride, okay. Starting and stopping the rides. That's their responsibility. General care and watering, feeding and hourly inspection of each pony in the ring. This is a constantthing. You have to lead these ponies...it's like somebody leaving a carnival ride. Okay, so that person cannot leave that place. They can't go anywhere else. Number 2 person which runs the retail store. Duties. Taking admission money and money for purchases. Doing inventory updates. Restocking merchandise... Anybody that leaves the store is going to get, you know they're... The summer kitchen, it's duties. Taking food orders. Cooking and serving the food. Take the money for food purchases. Cleaning up after customers outside, and general housekeeping of entire kitchen. I mean they're going to be people that are going to be leaving stuff around and I expect that place to be clean and that's what this person's job will be. Then person number 4, which is 190 feet from the other person down at the pony ring is going to be talking about each animal and farm life through the last 100 years with the people walking...talking about that. Making sure the children are not climbing in or around animals, because they do. Making sure no one is teasing or causing injury to any of the animals, because they will. General care, feeding, watering of each animals because they need it. General housekeeping of the barn area because that's going to be listed with USDA and I have to do that, plus they have tll(, water and feed the animals, or I'll get in trouble if they show up, okay. And the last thing I'm asking, a cell phone for anybody who has a question about the place. That's what each person is doing at their location. They cannot go ITom one location to another. Okay, then the last person was the general grounds keeping. This is something I don't have to have all the time. I don't know about... but the Bluff Creek nature walks because when they come out there, the kids get rambunctious. They're only there for like an hour. It's nice to have them do something else or whatever. to make it a little longer you know experience for them so that's the, that's what has to be done there. Okay. And then when you talk about, well I know how you can limit the time frame is having me do all this stuff. I'll die is what's going to happen. I'll only being doing business for like 6 months so. Okay. I have a terrible sense of humor. Sacchet: Do you need a moment to catch your breath? Susan McAllister: No, I'm fine. Sacchet: Because I have a question. This one employee equivalent. How's it measured? I mean does it mean if you have 8 people working for one hour a day? That's one employee equivalent or does it mean if you have 16 people working one day for one hour and nobody the next day? Is that still within that? I mean what's the definition ofthis term? 32 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Kirchoff: It'd be on a daily basis. Sacchet: Daily basis, okay. And it does not include residents. Now the second question to this. Susan McAllister: Don't make me get married. I don't do well in that. Sacchet: You might need a family for this Sue. If you contract somebody for services, like somebody come mow your lawn. That's not your employee. You're buying a service. Correct? Aanenson: Well I'm sure there's ways. Our concern is that you can see by the description of that, you've got a lot happening on 5 acres. That's our concern. There's a lot happening. A lot of employees. 100 people up there on 5 acres and. Susan McAllister: 6. Aanenson: 6 acres. That's our concern. Sacchet: Okay, well yeah. I'm not trying to debate that. I'mjust trying to see how we can balance. Aanenson: Could that be contracted out? Yes, but what's the difference between contracting out and then someone who comes for an hour or two. Sacchet: Well by definition it's not an employee. I mean if you look at legalities. Aanenson: Who's paying for that service? Sacchet: Still not employee. It's something you buy. Anyhow, I thought you needed a break. Susan McAllister: Okay, well that's good. I don't care. I'll take all the support. Okay. Well I'm just saying that I need that. I cannot do, and I will not do, I won't do it without it. At the expense of keeping animals and the entrance and everything, I have to have all these other things going on. There's zoos that are in the red all the time because they can't make ends meet. I need, I came up with a creative way to preserve the green space. To allow children to have fun in a non-threatening way. To have a very enriching experience and what my goal is is to you know preserve the essence of the farm you know by the activities and selling merchandise so that's the way it is. That's what I need. Number, okay so that was number 3. Number 4 is the only customary farm animals will be allowed on the site. Okay, so I know it's going to be hard. Wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited. I want to change it, I'm hoping that we can change it to, and I really know this is, I feel this is going to work. Take out the only and put customary farm animals shall be allowed on this site. Scratch out wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited and add, large carnivorous animals such as lions, tigers, and bears shall be prohibited because I really think that the city is really afraid of that and they need to say that. Instead of all this other stuff, and we could be here splitting hairs forever because I can argue with you about exotic animals. And a wild animal, my 800 pound sow is more wild than my little fox will ever be. She's only going to be 14 pounds at full growth. Okay. An 800 pound sow is you know, crazy. I mean she'd knock over every chair if! brought her in here and said hi. She would knock everything over. She'd jump in your lap besides. Okay. And this definition ofa zoo, I think we should just drop it. I don't like the word zoo but like I just said, you know animals held in cages for public display are considered a zoo. Sometimes that could be government too, but whatever. We'll leave it for the animals. Okay. I want to do the wildlife rehabilitation. I don't want to do it right now. I have to say I need to put this together and keep it this . 