HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 08, 2024 BOAA PacketShakopee Board of Adjustments
and Appeals
August 8, 2024
7:00 PM
City Hall, 485 Gorman St.
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Call for Notarized Affidavits, Proof of Neighborhood Meeting and Sign in Sheet for
appropriate Public Hearings
4. Recognition by Board of Adjustment and Appeals of Interested Citizens
5 Consent Business - (All items listed in this section are anticipated to be routine. After
a discussion by the Chair there will be an opportunity for members of the BOAA to
remove any items from the consent agenda for individual discussion. Those items
removed will be considered following the Public hearing portion of the agenda. Items
remaining on the Consent Agenda will not be discussed and will be approved in one
motion.)
5.A. Meeting Minutes of July 11, 2024
6. General Business
6.A. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit for Vehicle Service/Repair and
Exterior Storage at 1500 Maras Street
6.B. PUBLIC HEARING - Variance request to fence material requirements and an
overheight fence in the front yard for ducks/geese in the Rural Residential (RR)
zoning district at 1396 Blue Heron Trail
6.C. PUBLIC HEARING - Setback Variance of ISTS from Bluff Impact Zone
7. Other Business
8. Adjourn to Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 7:00 p.m.
If a commissioner has any comments, concerns or questions, he or she should contract the
staff project manager prior to the scheduled meeting date. Also, if a commissioner is unable to
attend the meeting for any reason, please call the Department of Planning and Development at
952-233-9300 as soon as possible. Thank you!
Page 1 of 76
5.A.
Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals
August 8, 2024
FROM: Lori J. Hensen, City Clerk
TO: President and Commission Members
Subject:
BOAA meeting minutes of July 11, 2024.
Policy/Action Requested:
Approve the meeting minutes of July 11, 2024.
Recommendation:
Approve the meeting minutes of July 11, 2024.
Discussion:
ATTACHMENTS:
a July 11, 2024
Page 2 of 76
City of Shakopee
Board of Adjustment and Appeals Meeting
July 11, 2024
7:00 PM
City Hall, 485 Gorman St
1. Roll Call: Present Commissioners: Schleck, Sandhu, Forsythe, Ranua, Sepulvado (Chair),
Staff Kerski
2. Approval of Agenda Unanimous
3. Call for Notarized Affidavits, Proof of Neighborhood Meeting and Sign in Sheet for
appropriate Public Hearings None
4. Recognition by Board of Adjustment and Appeals of Interested Citizens None
5. Consent Business - (All items listed in this section are anticipated to be routine. After a
discussion by the Chair there will be an opportunity for members of the BOAAto remove any items
from the consent agenda for individual discussion. Those items removed will be considered
following the Public hearing portion of the agenda. Items remaining on the Consent Agenda will not
be discussed and will be approved in one motion.)
6. General Business None
7. Other Business
None
8. Move to Adjourn to Thursday, August 8, 2024 at 7:00 pm. Schleck moved to close,
seconded by Forsythe, Unanimous. Meeting ended at 7:03PM
Page 3 of 76
6.A.
Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals
August 8, 2024
FROM: Amanda Schwabe, Planner
TO: Board of Adjustment and Appeals Members
Subject:
PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit for Vehicle Service/Repair and Exterior
Storage at 1500 Maras Street
Policy/Action Requested:
Adopt Resolution PC2024-008, a resolution approving the proposed conditional use permit
for vehicle service or repair and exterior storage at 1500 Maras Street.
Recommendation:
Adopt the resolution, as presented.
Discussion:
Applicant: Marie Paff, EJ Equipment
Property Address: 1500 Maras Street
Property Owner: Quiring Properties, LLC
Lot Area: 2.15 acres
Zoning: I-1, Light Industry
2040 Comp. Plan: Industrial
Marie Paff, representing EJ Equipment, has applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for
vehicle service/repair and exterior storage at 1500 Maras Street. The proposed vehicle
service/repair operation with exterior storage is a Conditional Use in the Light Industry (I-1)
zoning district and requires a CUP to operate.
EJ Equipment is a private, woman -owned business specializing in maintenance services for
commercial trucks and the wholesale of parts and equipment which operates three (3)
facilities in Illinois and one (1) in Wisconsin. Their clientele mainly includes municipalities
and commercial/industrial businesses with operating hours of Monday - Friday from 7 - 4:30
p.m. The applicant has entered into a long-term lease for approximately 1 acre of the 2.15
acre site and will utilize the existing building which includes office spaces, parts storage area
Page 4 of 76
and six (6) service/maintenance bays. The site includes existing parking spaces for the
proposed 7-10 employees on the east side of the building. Vehicles and equipment waiting to
be serviced or pending delivery to the client will be parked to the west of the existing building
behind the required screening (fence) for outside storage. A roofed enclosure is required to be
constructed on the property to accommodate trash receptacles. Outdoor display or sales of
vehicles will not occur at this facility.
Utilities became available in Maras Street in 2023 following a city street reconstruction
project. The property owner has a permit to install city services to the building which is
anticipated to occur yet this year. As a result of the expenses associated with the utility
connection work and a desire to have one (1) freeze/thaw cycle prior to completing paving
work, the applicant is requesting a phased improvement plan for the required screening for
the exterior storage, pavement for drive aisles and parking areas, and compliance with
impervious surface requirements associated with the CUP. Typically, compliance with CUP
conditions is required at the time of CUP approval and commencement of the use.
Specifically, the applicant is requesting the following:
Request 1 - Install paved property entrances by October 31, 2025.
Staff Response: Staff is agreeable to an deadline of July 1, 2025 for paving provided a
grading or building permit is obtained which includes a site survey by a licensed and
registered surveyor in the state of MN showing existing and proposed conditions as well as
existing and proposed impervious surface areas and totals.
Request 2 - Install screening (fencing) for exterior storage by October 31, 2026.
Staff Response: Staff is agreeable to a delayed installation of the required screening (six
(6) foot tall privacy fence) for the proposed EJ Equipment exterior storage area to a
deadline of July 1, 2025. The area required to be screened will require approximately 500
feet of fencing, which is less than the proposed fenced -in area which includes the entire
subject property and PID 279120260 (Approximately 1,200 feet). As a result, the required
fence should be able to be installed more economically. Staff feels it is reasonable to install
the fence after the paving is complete to prevent damage to the fence during pavement
installation.
Request 3 - Count the unimproved lot area (approximately 30,000 sq. ft.) of the property to
the south (PID 279120260) to comply with the lot coverage/impervious surface area
requirements (max 75% of the lot area) for the subject property.
Staff Response: Staff is not agreeable to utilizing property that is under separate ownership
for purposes of impervious surface calculations outside of a Planned Unit Development.
Section 151.011 (Conditional Use Permits), Subd. A (Criteris for Granting Conditional Use
Permits) states "In granting a conditional use permit, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
Page 5 of 76
shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, and general welfare of
the occupants of surrounding lands and the City as a whole." The Board of Adjustment and
Appeals shall not grant a CUP without making certain findings which are listed below with
staff findings.
Criteria #1 The use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish
and impair property values within the immediate vicinity.
Finding #1 The city has not received any evidence that the proposed vehicle service/repair
and exterior storage for EJ Equipment will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity, not would it substantially diminish or impair property
values in the area, provided the use complies with the conditions of the resolution.
Criteria #2 The establishment of the conditional use permit will not impede the normal
and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses
allowed in the area.