33 Planning COInnÙssion Meeting - June 6, 2000 way but I want the city to know, and I've tried to explain this, that it is not possible for the public to view wildlife being rehabilitated. It's against the rules. I could never do it. In had anybody even see it, it could only be me or somebody else that was like a veterinarian or whatever but it has to be in a private building away from people so. Number 5. Please explain to me what this means. All structures and storage areas must be set back 50 feet from public or private right-of-way's and 300 feet from an adjacent single family residential, or a minimum of 50 feet from a side lot line, whichever is greater. And I'll stop there and I'm not going to be done with that paragraph but I don't understand that. Could somebody explain, what's this 300 feet? Kirchoff: That is for noise purposes and also for smell. Susan McAllister: Okay, stop then please. Let me insert one thing. Isn't an industrial office park, you know that abuts up to a single family residential only required to have 150 foot buffer? Kirchoff: Well but you don't have number animals making noise and other people, the noise will be a factor. And just from experience, people. Susan McAllister: Cindy, you're not experienced. Not in the animal. Kirchoff: No, I'mjust talking about noise in general. Noise in general. We receive numerous, numerous complaints about noise. Susan McAllister: From? Kirchoff: Vehicles. Susan McAllister: I'm not doing vehicles. Peterson: Let's not sit here and argue. Susan McAllister: Okay, well I'mjust saying. I don't understand the 300. I think it should be 150. I mean I'm not any worse than an industrial office park or whatever. And I don't believe that a petting farm is as loud as a park. Somebody had mentioned that a while back. Kids run and scream and jump at parks and they're uncontrolled. They're out to have fun. These are guided tours. I mean kids do kind of like run around from one place to another but they're not screaming because I tell them they can't. The . animals don't like it and it's not smart so, okay. Then we get to that paragraph, the City Council may require storage areas to be completely screened by 100% opaque fencing or benning. What's the storage area? What are you considering a storage area? Is that a manure pile? Kirchoff: Yes. Susan McAllister: Okay, well I can tell you if you completely screen or enclose a manure pile, the goal is to aerate manure and you aerate manure by allowing air to get to manure and that, I can, I probably should have brought a bag of my nice compost up here so you could smell it. It doesn't smell. So I'm just saying that you know I want you to come out there. I want somebody to come out there to take a look at what it looks like, you know, and then make that decision. Don't just arbitrarily make that rule because you have to know. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Aanenson: These aren't arbitrary. We have other ordinances. We do have a large animal hospital in the city. We've contacted other cities. We're the only city that's going to have this in the metro area. The only city, and you can put whatever standards in here you want so I think you need to make the argument with the Planning Commission. Susan McAllister: Okay, well I'm asking if you would please just you know, if you have a question or concem or whatever, if you would come out. I don't know if! can do that now because it might be too late. Peterson: If you can raise your issues and we'll entertain those in our discussion. Susan McAllister: Okay. Okay, well I'm going on to say here that I've always taken really good care of my animals and okay. I'm asking for 10 years instead of 5 years with the sunset of being you know 5 years. Instead of that, having 10 years and for me to be allowed to reapply. But then it says I have to follow all new ordinances. Doesn't that kind of like ace me out right there? Any new ordinances that have come into play since I have applied before, don't I get just automatically eliminated because I'm sure there will probably be an ordinance that says no petting farms allowed in this city. Blackowiak: Not necessarily. Susan McAllister: What? Sacchet: I wouldn't count on it. It's not ideal but. Susan McAllister: I need more time. ljust can't possibly do it in that short period of time. Okay. Alright, the West 78th Street, like I said. I've got to have, Highway 41, the driveway's that existing right now. The main driveway until that road comes in, whenever it comes in. I don't know when. Like I said, I'm only taking down 2 trees so I do not feel I need to add any more plantings. I will give you the daffodils and plant them myself. I guess there's one other thing that, when we get to the, oh boy. It's on page 14, one of the conditions. Okay. Like it says, number 4. 1 don't believe I would need to do that because I'm really protecting everything I can possibly protect. I don't even like taking down those two trees. Nuniber 5 also. Okay, number 7. The site shall only have access from West 78th Street. Okay, I want to keep my back driveway just for my own personal use and also in case there was ever a fire or whatever. I think that that would be something that anybody you know would like to have as a fire department. I have to have that back driveway to get my trailer out of there, and it's really, it's very dense and overgrown and I don't use it very often. When I use it, I need it. Okay. Number 12. The building officials conditions are as follows. (a). It says all buildings must meet code requirements as required for new buildings because of a change in occupancy classification. I would like to take out all and just add only buildings used by the public, which would be the barn and the retail store that the people would actually go into would meet code requirements because there's no, to me there's no point in all buildings. I'm not doing anything with the house yet. If I were doing something with it in the future, I would say that would definitely be a given. . Peterson: Is that the intent? Aanenson: That's the intent. My understanding from the building official. Peterson: Okay. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Susan McAllister: Okay, because on (b) it just says all buildings and areas intended for use by the public, and then it says must be... Okay, well I was a little bit nervous. Okay. I guess you know, hang on. I'm almost done here. I've just got really quick. Okay, please keep in mind the 300 feet. Does that mean I can't, is my, when West 78th Street comes in, does that mean that right now I'm on Highway 41 as my frontage. The front of my property is Highway 41. When West 78th Street comes in, does that mean that I'm going to be fronted on West 78'h Street? Aanenson: Correct. Susan McAllister: So then that will be the front. Aanenson: That's ultimately going to be your access. Susan McAllister: Oh! So then this 800, or the 300 feet. What exactly is that going to mean to me then? When you say the 300 foot. I keep referring to that because that makes me a little nervous. Kirchoff: That's measured from the bam to the dwelling. Not to the property line. It's not to the property line. Just to keep that 300 foot separation between the two uses. Susan McAllister: Between what? Between the barn and the property line or what? Kirchoff: Dwelling. Kind: Between the barn and a house. The physical house. Susan McAllister: There's not 300 feet between the barn and the house. Sacchet: Not your house. The new house. Kirchoff: Not your house. Susan McAllister: Oh a new house. Oh okay. Okay. Okay. Alright, well I guess you know does anybody have any questions because I don't, I can't think of anything more to say I don't think yet. Peterson: So what happens if you lose the USDA approval? . Susan McAllister: I'll re-apply for it because the only way that I'll lose the USDA approval is if I'm not up to conform. Peterson: That wasn't, my question was, do you need it? Susan McAllister: Yeah I need it. Peterson: Why? Susan McAllister: I can't show one animal for pay, even if! travel with my petting zoo, which I do by the way. I can't. If I'm not USDA approved so I have to have it. Sacchet: And the same with the DNR. You need that to do rehab. 36 Planning Connnission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Susan McAllister: Oh yeah. Sacchet: And they enforce that those animals have to be totally out of the public's view. Susan McAllister: Right. The public absolutely can view it. I mean all I can do, and the only reason why I want to do it is because I believe in it and I believe I'm in a very good spot for it because I hear deer being shot all the time and I don't like that. And also because, the only thing I can do is just tell the children what I do and maybe show, you know I show photographs of other animals that have been rehabilitated, including urine just photographs. That's all I can do. I mean it's not going to make it a higher use because it's not for them to see, so. Peterson: Other questions? Sacchet: Yes Mr. Chair. This aspect of meeting the building and fire safety inspection requirements. You believe that can be met? Susan McAllister: Right. I am of the. Sacchet: For the buildings that will be accessible to the public. I think that was being implied. It wasn't spelled out but it was implied of understanding. Susan McAllister: Excuse me? Sacchet: I think the implied understanding was that that rule applies to the parts of the farm that are accessible to the public, right? Susan McAllister: Okay, but are you asking me if I feel that the bam is going to be able to meet the· structural standards? Sacchet: Well yes. Susan McAllister: Yes. I believe it will, according to the structural engineer. Aanenson: That's the structural engineer out there. , Sacchet: You have somebody working? Susan McAllister: I'm working with somebody right now. Sacchet: The same with the electric? Susan McAllister: I believe so too because it was added in 1983. It was all changed over. So it's recent. I can't imagine, you know I don't know what, you never know though. What entails things lately but I believe that I would not have a problem with either one. Sacchet: Okay, thank you. Peterson: Other questions? 37 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Kind: Yes Mr. Chairman. Sue, you did not speak to parking, or if you did I missed it. Susan McAllister: I didn't speak to it because. Kind: Because you're okay with 10 stalls? Susan McAllister: Well, at this time I believe I am. I don't want to have an over abundance of stalls because I don't, you know it's really hard for me to turn that area into a parking area because I like the green look. By the way, the map that I showed you in color, shows exactly where all the green space is. It does, I mean my property line does abut with some of the Bluff, you know the wetland area like that' but Ijust wanted to let you know that that's all green. Aanenson: But it's not all of her property. Susan McAllister: No. But it's all green. All my property. Another trick question. Peterson: Other questions? Alright, thank you. Susan McAllister: Can I add one other thing too, because I forgot about it. This livestock and poultry odor. I have gone to a workshop that shows exactly how to make your manure piles from curing into beautiful black dirt, okay. So I have, and it talks about measuring odor and it says that the nose can smell over 10,000 different smells, okay. And so they actually have contraptions because I don't know what other way to put it, but things that look like a box and you put it in your nostrils and you go to the smell and then you time it and it.. . and then you mark down what you smell for a period of time. It's all very technical and that's how the Department of Biosystems and Agriculture Engineering at the University of Minnesota deal with potential problems with people. And I would like to add one other thing. Uli, I don't think, well you weren't on the Planning Commission at the time but can I give you this copy? I don't think that you got that, or did you get it? \ Sacchet: Sure, you can give it to me. ' Susan McAllister: One other comment, and I'm going to be done. Is that when I was here the first time. Peterson; This is your third time before you were done. . Susan McAllister: Wait a minute, I'm done, I'm done. I've got my folder closed up. When I was here this last time on April, whenever it was. 19th. The people that did speak in my favor were not anybody that I planned on. Vernelle is here. That's the only one I asked to come here and so the other ones were just spontaneous. Not anything I had to do with. Thanks. Peterson: Thank you. Kind: I'm sorry, I have one question for her. I hate to ask it though. Peterson: Then don't. Kind: I'll ask you guys. 38 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Peterson: Well commissioners, this is before us again. Blackowiak: Is this a public hearing? Do we need to? Peterson: No it's not. Blackowiak: It's not, okay. Peterson: That means you have to gather your thoughts more quickly than you had planned. Kind: Mr. Chair, I'll start with the question I was going to ask Sue and maybe you guys can help me. The 300 feet between dwellings, is that an issue with this plan? Will she be at least 300 feet from a dwelling? Aanenson: Pulte Homes, I believe so. Kind: Yeah, so that's not even. That's not an issue for this particular plan. We need to put it in there for the standards. Aanenson: That's what we need to keep in mind. Thank you very much because whatever we do here, anybody