Finding #2 The conditional use permit should not impede future development and
improvement in the area, provided the use complies with the conditions of the resolution.
Criteria #3 Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities have
been or will be provided.
Finding #3 The Board finds that adequate utilities, access, drainage and other necessary
facilities have been or will be provided for the site, as conditioned in the resolution.
Criteria #4 The use is consistent with the purposes of the zone in which the applicant
intends to locate the proposed use.
Finding #4 The use of the subject property as proposed by EJ Equipment is consistent with
the purposes of the Light Industry (I-1) zoning district.
Criteria #5 The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
Finding #5 The use as proposed is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan (Industrial).
Staff reviewed the above criteria and have found that the proposal would meet the criteria
provided the conditions of the draft resolution are met. City Engineering provided comments,
with conditions of approval, that have been incorporated into the draft resolution should the
BOAA approve the request.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution PC2024-008
Page 6 of 76
o Location Map
o Engineering Memo
• Site Plan
• Applicant Narrative
• Applicant Leased Area Exhibit
• Applicant Floorplan
• Applicant Proposed Improvements Exhibit
Page 7 of 76
RESOLUTION PC2024-008
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW VEHICLE SERVICE/REPAIR AND
EXTERIOR STORAGE AT 1500 MARAS STREET
WHEREAS, Marie Paff of EJ Equipment, applicant, and Quiring Properties, LLC,
property owner, have made application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a vehicle
service/repair facility with exterior storage on property located at 1500 Maras Street; and
WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described
in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing for the application
were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity
to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Shakopee did review
this application on August 8, 2024, and adopted the following findings:
Criteria #1
Finding #1
Criteria #2
Finding #2
The use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate
vicinity;
The City has not received any evidence that the proposed vehicle service/repair
and exterior storage for EJ Equipment will be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, nor would it
substantially diminish or impair property values in the area, provided the use
complies with the conditions of the resolution.
The establishment of the conditional use permit will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant
property for uses allowed in the area;
The conditional use peituit should not impede future development and
improvement in the area, provided the use complies with the conditions of the
resolution.
Page 8 of 76
Criteria #3
Finding #3
Criteria #4
Finding #4
Criteria #5
Finding #5
Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities
have been or will be provided;
The Board finds that adequate utilities, access, drainage and other necessary
facilities have been or will be provided for the site, as conditioned in the
resolution.
The use is consistent with the purposes of the zone in which the applicant
intends to locate the proposed use; and
The use of the subject property as proposed by EJ Equipment is consistent with
the purposes of the Light Industry (I-1) zoning district.
The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
The uses are not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan (Industrial).
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota that the requested CUP is hereby approved, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Paving shall be installed and completed by July 1, 2025. A grading or building permit
shall be obtained which includes a site survey by a licensed and registered surveyor in
the state of MN showing existing and proposed conditions (trash enclosure location,
parking lot striping, fencing, etc.) as well as existing and proposed impervious surface
areas and totals.
2. Screening of the approved EJ Equipment exterior storage area and parking facilities in
the front yard setback shall be installed per City Code requirements by July 1, 2025. A
grading or building permit shall be obtained prior to installation.
3. All waste receptacles shall be stored within the building or within an approved
accessory structure, consistent with City Code requirements (which includes being
enclosed with a roof). A grading or building permit shall be obtained and the enclosure
constructed upon issuance of the CUP.
4. Compliance with the Engineering Memo dated July 31, 2024.
5. Compliance with Scott County Hazardous Waste permitting and disposal requirements.
6. Unlicensed or inoperative vehicles shall not be stored for more than 7 days, except in
approved and screened exterior storage areas.
7. All washing, repair, assembly, disassembly, or maintenance of vehicles or equipment
shall be conducted within the principal building, except for minor maintenance such as
tire inflation, adding oil, and wiper replacement.
8. No public address system shall be audible from any residential property.
9. Parking shall only occur on the approved paved areas within the property.
10. Sales of vehicles is not permitted by this conditional use permit.
11. Operation of equipment and tools shall be in compliance with the noise and exterior
lighting ordinance standards set forth in the City Code, including in the situations
when vehicles are dropped off late in the evenings due to emergency situations.
12. No business activities shall occur within the public right-of-way. This includes
dropping off of vehicles for service, street parking/storage of vehicles for service, and
business vehicles.
13. Sign permits are required for any business exterior signage.
Page 9 of 76
14. Compliance with any other local, state, or federal requirements including but not
limited to Shakopee Public Utilities.
Adopted in regular session of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held on the 8th day of August, 2024.
Chairperson,
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
ATTEST:
Michael Kerski,
Director of Planning and Development
PREPARED BY:
City of Shakopee
485 Gorman Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
Page 10 of 76
EXHIBIT A
Tract A:
The Southerly 191.81 feet of the Northerly 383.63 feet, as measured along the East and West
lines of that part of the West Half of the East 6/7 of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of
Section 12, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning
at the Southwest corner of Lot 4, Block 1, Maras Addition, said point being on the West line of
said West Half of the East 6/7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 18 minutes 12
seconds East, along said West line, 767.25 feet; thence on a bearing of East, parallel with the
South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 283.87 feet; thence North 0 degrees 18 minutes 26 seconds
West, a distance of 767.25 feet to said South line; thence a bearing of West, along said South
line, 283.82 feet to the point of beginning.
Tract B:
The Southerly 191.81 feet of the Northerly 575.44 feet, as measured along the East and West
lines of that part of the West Half of the East 6/7 of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of
Section 12, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning
at the Southwest corner of Lot 4, Block 1, Maras Addition, said point being on the West line of
said West Half of the East 6/7; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 18 minutes 12
seconds East, along said West Half of the East 6/7; a distance of 767.25 feet; thence on an
assumed bearing of East, parallel with the South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 283.87 feet;
thence North 0 degrees 18 minutes 26 seconds West a distance of 767.25 feet to said South line;
thence on a bearing of West, along said South line, 283.25 feet, to the point of beginning.
Page 11 of 76
1500 Maras Street
(
11
fy
WV
5A
Y1uii��o�mlm�uli�lo�uuuuo
�uuuuuu i iuu i i uuu1°4VVI4111111Pm'
I',p" p';nildl''ll
vIIV!�;t„Imii � o pulp IIIIII�
dNiiiiVIIIIIIIItl
4r
III
gItlullilluluM
'ul
, Irouuuuuuum um um
ili111111@„„„„„,
llllllill
�iuIllVddl l�
omimuum4
III, TT
N °„RAuIIIIIVululili
000001011111111100loon���� VIII01111110
PJIIIIII VJ umeu, m6,
�IIuJ���jN;9"911111111 Illlllllllllllllj!L...o moi�uo
,„1101 I'I'IY�IIjIVlil„1000001111111 illyNI
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not
intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records,
information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices,
and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for
reference purposes only. Scott County is not responsible for any
misuse.
colt
FOilet',:r 087€1/ 2024
1:2,257
0 30 60 120 180 240
Feet
City of Shakopee
Memorandum
TO: Amanda Schwabe, Planner
FROM: Darin Manning, Project Engineer
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit —1500 Maras Street
PID NO.: 27-912025-0
CASE NO.: USE -000226-2024
DATE: July 31, 2024
The application indicates a request for a conditional use permit to allow for heavy equipment
and truck part sales, service and exterior storage.
The Engineering Department has completed its review and offers the following comments at
this time for the applicant and for the planning department:
1. The driveway shall be paved with bituminous or concrete between the proposed
storage area west of the building to Maras Street. This must be completed by July 1,
2025. See comments on "EJ Equipment Site Plan Visual_V1_V1".
2. The applicant must submit and obtain approval of a Storm Water Management Plan
(SWMP) for the additional impervious surface area proposed. The SWMP must
adequately address requirements set forth in the City of Shakopee's Comprehensive
Water Resources Management Plan. The applicant will be responsible to pay the Storm
Water Management Plan Review Fee, as required by the most current City of Shakopee
Fee Schedule.
3. Prior to any land disturbing activity, the applicant will obtain a grading or building
permit. The grading or building permit submittal must include construction plans that
satisfy the requirements of City Code section 150.12 and meet the impervious surface
area requirements.
4. Approval of the CUP does not constitute approval of the submitted plans.
Recommendation
The Engineering Department recommends approval of the application subject to the
conditions above being addressed/completed by the applicant.
H:ABOAA-PCV2024V08-08\USE-000226 (CUP for Vehicle Repair & Ext Star) 1500 Maras Street VCUP (1500 Maras St) 07 31 24 Engineering Mento.docx
Page 13 of 76
Proposed Improvements for CUP
R4::•d Pr. posed II:::::erncling
Purple: Pr,.p sed Fencing
Black: Proposed Paving
Pave this area too. All
paving to be completed
by July 1, 2025. This will
allow for one freeze thaw
cycle after utilities are
installed this year.
Parking spaces shall be
striped per approved
plan.
Obtain a grading permit
prior to paving. Grading
permit shall comply with
impervious surface
percentage
requirements.
vb"linnllvlI.ICSvt1lVh rill k ' viv
III ! ��;iiiii�iiii IIIIII I
1111111111111111111111111111111i1
9f1'wIV,��llli`�,llVlllull�VR��44'd�lVl�lu�,l,��'��9��n� ,
g0
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II
Page 14 of 76
1500 Maras Street Site Plan
N
Ilu�'
IIIIIC
YIiG f YIiIV�
ill111111111 loll
l l' 'liiiil
1'1III11' 1;S ml'
n 111111111111111110111111111111111111111111111111 i i�l����"�',Illl��rrr���luuuuuuluu��
II II IIII�II�IIIIII II h I� �� ,I ;;IIIIIIIIIIIIIlI�
Ii�i�iliIIIIYI"�I '�'ii°lip �����i"NI;p'uuN'MNvvvv,H'M'm'N�w��ll' NAT 'v. „ �I'II
4
iwawu a Imb �' '
AI A
1tioYn n lu „„,,JJ
I �;II'IM
"""Y�INIfN"
ti III V i��'II. II�
�� IV�����IliVl' )liin
II
(slim lllllllll
N vow dlQloygl(lN'
Itll,
m u IIII 1
"��,,,IIII ( II,
liiufllllh,Q'
ff«<
�'(ffffl' uul
I �i(ipll
IiiUl
dN � 'ii II Ir/
III '
IG
IIP
NA'� ,
if
dI Ih
IIII, 1!%
INN�dll
6 Jiiiimiiiiiiiiiouuuuuuuuua'I'°
I��u�ll
Nhnilllll
Jojiii,J FA,I till
111111
INI
rq'I �Ilulu III
IAA loh;ulllllllllllll,
uuuuu0uu"'mllllllllll111111 uuuuuuuuupuuuuu
11111111
uuuuuum� NIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIII
III IVuMIiuuMlilmi'llld
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not
intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records,
information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices,
and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for
reference purposes only. Scott County is not responsible for any
misuse.
'V `O(V i
FfdtiftM c7./2024
r /I
EJ Equipment Leased Area
South 1/2 of Subject Property
Screening for Exterior Storage Area
Trash Enclosure
EJ Equipment Exterior Storage Area
Area to be paved
June 17, 2024
mom 1/30'"Aftg00
@I11U1 ..
City of Shakopee
485 Gorman St.
Shakopee, MN 55379
(925)233-9300
Re: Proposed Use of 1500 Maras, Shakopee MN 55379
To the Shakopee Development Committee:
We are writing to report on the proposed use of 1500 Maras, Shakopee, MN 55379
Who We Are:
EJ Equipment is a private, woman -owned business specializing in maintenance services for commercial trucks and
the sale of parts and equipment. With a current staff of 90 employees, the company plans to hire an additional 7 to 10
individuals for the Shakopee location. EJ Equipment already operates facilities in Illinois, situated in Addison,
Manteno, and Troy, with a new location set to open in Sturtevant, Wisconsin, on July 1, 2024. The establishment in
Shakopee will mark EJ Equipment's inaugural presence in the state of Minnesota.
EJ Equipment's Six Core Values:
1. Safety: EJ Equipment prioritizes the safety and well-being of its employees, customers, and community in
all aspects of its operations.
2. Integrity: EJ Equipment values honesty and transparency in all dealings with customers, suppliers, and
employees.
3. Customer Experience: EJ Equipment is committed to understanding and meeting the needs of its
customers, providing exceptional service and support
4. Reliability: EJ Equipment prioritizes delivering high -quality maintenance services and equipment parts
consistently and on time.
5. Teamwork: EJ Equipment promotes collaboration and communication among employees to achieve
common goals and drive success.
6. Accountability: EJ Equipment holds itself and its employees responsible for their actions and outcomes,
fostering a culture of ownership.
Intended Usage:
The 1500 Maras property will serve as a facility for storing parts inventory for sale, service, and maintenance bays for
trucks. The garage bays will be used for service and maintenance on trucks, while the back lot behind the building will
be used for parking trucks undergoing service. The primary focus of the business will be on part sales.
Operational Overview:
EJ Equipment operates three main lines of business: Parts Sales, Equipment/Truck Sales, and Maintenance. As an
authorized dealer for Heil, Vac -Con, Cues, Maintainer, Sany equipment, and parts, EJ Equipment holds the Heil
dealership license for the state of Minnesota, allowing them to expand their presence in the local market. The
clientele of EJ Equipment mainly comprises municipalities and commercial industrial businesses, with a commitment
to providing exceptional customer service and maintenance to ensure the smooth operation of their fleets.
Operating hours are Mon -Fri, 7:00 am to 4:30 pm
Parts Sales:
EJ Equipment functions as a wholesale parts dealer, facilitating sales through phone and email at the facility. An
inventory of parts is maintained within the premises, enabling same -day deliveries within a 25 -mile radius of the
Shakopee location or through shipping services.
EJ EQUIPMENT • 6949 N 3000E Road • Manteno, Illinois • 60950
(800)522-2808
Page 16 of 76
IriPel
mum IfFAR°41
OW,
Equipment/Truck Sales:
EJ Equipment assists customers in selecting the appropriate trucks and equipment for their specific needs. Upon
placing a customized order, the truck and/or equipment undergo inspection at the facility. Unlike traditional retail car
dealerships, outdoor display of trucks and equipment is not a feature at this facility. Upon completion of quality
assurance checks, EJ Equipment delivers the purchased truck or equipment to the customer, typically within a week.
The company emphasizes prompt service delivery without compromising on quality standards.