else in the city that's equally zoned can do the exact same thing. Because we're now changing the zoning ordinance and that's part of what we're saying. And also a conditional use. It could be sold tomorrow and run by somebody else so you have to make sure that we look beyond the personal phase... anyone else that's in an equal situation. Kind: Okay. Peterson: Anybody want to take a stab at it? Sacchet: Yes. I do want to take a stab. First the standards. I have a problem with number 3, but I don't have a really good idea how to solve it except trying to work around it and you know having creative ways. ... but I don't have good solutions so if one of you has something about that issue, appreciate hearing it. I do have a solution to number 4. Proposed solution. Number 4 reads, only customary farm animals shall be allowed on the site. Wild or exotic animals shall be prohibited. I'd like to read, dangerous animals shall be prohibited. Animals creating nuisances will need to be removed after one . warning. And not even go into the fann animal part. That's what I'd like to propose there. I do, just as a comment. I think wildlife rehab should be encouraged because it's very tightly regulated by the DNR and so it's a valiant effort. Number 10. Retail sales shall be limited to 300 square feet. I have a problem with that because it's a fixed number. I mean if we have somebody with a real huge farm and they want to have a petting farm added to it, would we want to limit that to 300 square feet? Should that be in relation to the size of the location? That's a question. Aanenson: That's a good question. You can make it a percentage but then let's think that through. If somebody had 23 acres, would you want to give them a 1,000 retail, you know Frank's Nursery, somebody that's competing? Again the intent of this ordinance is that you're providing something ancillary to the use so when you go to experience it, that there's something there that kind of compliments that experience. Not that you're going there just for the retail but the primary uses that you're going to... That's a good point and we could do a percentage but I guess I would... 39 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Sacchet: I'm alright with leaving that 300 but I want to state that as a concern for the public record that if we have ever somebody come back in this context that they have to be looked at. Number 11. I have a problem with animals on chains. I'd like to take out that middle sentence. If chains confine animals they must be attached in such a manner as to not become entangled with chains or other animals because the next sentence says animals must be in confined area with fencing. I don't like the idea about chains. I'd like that to go. Number 12. I'd like to have somehow reflected in there that an interim use permit is not a drop dead thing. Ifwe could say, establish for an interim use permit that can be renewed. That may be re-applied for renewal or something like that. And I have a question. I'm not sure whether we are violating some legal framework by saying, city ordinance including any new ordinances after the original approval will apply. I'm not sure whether we're overstepping legally by doing that so that's, I don't know. Peterson: Where are you at on that one? Sacchet: It's number 12. The last sentence. Do we have somebody here with legal knowledge? Matt? Burton: I'm not going to give a legal opinion but it seems to me you could probably do it. Aanenson: Yes. We've had that... Sacchet: We can do it, okay. Aanenson: It's up to you what you want to do. I think obviously there needs to be some sort of that's not burdensome but. Sacchet: I personally would strike it because it's really a thorn inside I think. Because there is enough controls on this to deal with. Aanenson: Let me just say...but whether we put it in here or not, it still may be a requirement. Sacchet: It may be a requirement, okay. And then the last part of the standards, this section 20-1. Definitions. I'd like to read, a petting farm can be defined as any activity whereby non-dangerous animals are exhibited and allowed to closely interact with visitors regardless of compensation. And I'd like to cross out the whole part about the zoo because it's irrelevant. That's the standards. Do we want . to deal with the standards and then do into the other parts? Peterson: Let's talk about everything in context. Sacchet: Want me to go on? Peterson: Yeah. Sacchet: Okay. Okay going on to the conditions are put on this. The recommendation and the conditions. Again I'd like to state when we talk about interim permit, where it says the Planning Commission recommends approval of interim use permit... 3. Parking shall be limited to 10 stalls with the provision for only 1 bus. I'd like to add the word initially. Number 9. The permit shall be reviewed bi-annually to determine compliance. I think once every other year is plenty of often enough and it's less burdensome to staff because what are we really going to do. Number 11. The interim use shall, maybe it 40 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 should say the in initial interim use shall terminate, I'd like to increase from 5 years to a little more and that's for debate. Is 10 years the right number? Is 7 years the right number? But I'd like to give her a little more. I'd like to spell out in 12(a), all buildings accessed by the public must meet and so forth. And that's what I propose here for further consumption. Peterson: Thank you. Other comments? Kind: Yes Mr. Chair. Vii, did you, you're going quickly. Did you address number 7 in. Sacchet: The Standards? Kind: Not the Standards. In the interim use permit request about the site access. Sacchet: No I did not. Kind: I'm suggesting that that could be reworded to Highway 41 access must be abandoned upon the completion of West 78'h Street. And get rid ofthe way number 7 reads. Peterson: We haven't got a motion so you can discuss your points. Sacchet: Yeah, we can use it for discussion. Kind: But anyway, that's an idea. I'm interested in other people's thoughts on that. Yeah, go ahead. Sacchet: It's my understanding we can't take access away until the new access is there so really the question is, what's the access for the petting farm. And that particular point I am worried about the access from 41. I mean seeing what's happening down at Bandimere Park entrance and that one doesn't have all the trees. I personally believe that it's not that much of a problem because I would think it's going to take about a year to put this together so I would not