Service:
At EJ Equipment, servicing trucks and other municipal equipment is also an important line of business. We aim to
maintain and repair service vehicles of high quality safely and promptly with little downtime for the customer. Vehicle
service would take place inside the bays of the facility. All trucks not in bays and in the process of being worked on
will be parked behind the facility. Truck maintenance services are essential for keeping commercial vehicles in
optimal condition and operating safely and efficiently. These services typically include routine maintenance such as oil
changes, tire rotations, brake inspections, and fluid checks. Truck maintenance services may involve specialized
tasks like engine diagnostics, transmission repairs, parts replacements, and troubleshooting electrical systems.
Professional mechanics with expertise in servicing trucks are responsible for conducting these maintenance services.
They are equipped with the necessary tools and technology to diagnose issues and perform repairs as needed. By
regularly scheduling truck maintenance services, businesses can prevent breakdowns, extend the lifespan of their
vehicles, and ultimately save on repair costs in the long run.
Enhancements:
Interior: EJ plans to obtain a permit to make small modifications to the office area of the building. This includes
removing carpet, installing new hard flooring, painting, and cleaning. The changes will only involve minor
construction, and there will be no increase in square footage.
Exterior Structure and Lot: No further alterations are planned for the building's structure. Trucks will be parked at
the rear of the building, while designated parking spaces will be provided near the front entrance for employees and
guests. There will not be any outside storage structures.
Trash Handling: EJ will place an enclosed corral in the northwest corner of the leased property to house the garbage
dumpster. The structure will be made of cinder blocks, have swinging gate doors, and be topped with a roof.
CUP Process and the Maras Property:
EJ Equipment and Ryan Quiring have entered into an 11 -year lease agreement for the 1500 Maras property.
However, during the Change of Occupancy process, it was discovered that EJ would need a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) to operate the service side of their business on the property.
Ryan Quiring, the landlord of the 1500 Maras Property, has a history of operating various properties in Shakopee for
many years. Understanding the city's requirements for safety and aesthetics during a change of occupancy, Mr.
Quiring is willing to make the necessary improvements such as greenery, paving, screening, and fire protection.
The main focus for these improvements is EJ Equipment's Service and Maintenance line of business, which would be
performed in the shop. While Mr. Quiring supports the city's goals, he is requesting a Phased Property Improvement
Plan to ensure compliance without facing financial strain.
Currently, Mr. Quiring is investing $850,000.00 to connect his Maras properties to the city sewer & water systems.
The city's requirements for fencing, greenery, and paving conflict with this sewer construction, as installing these
improvements would require removing them later for the sewer & water connection.
Given Mr. Quiring's compliance with the city's requests and commitment to making the necessary improvements, he
is seeking approval for a phased approach. This would allow him adequate time to complete the sewer & water
connections, fencing, greenery, and paving in a timely manner, easing the financial burden by spreading out the
costs. The Phased Property Improvement Plan would not delay any fire or safety improvements.
EJ EQUIPMENT • 6949 N 3000E Road • Manteno, Illinois • 60950
(800)522-2808
Page 17 of 76
�I�rwa�u�u
mom "y1.7AFttli
OW,
Phased Property Improvement Plan:
Paving/Greenspace:
Fencing:
1. We are proposing that we pave both entrances to the currently unpaved property. The far
North entrance to the property is already paved all the way up to the building. We
propose that we pave the other two entrances to the property, as noted in the site plan,
the black lines. The proposal is in line with what was approved by the city for the CUP
(same use) issued for 1431 Maras Street back in 2022, which was an entrance paved 24'
wide by 100' deep. We are proposing the same requirement here, a 24' wide by 100'
deep paved entrance to both the center and South entrances to the property, but we may
choose to do a little more than that to tie it into existing pavement etc. The rest of the lot
is paved with Class 5 aggregate, so this should put us in compliance with this
requirement.
2. Timeline: We would ask that the city allow us to install this through the 2025 construction
season (no later than 10/31/25). This would allow for one full freeze/thaw cycle after the
utility hookup and help us spread out the costs of meeting the city requirements.
3. Estimated Cost: $55,000
4. Impervious Surface Maximum of 75%
a. Attached is our proposal to address this requirement. We are asking the city to work
with us on this one, given the property setup and 40+ years of historical use. The
1500 Maras property is approx. 2.19 acres (95,396.4 sq. ft.). Combined with Roger
Zacharia's lot to the South, the approx. total lot size is 2.85 acres (127,276 sq. ft.).
We already have an agreement in place with Roger to utilize a portion of his property
and have also received permission from him to put a fence on the South and East
property lines per our fencing/screening proposal to the city, as noted in the attached
site plan. With this, we ask that the city include Roger Zacharia's lot in considering
our proposal to meet this requirement. Roger's lot is essentially entirely
pervious/green space, and that, along with our other proposed green space areas
outlined in green in the attached site plan, that would give us pervious/green space of
approx. 35,742 sq. ft., which would put us at 27.6% of pervious surface and would
help us meet this requirement. Without this, it would be extremely difficult for us to
achieve this requirement with our 1500 Maras lot on its own without significant
impacts to our income earning ability, mixed with the costs associated with us working
with the city to meet their other requirements.
b. The green space being proposed on the 1500 Maras property specifically includes a
6' wide green space area along the East property line (less entrances), another 6'
wide green space area along the West property line, along with the green
space/landscaping that already exists around the North and East sides of the office
portion of the building.
1. We will install a new fence as outlined in our site plan. The proposal is to install the South
fence line, as well as the SE fence line, on Roger Zacharias' property. I have obtained
permission from him to do so. The red lines in the plan represent the proposed fence
location, and the purple lines represent gates, if gates are required. If not, then the
entrance would just be open.
2. Timeline: We would ask that the city allow us through the 2026 construction season (no
later than 10/31/26) to install this. This allows for two full freeze/thaw cycles after the
utility hookup and helps us spread out the costs of meeting the city requirements.
3. Estimate Cost: $30,000
4. Requirement of not more than 50% of lot area; we fall well within this requirement. The
proposed parking/outside storage, both the tractor/trailer parking that already exists on the
South half of the property, along with what EJ is proposing for the North half of the
property, totals approx. 36,975 sq. ft. The total 1500 Maras Street lot is approx. 2.19
acres, or 95,396.4 sq. ft., so the proposed parking/outside storage is only around 38.76%,
well under the 50% limitation.
5. Requirement not to be located closer than 300 feet to any residential zone; no issues here
as we are nowhere near this close to residential zoning
EJ EQUIPMENT • 6949 N 3000E Road • Manteno, Illinois • 60950
(800)522-2808
Page 18 of 76
tl�rwa�u�u
nom 1/1,7AFttli
OW,
Refuse Container Enclosure:
If you have any questions, please reach out to Marie Paff, Director of Corporate Operations.
Iade(u' IC nie uuliluairn ein .cornn (224)471-9561.
Sincerely,
John Larsen, COO
EJ EQUIPMENT • 6949 N 3000E Road • Manteno, Illinois • 60950
(800)522-2808
Page 19 of 76
U II'p nIIIIIIIVnI'
I% � IIIVI"'llllluuuul
ti
unl
l000
ellgairor
"11Ii IIII�Viiullllllmu'IY;'�I
lllmo;il"uy�p NINpf
Ullll " i'gv�'I,rt �im� i Il,l urrAul,�,lid
�V'�'I�INIII�II!'I!!,I!1;Illl�lll
nuu o��
�Ijllllllllllllllm. so u
..„1
1111111111111,,
HVIINimlVuul �I�II
rr4w„641 ie;04 d m
EJ Equipment Rental Prope
Blue: EJ Equipment Leased Property
Yellow: Additional 1500 Maras Property (nc
Green: Roger Zacharia's Parcel
Page 20 of 76
Biuwed aaAoIIdwEi l.uawxu :� n
5£
O
1500 Maras Floor Plan
' L'9►r1
O O
O O
L9
00 1 vet .cci
•
V
X
N
979
CO
X
N
r
O
1 b► 1£'9►
9'b►- 1££
N
N
A
CO
O
O
5'Z£ ►
co
V
Page 21 of 76
Proposed Improvements for CUP
Red: Proposed Fencing
PurpVe: F:>rw posed Fencing
Black: Proposed Paving
Ora G I' ei ua Ili k:uern e
11111111111111111
N1 Nkliiu 11�61UI6�»»iu�u�uw�tiu�lui�m`n
u��!�ul uuuai/II�II�!lVlUu utlllUpl
111 Irlor
, ,
rril(lillto:lool! II � ���u ��,,,yli �Il"I'l'°I I u'Ouu 0uuirIilw�lII�luisVOVVONIVI��II uVIV�uI V Q
I
Page 22 of 76
6.B.
Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals
August 8, 2024
FROM: Amanda Schwabe, Planner
TO: Board of Adjustment and Appeals Members
Subject:
PUBLIC HEARING - Variance request to fence material requirements and an overheight
fence in the front yard for ducks/geese in the Rural Residential (RR) zoning district at 1396
Blue Heron Trail.
Policy/Action Requested:
Adopt Resolution PC2024-009
Recommendation:
Adopt the resolution as presented.
Discussion:
Applicant & Property Owner: Kayden Fox
Address: 1396 Blue Heron Trail
Lot Area: .99 acres
Zoning: Rural Residential (RR)
2040 Comp. Plan: Suburban Residential
Kayden Fox, property owner, has applied for a variance to retain an unpermitted fence
greater than three (3) feet in height in the front yard that is constructed oft -posts and thin,
flexible, galvanized steel wire with hexagonal gaps (poultry wire) material for ducks and
geese in a residential zoning district.
In April 2024 staff received a complaint associated with the fence materials, location of the
fence in the front yard and right-of-way as well as the keeping of ducks and geese at the
subject property. Upon receipt of the complaint, Planning staff advised the property owner of
the fence material and location requirements as well as options for compliance. The Police
Department manages the animal related sections of the City Code. The property owner
relocated the fence out of the right-of-way of Heron Court S and Blue Heron Trail S
following the code enforcement communication; however, the fence still exceeds the three
Page 23 of 76
(3) foot height maximum in the front yard and does not meet the material standards. The
complaint is an on -going case with the Code Enforcement Specialist in the Police
Department as the property owner chose to apply for a variance for the fence height and
location.
The variance request is to keep the existing approximately four (4) foot tall poultry wire and
t -post fencing in the front, side, and rear yards for use as grazing/pasture area for their eight
(8) geese (a domesticated Chinese breed) and an undisclosed number of ducks for a minimum
of three (3) years. The applicant is also requesting to be allowed to place the same fencing in
the public right-of-way along Heron Court and Blue Heron Trail seasonally.
Per City Code Section 111.02 B., fences up to three (3) feet in height are allowed in the front
yard setback outside of easements and sight triangles. Fences are allowed to be up to six and
one half (6.5) feet tall on residential properties in the side and rear yard. All fences need to be
constructed of materials that are consistent with the building material standards in City Code
Chapter 151 that are not deemed hazardous by the Building Official (primarily chain link (no
slats allowed), ornamental metal, vinyl, or wood that is maintained) with the finished side
facing adjacent properties or the public right-of-way. Fences require a building permit to be
obtained prior to installation. The permit includes an inspection following installation to
confirm compliance with the approved permit.
The subject property is located in the Rural Residential (RR) zoning district allows low -
density residential development in areas which are not served by municipal urban services
with minimum lot size of 30,000 sq. ft. (.68 acres). The RR zoning district is not the same as
the Agricultural Preservation (AG) zoning district which preserves and promotes agriculture
in the unsewered areas of the city that are suitable for such use and requires a minimum lot
size of 22.96 acres (1 per 40 density). City Code Section 130.04 addresses the keeping of
animals, including Farm Animals on properties zoned for agricultural purposes and hen
chickens. Hen chickens are allowed in all zoning districts provided they meet the
requirements of City Code Section 130.04 H Including, but not limited to, a maximum of five
(5) hen chickens, no roosters, confinement of chickens in a coop in the rear yard with the size
based on the the number of chickens with screening, appropriately sized runs, and a provision
to restrict injury or annoyance to persons on other property in the vicinity by reason of noise,
odor, or filth.
Geese and ducks are not listed Section 130.04 Other Animals or defined in that section of the
Code as a Domestic Animal. They would be allowed as noted in the zoning code as
Agricultural Use in the AG - Agricultural Zone, which is typically the farming areas of the
city.
Attached is the narrative provided by the applicant along with a comment letter received by
Page 24 of 76
staff for your reference.
Staff has prepared and attached a resolution with findings denying the variance request
because it does not meet the variance criteria in City Code/State Statute, specifically the
criteria listed below:
• The circumstances were not created by the landowner.
• The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property.
• The variance as requested will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the
chapter.
• The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
• The problems extend beyond economic considerations.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Resolution R2024-009
• Location Map
• Applicant Narrative
• Resident Comments
• Fencing Exhibit
o Property Photos
o City Code on Animals
Page 25 of 76
RESOLUTION NO. PC2024-009
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, DENYING A
VARIANCE REQUEST TO CITY CODE SECTION 111.02 (BUILDING PERMITS)
AND 151.108 (CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL) FOR AN OVERHEIGHT FENCE IN
THE FRONT YARD CONSTRUCTED OF POULTRY NETTING AND T -POSTS IN
THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Kayden Fox (applicant and property owner) has made application for a
variance to City Code Section 111.02, Subdivision B. and Section 151.108, Subdivision A, to
retain an unpermitted fence greater than three (3) feet in height in the front yard that is
constructed oft -posts and thin, flexible, galvanized steel wire with hexagonal gaps (poultry
wire) for the keeping of ducks and geese at 1396 Blue Heron Trail in the Rural Residential
(RR) zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the property upon which the requests are being made are legally
described as:
Lot 2, Block 3, Timber Trails, in Scott County, MN; and
WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing for the application
were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity
to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Shakopee did review
the application on August 8, 2024 and adopted the following findings:
Findings for the Variance Request to City Code Section 111.02 (Building Permits) and Section
151.108 (Construction Materials)
Criterion l
The application for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in
complying with the official control. Practical difficulties means the following:
1.A. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by an official control;
Finding I.A. The existing four (4) foot tall fence constructed of t posts and poultry wire is not
reasonable as this residential development is not agricultural and the property is visible from a
Page 26 of 76
city park (Timber Trails) and adjacent residences. A fence three (3) feet in height would be
permitted in the front yard provided it meets the requirements of City Code Section 111.02B. The
City Code was amended By Ordinance 885 in 2014 to allow hen chickens on all properties with
conditions outlined in City Code Section 130.04H The City Code does not address decks/geese.