support your giving access for the operation from 41. Kind: Yeah, I think that's reasonable. Sacchet: Because it's a safety issue. . Kind: And I too agree that I'd like to, I like the idea of it being interim use. I think that that's important so we can review it. But I think we need to extend the amount of time just to, this is a big investment for just 5 years so I'd like to see, 10 years I guess makes sense to me. I'll be interested in other people's comments on that. And then what else did I have? That Vii may not have, oh. A suggested way to think about number 4 under the petting farm conditions. This is the one that talks about animals. The way that I thought it could be worded would be something like, animals currently allowed in A2 districts may be publicly displayed. Animals that require special permits are allowed on site but shall not be publicly displayed. And the third sentence, wildlife rehab is allowed on site but may not be publicly displayed. Sacchet: I have real problems with that Deb because we're totally out of our jurisdiction with that. Based on that, they could have cobras. There's no restriction to have a poisonous snake in this place. There's no, and Sue was correct as far as there's no restriction to have dangerous animals. Kind: Yet a hard thing to define though is dangerous. 41 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Sacchet: Well yeah, but I think when we say dangerous I think that that is about the best definition that I feel we've found so far. Kind: I think the city requires a permit for a cobra. Sacchet: Do they? Susan McAllister: .. .have to register them. You have to register them with the city. You have to have them on at least a 4 foot leash. You have to have a. ..bury the cage underground 2 feet and have a cover over the top.. .on the property and that's it. Kind: So I'm suggesting that we make the distinction between animals that are currently under A2, without a permit and then animals that require a permit. Sacchet: Which you basically say dangerous.. . Kind: Yeah. Sacchet: Basically the same thing. Kind: Yeah. But maybe easier to measure. Maybe. Big if. Aanenson: Just to be clear. Animal control does this section of the code. It's out of our element. Kind: Yes. I was assuming that. Let's see. Oh, the number of employees. I think if we really support the idea of a petting farm concept in A2 district, that we need to allow applicants to meet their regulatory agency requirements and that would require more employees so I think it would be reasonable for number 3, under the conditions to state that 3 full time equivalent non-resident employees may be employed on site per 5 acres. What else? And then of course that we clarifY that it's public buildings that meet building official things. Overall I like the concept. I like how it encourages preservation of open space'and I think Sue's come up with a creative way to keep her little oasis as we refer to it. And I think it does celebrate our rural history and keeps a little slice of that life. And the LuAnn stated in our last meeting, it's really very similar to a park as far as the intensity of the use and I like to think of it as a privately owned park. . Peterson: Other comments? Blackowiak: Sure. I've had a really hard time keeping Sue the person separate from the Miss Rosie's Farm concept because to me they're one in the same and when I think of this petting farm pennit, I think of her and I'm really trying hard to think of the city. In other words, what we want in the city for a petting farm. And if we want that in the city. We're getting into a lot of nit picking. You know how many employees, this and that. I think the number of employees is really irrelevant. If she can afford to have 40 employees, so be it. I mean I don't think she can. Just simply based on her size. And I don't think that we need to start limiting numbers of employees, and I don't know if that's a part of the ordinance if we do choose to go ahead with an ordinance. I think that's a little bit much. Peterson: What if it takes 40 employees to make money to sustain it? That would be my concern too. Negate that. 42 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Blackowiak: So what would your recommendation be? Have a limit or not have a limit? Peterson: Oh yeah. Have a limit. Yeah. Sacchet: I kind of like your idea of not having a limit because this is never going to make a lot of money. I think realistically this is just an effort for the love of it, not for the money of it. And I would agree that the cash flow will limit the number of employees very naturally personally. Blackowiak: Unless Sue opens up a boarding house and has you know, 10 residents there and technically they're a resident and they don't have to need any other apartment. You know there are ways around it. Sacchet: But then it's not a petting zoo anymore. Then it becomes a boarding house. Blackowiak: Yeah, that's it. That's what I'm saying. It's not just for her so I'm having a real hard time trying to really separate these two issues and I guess I don't really, I'm still not sure what I think. We're getting into a lot of specifics and I don't know if we need to be at that level yet. I guess that's my point. So let's hear what Matt has to say. Burton: Okay I guess I'll just take them in order again. Petting farm standards. At first I was thinking 1 employee for 3 acres but I think 3 per 5 is fine with me. Perhaps that and the phrase, after it says non- resident employee, put perhaps or contractor to avoid the loophole which we already developed. On the definition of animals, I'm still struggling with, on number 4 what we should put there. I had originally, one of my thoughts would be to say allow animals are limited to the following and then say, customary farm animals, and then come up with some definition of the other group and what I had come up with was non-carnivorous, wild or exotic animals which pose no danger to the public safety, whether or not in captivity in a number not to exceed the number of customary farm animals on the property. That just, that was the intent oflimiting a number of the others in relation to the farm animals. Was to try to keep it more of a agricultural, labor, petting zoo as opposed to some exotic zoo. Animal zoo. But I'm open to anything on that one. I like the rest ofthe petting zoo standards laid out by staff and I wouldn't want to change any others. I guess I heard UIi' s suggestion on the definition again, maybe adding a non, that would be fine but I didn't quite catch all of it but that might be one change that I'd be okay