1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property;
Finding 1.B. The property is similar in size and has the same zoning designation (RR) as the
immediately surrounding properties. There are no circumstances unique to the property that
would prohibit the installation of a fence that meets the construction material, height, and location
requirements.
1.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner;
Finding 1.C. The circumstances are created by the landowner's desire to keep an unpermitted
fence that does not meet City Code requirements related to construction materials, height, and
location.
1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality;
Finding 1.D. The variance would alter the essential character of the locality as there a limited
number offences in this development and those that do exist are constructed of allowed
materials (wood and chain link). The standards are in place so aesthetically pleasing, high
quality materials that are easily maintained are utilized for fencing.
1.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations
alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
Finding I.E. The problems do not extend beyond economic considerations. The applicant is
requesting to use the proposed t -posts and poultry wire in lieu of a fence constructed of chain link,
vinyl, wood or other allowed materials. There are no circumstances unique to the property that
would prohibit the installation of a fence that meets the construction material, height, and location
requirements.
Criterion 2
It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the chapter and is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Finding 2: The proposed variance would not be keeping with the spirit and intent of Chapter 151
(Zoning) as it would allow the use of a lower standard of fencing materials at a height of four (4)
feet in a very visible location adjacent to a city park (Timber Trails) and other residential
properties in the development. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides this property as Suburban
Residential as it will be served by municipal utilities in the future.
Criterion 3
The request is not for a use variance.
Finding 3: The request is not a use variance.
Criterion 4
Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals must be directly
related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Finding 4: The board is denying the proposed variance request, no additional conditions are
necessary.
Page 27 of 76
Criterion 5
Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet additional criteria:
Finding 5: Not applicable since the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone.
Adopted in the regular session of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held the day of August, 2024.
Chairperson,
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
ATTEST:
Michael Kerski,
Director of Planning and Development
PREPARED BY:
City of Shakopee
485 Gorman Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
Page 28 of 76
1396 Blue Heron Trail
This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not
intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records,
information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices,
and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for
reference purposes only. Scott County is not responsible for any
misuse.
colt
F1 g 0BM/2024
1: 2,257
0 30 60 120 180 240
Feet
We have lived on our 1 acre lot located on a dead end road at the south edge of town by a
vineyard and pumpkin patch for 10 years now. Our lot is bordered to the north by Blue Heron
Trail (with a 1.5 acre park across the street), to the east by our only adjacent neighbor, to the
west by Heron Court and to the south by a vacant lot owned by Scott County. On the other side
of the Scott County lot is an 11 acre RR property that has a one acre pumpkin patch where they
grow pumpkins/corn for commercial sale. To the south of that property is a 26 acre AG property.
Lake O'Dowd is nearby to the southwest on the back of the two properties to our south.
One of the things we love about our property is it is in an older established neighborhood (our
home was built in 1982) that, when built, was considered to be "in the country." As Shakopee
has grown, more traditional housing developments have sprung up near us, but our
development pocket has remained far more rural with area lots ranging from around 3/4 of an
acre to 1 '/2 acres. Many of the lots are heavily wooded. Just across Marschall Road you find
horses, a barn, and crops grown in an agricultural setting.
It is common to see wildlife throughout the development; not just song birds but wild geese,
ducks, deer, foxes, squirrels, and others. With the large lot sizes in the development many
neighbors in the development have installed outbuildings/sheds and most keep some kind of
animals/pets on their property. Our neighborhood structure allows for a wonderful combination
of having neighbors while still having space to spread out more than a newer residential
subdivision. Adding more uniqueness to the area is the design of the homes as no two look
alike. Our home, for example, is a geodesic dome. Our neighbor to the east has a home built
in to the earth. This variety adds to the character and sets this subdivision apart. In the last
several years, the rural and more laid back nature of the area has actually increased with the
closing of the intersection of Blue Heron Trail and Marschall Road. We now live on a dead end
street with really only one connected neighbor. Our home itself sits positioned well to the front
of our large lot and our backyard is huge but also far from the water source the birds require. I
am attaching a photo/map from the Scott County GIS site to give a good idea of the layout of
the area. Unfortunately much of what is the flattest surface is presently used as pasture for the
birds is "side yard" and contains the trees the birds chose as shelter. Even in the dead of winter
and 2' of snow, the birds prefer sitting under our pine trees to any coop offered.
When COVID came around our family discussed getting backyard chickens but opted for
domesticated ducks and geese because they eat bugs and grass and lay larger eggs. With the
heavy woods in the area we thought the geese and ducks eating bugs would be a nice side
benefit. We also thought that domesticated geese and ducks would be a better fit in the area
given that wild ducks, geese, and heron had long been prevalent in the area (note the area
street names: Heron Ct; Blue Heron Trail; Wood Duck Trail). We also felt that since our
subdivision is zoned rural residential (RR) the geese and ducks made sense given the nature of
the subdivision and how the area has been used over the years. This has allowed us to avoid
harmful chemicals for weed/bug control that ultimately work back into our well supply. As a side
effect of being one of the few lots to not use a lawn care service our yard is full of over a dozen
native plant and pollinator species like our milkweed that contain hundreds of eggs for the
Page 30 of 76
endangered monarch butterfly, wildflowers, a number of bees, mosquito eating dragonflies, and
luminescent fireflies.
Before buying the birds, I looked into the city code for RR that provides setbacks for machinery
and buildings required for agricultural operations and figured it would be odd to give agricultural
setbacks and not allow related agricultural uses. The fact that we had a neighboring pumpkin
patch and the property just across Marschall to the east (also zoned RR) had horses and a
rooster (which is only allowed in rural agricultural areas) seemed to support this line of
reasoning.
We researched and constructed a run suited to the needs of larger domestic geese and ducks
that cannot fly. We had the birds for a few months before code enforcement first showed up.
We had 8 geese at that time but a few wild mallards took up nesting in our yard as well as we're
just off Lake O'Dowd. We explained our understanding of code, the fencing we were using, that
our geese were domestic, and that the mallards were wild and free to come and go at will. Code
enforcement seemed satisfied and being we never heard anything back we took that to mean
we were fine to continue as is and did so for the next three years.
Our sole neighbor has a sump pump that runs so much (presumably because their house is
built into the ground as noted above) that our ditch was standing water even in years of drought.
This year, it's become an all but unmowable mosquito factory given the volume of rain and
saturation of the ground. I again looked at the code and it said that temporary garden fences 3'
or less were allowed in easements so my solution was to add an outer ring to the run fence so
the geese could help keep the grass down and the ducks could keep the mosquitoes down. We
have been using t posts and poultry wire to make pens which we thought met the temporary
criteria as they don't obstruct view and can be installed/removed in a minute and we relocate
them semi regularly based on where we're growing what.
Now, after having the birds for three years since code enforcement first visited, they returned
this summer. Code enforcement has now insisted that we get a permit for an approved
permanent fence rather than the temporary containment fence we had used for the birds to
date. They also demanded we do this within 30 days. I ran the numbers and 3' chain link on just
the two road facing property lines would be over $5,000 even if I installed it myself (and wouldn't
be a sight barrier) while a 6' privacy fences seemed to start at $20k. When I said I couldn't afford
that expense in a month's time, enforcement directed us to remove all the t -post fencing from
the yard unless it was part of a run for the birds. However, they just applied the rules for
chickens that are 1/4th the size of pasture grazing geese that require more room. An acre can
support 20-40 geese for pasture grazing depending on quality. We grow a number of
grasses/grains/greens throughout our whole yard for their consumption but once you account
for house footprint and clay soil, they need most of the yard as their pasture/run. The larger
grazing area allows waste to organically build soil whereas smaller pens create concentrations
of waste that can be a health hazard to all involved and require more labor and care.
Page 31 of 76
Unfortunately, just allowing more room per bird just results in an exorbitantly expensive box that
would cover most of my yard that's too short for me to stand in. Code limits the runs to 6' high
while I'm 6'3" and my posts are 5.5'. Further, our yard has a number of trees and sloping that
we'd be hard pressed to find a space to erect something that could meet their spacial needs and
the canopy requirements for chickens. They need access to larger volumes of water than
chickens so we have a number of pools around the side yard we empty and refill every few
days. Flipping and filling their pools inside a cage would lead to the enclosure becoming mud
with them having nothing to graze. Geese also live about 20 years to a chickens 3-5, so this
would be quite inconvenient for a long time.
We talked to our only consecutive neighbor before getting the geese and they were all for it.
Even years later they say they much prefer any sound our birds make to their three dogs
barking or the traffic on Marschall. The neighbor across the cul-de-sac regularly tells us she
loves watching the birds waddle across our backyard. Living across from a park, every week we
see a family with kids enamored with the birds. Our geese are a domesticated Chinese breed.
They're not aggressive like Canadian geese nor can they or the blue Swedish ducks fly. Three
of our neighbors have birds and we're aware of a few other properties in what is/will be
Shakopee that have water fowl and are actively engaged homesteading in a situation like ours.
While I agree that the code for chickens makes sense in higher density areas where lots are
between an eighth and a quarter acre and that waterfowl definitely shouldn't be kept downtown,
I think lot size and location should factor in to how many of what kind of bird are allowed much
like how horse count is dependent on acreage.
Given we're going on our fourth year of having the geese and property values in our
development have continued to go up while 3 other properties in the neighborhood also have
birds, I believe we've met the criteria of 151.011A1. Specifically, our property has increased in
value according to Scott County tax records by over $25,000 in the years we've had the geese
and ducks. Every nearby property has also seen an increase in value during that same time
frame based upon Scott County assessed values. One nearby home sold for $460,000 in
October of 2021 and is now valued at almost $500,000 (PID 270610211). Another nearby sold
in May 2023 for $500,000, in a year where it was assessed to be worth $460,000 (PID
270610330). Clearly our birds have not diminished or impaired property values in the
immediate vicinity. Our use will also not impair anyone else's use of their property. Our use will
stay entirely within our property boundaries and will not have any adverse impact on our direct
neighbors.
Our development does not really have any vacant property that is eligible for orderly
development. The only vacant property is a split lot owned by Scott County that is owned as
part of the trail expansion but that lot is not of the size that it would be developed. It is simply
open space. If anything, having that lot connected to ours supports the conditional use request.
Page 32 of 76
o iimmPmm
111111111111111111111111
Some more information about nearby properties in the immediate vicinity:
Property id - 270610180- sole adjoined neighbor to east- 3 dogs, loves the birds over traffic on
Marschall. Has provided a letter of support for this conditional use permit application.
Property id - 273060010- southern neighbor house —500ft from property line with woodland
between with 1 acre plot raising pumpkins/corn for Peter and Carmen's commercial market.
Property id - 270610200- owned by county and used as driveway for above after trail expansion.
Doesn't seem viable for development as is but my use wouldn't interfere with that regardless
which should satisfy 151.011a2. I'm actually also interested in acquiring the portion of this parcel
directly adjoining my lot but have had issues getting replies from the county to my requests.
Property id - 270610211- southwest neighbor largely obscured by two rows of trees, their girls
love our birds, and they also own birds.
Property id - 270610221- due west with full view of our whole back yard but every time we bump
into them they tell us how much they love watching the birds and have a dog.
Property id - 270610170- northwest neighbor. They have their own birds as well.
Property id - 270610370- northern neighbor is a city park that draws nature lovers that typically
fawn over the birds.
Nothing about my usage requires additional facilities which should satisfy 151.011A3. Access
roads are adequate as is drainage and utilities. Our proposed use will not require an increase in
utility capacity.
Page 33 of 76
City code permits chickens in residential zones and horses are also allowed in RR based on lot
size. Considering lot size, location by a lake at the periphery of city limits, amidst moderate
scale agriculture including commercial crop on RR and AG, and horses across the road, I do not
believe geese are inconsistent with the purpose behind the rural residential zoning district and
already established rural agricultural -like usage already in the immediate area per 151.011A4.
Additionally, given permitted horse count increases with lot size it seems reasonable to allow
more birds on a 1 acre parcel than the same 5 allowed on smaller 0.11-0.15 acre lots. The
county sets geese/ducks as .01 AG unit per acre. 100 birds is a lot but 5 per tenth/fifth/quarter
acre would be reasonable as would setting the total per acre at 25/30 and just multiply by lot
size.
I have no reason to believe anything I do in my yard would do anything other than embrace the
comprehensive plan per 151.011A5. The 2040 comp plan states a key goal is to align land use
with the Envision Shakopee goal ---one of which emphasizes "connecting people to nature",
which specifically includes wetlands. We actually attended the various events at Huber Park and
the Community Center to support/vote for this very point years ago. Our birds, unlike chickens,
actually further this goal. (Pages 7 and 35 of Envision Shakopee comp plan).
The comp plan also sets a goal to "identify and remove barriers to local food systems in zoning
code and land use policy." (Envision Shakopee plan p. 105). As noted above, our birds lay eggs
and we consume those eggs. They are all natural, organic, and raised in our own yard. Our
proposed conditional use supports this comp plan goal. Interest in homesteading has soared
post COVID and it would be amazing if code could empower residents to cultivate closer bonds
to their land than just manicuring turf. We wanted to have a better connection to our food
beyond pulling it out of a cooler. A big part of homesteading is being both environmentally and
economically conscientious and a static $20,000 privacy fence to hide birds neighbors actually
enjoy is an artificial barrier against the comp plan considering a $1,000 in poultry wire has suited
our every need for 3 years and is entirely reusable as our needs change with crop rotation or
isolating sick/injured birds.
Our proposed conditional use is also consistent with the comp plan goal to "preserve and
enhance the unique identity and character of individual neighborhoods." As noted throughout
this narrative our neighborhood is very unique within Shakopee. It is not a new cookie -cutter
national builder based development. It has been allowed to develop in its unique way that
encourages different uses than other neighborhoods. Our proposed use is consistent with the
historic use of the neighborhood and with the comp plan goal of supporting those unique
opportunities. (Envision Shakopee p. 114). Our requested conditional use fits with the guidance
of the Envision Shakopee plan to shape zoning decisions in accordance with the goals of the
comprehensive use plan. (Envision Shakopee p. 128).
These years with the birds have been filled with joy. Everyone in our household suffers with
anxiety, depression, PTSD, or something else. The birds have been a massive asset in coping
with everyone's respective struggles. The changes mandated by code enforcement would turn
our lives upside down and undermine the well being of our animals that live a rather long time to
Page 34 of 76
be stuck in enclosures that don't meet their needs. The asks are also financially onerous and
counter to the city's goals of increasing land use, connecting with nature, and removing barriers
to healthy food.
Existing use of property -
Single family home with pasture for grazing geese and ducks using 3' high t -posts and poultry
netting. Netting is 5' with 2' staked inside the pen to prevent sneaking under.