with. Going over to the recommendations. I don't agree with adding the word initially in number 3. I think that they can always come back and ask for changes regardless of whether the word initially is in there or not. I agree leaving number 7 the way it is. I like the annual review so I guess I'm different there. I think I would like to have the staff go out there annually. I agree that 5 years is probably not enough. I was thinking more of6 or 7, but I could easily persuaded for more. I agree with the change to number 12. And I guess that's it. I think that it's a nice project to have in Chanhassen. I'd like to have it and I hope we can work through it. . Peterson: Well. I guess I feel as though I'm kind of a broken record on this one. I think that, let me speak to the general issues and standards first of all. I think the ones that we've been discussing, I think that 5 acres is fine. I think the employees, I seemed not enough. I think that 3 per 5 acres would be the maximum I would want to go. You start getting more than that, then you start, I start worrying about the size and the activity. You're kind of defeating your purpose of having it be a small, intimate place. As Sue described it earlier, as she was describing the need to have all these people, I just pictured it as being much more active than not wanting it to be on 5 acres, and more importantly where it was residing. So my concerns that were raised before are certainly there and if anything reinforce that I'm concerned about where this is. You know I love the concept but the question is, is it in the right space for 43 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Chanhassen's, where it is in Chanhassen right now. A couple more points on the overalI issuance standards. I'm comfortable, I think we need the yearly review. I think that however we define customary farm animals, it's going to be an issue and I think that, you know I think that removing wild or exotic shalI be prohibited. I think it's reasonable to delete that without an issue. You know at the end ofthe day, at the end of the day I'm losing my voice but this just doesn't fit. I think it's too close to other developments. I think it's going to, I don't think it has the intimacy that originalIy I had hoped for. Ijust don't think that 6 acres for what wants to be accomplished as is presented today is enough. Particularly this 6 acres and particularly where this 6 acres is at so, you know I'm comfortable approving the standards as set forth but as far as the specific ones, I won't be voting in approval of it as I had not prior to this point. With those comments, I'll entertain a motion. Sacchet: Do you want me to take a stab at it? Peterson: Sure. Sacchet: The Standards. Change number 3. Kind: Make your motion first. Peterson: Make your motion. Sacchet: Okay. I make a motion to adopt Section 20-267, Petting Farms as is plus the folIowing changes. Number 3 be changed to, the applicant for the interim use permit shalI reside on the site. Only three (3) fulI time equivalent non-resident employees may be employed on the site per five (5) acres. Number 4 should be changed to read, dangerous animals shall be prohibited. Animals creating nuisances or complaints wilI need to be removed after one warning. Number II. The middle sentence, if chains confine animals should be struck out. Number 12. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit for which, how can we word this? For which application for renewal is possible. Something to that effect? It's not realIy good words but that's the meaning. Section 20-1. Definitions to read, a petting farm can be defined as any act\vity whereby non-dangerous animals are exhibited and alIowed to closely interact with visitors regardless of compensation. And strike the zoo paragraph. That's the standards. Do we want to make this a separation motion? That's my motion for the standards. Kind: Second. With a couple ftiendly amendments possibly. Number 12 I think could stay exactly the way staff had it and delete the last sentence because in there it says prior to the permit expiring the applicant may request an extension to the interim use. . Sacchet: Oh there it is already. Okay. Kind: By submitting a new application. So number 12 with deleting the last sentence. And then number 3, I liked Matt's suggestion to reword it to state 3 fulI time equivalent non-resident or contracted employees may be employed on the site per 5 acres. And then I'm wondering about number 4. Ifwe would like it Uli's way or the permit versus non-permit way. Sacchet: The reason why I didn't change... It seemed like the permit part is also based on the term dangerous so I might as well use the same term and then we have it the same way. Aanenson: And that term is defined in the city code... 44 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Kind: Okay. Groovy. Ijust wanted to get groovy in the Minutes. Okay, and that's it for my friendly amendments. Sacchet: They sound good. Peterson: Any further discussion? Blackowiak.: I would just like to make a comment, I'm not sure what number you put it under but destructive animals removed after one warning. I don't like that. I think that you get somebody who doesn't like you. They make a phone call and they say, well they had a warning. And I don't think that that's the intent. I think the intent is more, if there's a problem that somebody can apply the ordinance existing and let's not make it a vendetta type of thing potentially. Sacchet: Well how would we express that? Substantiated. Blackowiak: Don't even say it. Aanenson: It's in the animal section. It's defined...so I think that, as Alison said. Sacchet: So we don't need to state that at at\? Good. Blackowiak: Yeah, I would take it out. Sacchet: So the only thing that 4 would say is dangerous animals shall be prohibited. Aanenson: Correct. Unless you wanted to add something. Kind: And then I had one thing that I kind of wanted to add but I forgot about it. It was wildlife rehabilitation is allowed on site, but may not be publicly displayed as an additional sentence to number 4. Aanenson: That's a requirement of the DNR. Sacchet: It's a DNR requirement that they cannot be displayed. Kind: Okay, how about wildlife rehab is allowed on site? . Sacchet: It's allowed anywhere in the city. Aanenson: Well when you're doing an interim use, you can attach any conditions you want. You can prohibit other uses. This is not. . . there may be too much on the site so you can make that a condition. Kind: But we're not prohibiting it right now so why. Burton: Put in the other conditions and not in the petting farm. Kind: Okay. Peterson: Other discussion? It's been moved and seconded. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment #00-1 to allow petting farms as an interim use In the A-2, Agricultural Estate District, to read as follows: SECTION 1. Section 20-1 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding the following definition; Pettinf! Farm any activity whereby non-dangerous animals are exhibited and allowed to closely Interact with visitors, regardless of compensation. SECTION 2. Division 2, Conditional Use Permits, of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amended by adding the following section: Sec. 20-267. Petting Farms. The following conditions will apply to petting farms: I. The site must be on and have access to a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. 2. The minimum lot size shall be five (5) acres. 3. The applicant for the interim use permit shall reside on the site. Only three (3) full time equivalent non-resident or contracted employees shall be employed on the site per five (5) acres. 4. Dangerous animals shall be prohibited. 5. All structures and storage areas must be set back fifty (50) feet from public or private rights-of- way, and three hundred (300) feet from an adjacent single family residence or a minimum of fifty (50) feet from a side lot line, whichever is greater. The City Council may require storage areas to be completely screened by one hundred percent (100%) opaque fencing or berming. 6. Parking areas shall be screened from public or private rights-of-way and adjacent single family residences. . 7. Hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The City Council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the comprehensive plan. 8. No outdoor speaker systems shall be allowed. 9. Signage shall comply with Article XXVI of the Zoning Ordinance. 10. Retail sales shall be limited to three hundred (300) square feet in area. Retail sales shall be limited to petting farm related items. II. Animals kept outside must have continual access to shelter to protect them from the elements and must be in a confined area with fencing. 46 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 12. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Prior to the permit expiring, the applicant may request an extension to the interim use permit by submitted a new application. The renewal application will be subject to all city ordinances including any new ordinances enacted after the original approval. SectIon 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. All voted In favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: I would entertain another motion this evening. Kind: Mr. Chair I'll make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of Interim Use Permit #00-2 subject to the plans dated February 22, 2000 for the operation of a petting farm, with the following conditions I through 13. And change 12(a) to say, all public buildings must meet code requirements as required for new buildings because of the change of occupancy classification. And I think that's it unless we want to add a wildlife rehab thing here. I'll leave it at that. That's my motion. Peterson: Is there a second? Sacchet: A question. You're leaving the 5 year limit with the idea. Aanenson: They can ask for an extension. Sacchet: With the idea that it can be extended? Aanenson: Correct. Kind: Actually I meant to change that. I'm sorry. Change number II to read the interim use shall terminate in 10 years. Peterson: Is there a second? Sacchet: I second this. . Peterson: Any discussion? Burton: I'm starting to think that 10 is too long because you have to come back. Kind: I'm open to a rriendly amendment. Burton: I'd make a friendly amendment that it be changed to 6 years. Kind: How about 7? Burton: That's fine. Peterson: 7 12. 47 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 Kind: 7? 7. I'm in a compromising mood. Number II. The interim use shall terminate in 7 years. Peterson: Any further discussion? Kind moved, Sacchet seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Interim Use Permit #00-2, subject to the plans dated February 22, 2000 for the operation of a petting farm, with the foUowing conditions: I. The site plan shall comply with Section 20-267. Petting Farms. 2. Accumulation of feces shall be located at least 200 feet ftom any well. Accumulation of feces shall be removed at such periods as will ensure that no leaching or objectionable odors exist. The premise shall not be allowed to become unsightly. 3. Parking shall be limited to ten (10) stalls with the provision for only one (I) bus. 4. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the proposed development. The applicant shall show the location, size and species of proposed trees and shrubs. 5. Landscaping shall be added to the area between the parking lot and West 78th Street to provide a buffer. Included in the plantings shall be overstory trees, evergreens and shrubs. 6. Landscaping may be required for the parking lot if it exceeds 6,000 square feet. 7. The site shall only have access from West 78th Street. 8. A dead animal disposal plan shall be submitted to the city for review. 9. The pennit shall be reviewed annually to determine compliance. 10. The applicant must apply and obtain all necessary permits ftom regulatory agencies such as Carver County, DNR, USDA, etc. 11. The interim use pennit shall tenninate in seven (7) years. . 12. The Building Official's conditions are as follows: a. All public buildings must meet code requirements as required for new buildings because ofthe change in occupancy classifications. b. All buildings and areas intended for use by the public must be on an accessible route and accessible to people with disabilities. c. Two accessible parking spaces must be provided. d. Accessible sanitation facilities must be provided. The number of fixtures required will be determined after specific use infonnation is provided. If this farm is intended to be used on a short term, seasonal basis, portable facilities may be provided, any other use 48 Planning Commission Meeting - June 6, 2000 would require permanent facilities. If permanent facilities are required, two acceptable septic sites must be evaluated and located by a licensed designer. e. The food preparation facilities require approval from the Minnesota Department of Health. f. Structures intended for public use must be evaluated by a structural engineer to determine ifthe building is safe for occupancy. 13. The Fire Marshal's conditions are as follows: a. A 20 foot wide fire lane shall be provided. b. The Fire Marshal shall review the existing buildings to be utilized for the petting farm to determine code compliance. c. Smoking is prohibited in any building used in conjunction with the business. d. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs shall be installed on the fire lane. e. Any new driveway must be designed to support the weight of a fire truck year round. f. Any new driveway must be installed prior to the removal of the existing driveway. g. The amount of combustible material (i.e. hay, straw, etc.) on the floors of any buildings used in the business must meet fire code requirements. h. All electrical wiring must meet code. All voted in favor, except Peterson who opposed, and BJackowiak abstained. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Peterson: Nay. For the reasons mentioned earlier. This goes onto council on the 26'h. Did you vote or.. . NEW BUSINESS: ESTABLISHMENT OF MEMORIAL PROGRAM COMMITTEE AND APPOINT REPRESENTATIVE. Aanenson: There's two items under that. Ijust put one on the agenda. The report from Todd looking for somebody on this memorial program. Just to clarify that. We've had people that wanted to donate, whether it's a bench or improve a park, and they wanted someone from the Planning Commission to be on that. They're trying to formulate a policy. Sacchet: Question. Do they want somebody from Planning Commission because it doesn't read it that they do. 49 , - /" ~ ANIMALS AND FOWL § 5·77 Sec. 5-74. Redemption. (a) Any dog or cat ma)' be redeemed from impoundment by the owner, within the time stated in the notice of impounding, upon payment of the license fee, a late fee for the license in the amount established by resolution if unpaid, the impounding fees, and all other costs and charges incurred by the city for impounding and maintenance .of said animal. The impounding fees shall be as established by resolution. (bi Upon the presentation of a correct license tag and a receipt for an animal license fee for the current year and for the required fees, the animal control officer shall release to any owner the animal claimed by him. (Ord. No. 24·C, §§ 7,8,7·12·76; Ord. No. 24·D, § 2, 8·2·82; Ord. No. 24·E, § 1,2.10.86) Sec. 5.75. Disposition of unclaimed animals. Any dog or cat which is not claimed as provided in section 5·74, within five (5) days after impounding, may be sold for not less than the amount provided in section 5-54 to anyone desiring to purchase the animal. Any animal which is not claimed by the owner or sold shall be painlessly disposed of and buried by the animal control officer. Whenever any licensed educational or scientific institution shall request, pursuant to state law, any impounded animal for research purposes, an)' such impounded animal remaining unclaimed for live \51 days after impounding shall be surrendered 10 such institution. (Ord. No. 24·C, § 10,7·12·76) DIVISION 5. DANGEROUS ANIMALS Sec. 5·76. Definitions. As used in this section, "daÌ1gerous animal" means: (í) Any animal with a known propensity or disposition to unprovoked attacks, to cause injury to or to otherwise endanger the safety of humans or other domestic animals. (2) Any animal that has attacked or bilten any person, except a person that has tor. mented or abused it. (Ord. No. 81, § 1, 10·5·87) . . Sec. 5-77. Regulation of dangerous animals. Ownership of dangerous animals within the city, with the exception of ownership by a public law enforcement agency, is subject to the following regulations: (1) Leash and muzzle. No person shall permit a dangerous animal to go outside its kennel or pen unless such animal is securely leashed with a leash no longer than four (4) feet in length, if possible, or otherwise physically restrained. No person shall permit a dangerous animal to be kept on a chain, rope or other type of leash outside its kennel or pen unless a person is in physical control of the leash. Such animals may not be leashed to inanimate objects such as trees, posts, buildings, and the like. In addition, all dangerous animals on a leash outside the animal's kennel or pen must Supp. No.1 273 § 5·77 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE be muzzled, if possible, by a muzzling device sufficient to prevent such animal from biting persons or other ani~als. (2) Confinement All dangerous animals shall be securely confined indoors or in a se. curely enclosed and locked pen or kennel, except when leashed and muzzled as above provided. Such pen, kennel or structure must have secure sides and a secure top attached to j;he sides. All structures used to confine dangerous animals must be locked with a key or combination lock when such animals are within the structure. Such structure must have a secure bottom or floor attached to the sides of the pen or the sides of the pen must be embedded. in the ground no less than two (2) feet. All structures erected to house dangerous animals must comply with all zoning and building regulations of the city. All such structures must be adequately lighted and ventilated and kept in a clean and sanitary condition. (3) Confinement indoors. No dangerous animals may be kept in any part of a house or structure such as a porch or patio that would allow the animal to exit such building on its own volition. In addition, no such animal may be kept in a house or structure when the windows are open or when screen windows or screen doors are the only obstacle preventing the animal from exiting the structure. (4) Signs. All owners of dangerous animals within the city shall, within thirty-"(30) days of the effective date ofthis division display in a prominent place on their premises a sign easily readable by the public using the words "Beware of Dangerous Animal" or ( . similar words. In addition, a similar sign is required to be posted on the kennel or pen of such animal. (Ord. No. 81, § 1, 10-5-87) r Sec. 5·78. Registration. All dangerous animals must be registered with the city public safety department within sixty (60) days after the effective date of this division. (Ord. No. 81, § 1, 10-5·87) Sec. 5-79. Penalty. It shall be a misdemeanor for the owner of a dangerous animal to fail to comply with the requirements and conditions set forth in this division. Any animal found to be the subject of a violation of this division shall be subject to immediate seizure and impoundment. In addition, failure to comply will result in the revocation of the license of such animal requiring the immediate removal of the animal from the city. (Ord. No. 81, § 1, 10·5·87) . Sees. 5-80-5-85. Reserved. Supp. No.1 ~~ 274