Proposed use of property-
1- Given code already permits some farm animals in RR based on lot size, we request bird
headcount similarly increase with lot size. The smallest lots in city limits are roughly 1/10th an
acre, but 50 may be excessive; perhaps 5 minimum +5 per 0.2 acre (25/acre).
2- Given we've demonstrated for years the current fencing solution meets all practical use
requirements for pasture grazing, flightless birds and imposes no harm or risk of harm to
anyone or their property, we request allowance to use t post fencing within our property lines for
a period of at least three years while we plant and cultivate natural barriers and save for a
privacy fence should that prove insufficient. [Blue lines on aerial 2]
3- Given our remote location, lack of water/sewer service, very low chances of requiring utility
repair, and the ease with which temporary fencing can be removed, we request permission to
temporarily place fencing in spring and summer in our ditch. [Pink lines on aerial 2]
HOSE
Page 35 of 76
Certified Aradmremra of f tet ` a°asa Approved he AS auraaw *rds for G
The premise of the WA standards is that aanmrmmais IrraySt he uaflowed to behave
naturally. 'The following standards allow aammimmnaats the umfmtro tunut.y to perform haat armwW
n instinctiveUfa ivom rs esseu^rttwap to their heeith ,aarnd wnuephibeitigi, Provisions are
made to ensure six kaaalU interaction„, r"woi ndorta and duluymm' icad sand psyiuhµm Aoaaa, kal weI
being„.
2,0.1 Breeds and strains mist be chosen with non.' asr ati n (O their ability to thrive
m the prev Ring chmrmaatic coonditiwar^ms ofthe farm, in pastou✓e•rb✓ se tree rern e
outdoor systeiinns,
6 OJ Birds must Iheve
aar
lea rmim fresh ga la"
have a teedioroq Wan that veil qu
mnutrituounal regime ampproprdulaatc for their wad""
St,i.3t,t ;,..nii
'tatty tit U, us
, (ignite
n I,;',,,a.r r;t
vines L a .0 �f t a':
reitairatrattattattitai !64r1 rL".tudn ra, d m ,, ., .,,
9fidat.5,0fifiitt and tanitubillfit fit in cynic, (id
is It grin, ?!,-its,
a vaned,. wwrehliula tarwced and � �� ✓r„
binds nixed
6,3 ,1 Ponllltry mmnuu,st, have constant access to food darn mdaayd'ubffht hours,
6 i,2 Birds must always have access to urmsolub e dfr'dr Itfiimufs must be able to pass the
grit into the gizzard,
(tote, Graft may be obtained (elm the environment or provided as a supmlemermt,, ,tf
pruvmud as a s&ppawerrmunt at m"an be remove, 4 hours prior to slaughter.
7„.0iii A ra rhfhiirng and taaraaginmj area amn,arnaau; e intent plan must be in tmhe4`e thhaat dresses'
the Specific farm site. it must enSure "hit:,
7,0,d ,1 Not aliocan'temf4
Poultry must Ihhmave Wncces to drawing green vegetatmon on the
range will ,„1, ever eerr futia or a at'
7n0"8 3 the m,om°orud,aaUsitlumn of the u°r rr
health put dlanans for tee birds.
ainth'u
Ai
does
amt°awaaa'e
7,.0.8.4 Birds have aam„ m ess to trams h, clean range no and foraging area' tdh t It
not Il IYlluuted with manure.,
,? „ tiff. m
m"a of Watter,, sd"n tU n,, and feeding amas is addressed
,!w""we,,
7°„ah.t the activity of time !dairat.s must not cause more than 20'W'tim of
far°am domdd y are kept on being denuded,
an:gin and
must be abet to fmmr i r'cart seeUr rmu,ufrmtdemm frmamrd tine range
mate. d,,ie anr,,a "efn-mmrr,mart be e!taa , to graze.
7",:;;f.4 Clean mfri nlararnua ara%hnter must be continuously amvaadltaatat turn birds mnrm r
,✓ is 5..,,datint batntei r,6'sc,1
,iii rrt, ,.
7;r;,iiiatt rr ur
argic. 'Vitt, heave yet to Ifit
fit rxdartit tide yard peritfitett.«itt anti tfitive
hatedii t ti nit „t dele r, att for tat.
t,!id ,Cun, ,r fnrlr,`tii N.�
(inni ,f �✓ r f'�'�'t11
try ;f „CD„
dna
Page 36 of 76
raf re raaaat mtr �rrlp
manner that encoura
and fora d.ng areas available.
I
geese shook h
or rmnmas,t, aaarmaudaltmda r Woan h I e birds and provided in a
lung bchasvior and aaSWIMS maximum use aaf the ranging
w tr ewer a sfmr"'arhs
I The minimum p
by S f
v,� c Cu
rigini nd fom
d/o,
rasa fralr
1.3„16 Fully enclosed aovi e) terns on rangtalmg and totagiilig areas may uaanty b
used when there is a predator risk that cannot be controlled by other means,
$R1'',;,
should be at Ill,eaast, td
7.4„„1 tdama" ' must ad,
Ely end,uw ,, facer^r o ranging, and forugiing areas furor
d°n i�tm u
e usacrumsc to water for behavior
Note: Different ,speed 's ,have differu, traafaaaaaam eat .r^r, d ;, All tr'a
to water°, such that they cab dip Meer ,heauts'a taro mm tuna Arid spread waalea„ over
feathers. Geese .sf'ma oold a1drt,Ounniadnry he provided as t 'a' a at n they a'a a 1m efl,
Goslings are included to the ,,. , urraarnraent ahoy faauf' tfar a mist be protected' from the
drysk of drowning, This may nr!c ssrtat r a:rota ,fratrra to run tuna of weer
w cart;/oar deep air ter,
1,.4,2 aatama
fmriktnes dur lb
rmmm9 needs must be deep enough for birds to fully invert their
red s%vimmm w Ihoot their feet toddling the bottom,
7.„,4,o3 Natural and asm^tdld'icdaad mar t r° sources must be duet. dean and wall maailiintmdn d.
"1,.4.4 Ponds and ,, aiaarmmmnmmm wwraater rmrmn t be maintained and managed to prevent,
environmental potlltwtdono.
07.6„2 4f binds are excluded from daytarrre ar,camss to cane urea atammt fabraafdi
must be prowrudeddl with v°e taat¢wue rrnaaterv,all s•o that ttmr y can engage in
rraas ttni
awnirm
ftwtd.) The therm aad c,lrmrrrfort of poultry must be protected by provision of hotuaiaa war
shelter oath natural' or inn than t temperature and hurmmiodtty^ control aus required, The
needs ds of all ages and stages of production ,and local climatic extremes must ken
into ar°coirot when planning housing or shelter,
B4Oi3 In extreme weather there must
sheltered envirandwmemnfi,
8,t ,11 Birds ds at all times Imnest have ward rr an a
they are not forted to stand Idols mud or rmmaamure.
8,^3.,11 There must be provision of to scde place
of compf'tµt`mon,.
means to feed a war atrmr lords turn a
trade that provides dry footing so
goo id birds to recover„
,., .2 4f injured thirds ahe sepaaraatamcd' from the flock they must only be kept aafmart until
such time they can m° dma the group writhout advPr'sety affecting ether the hraa<h or
welfare of the lI°iv" uto d ar time tiock„e
8,3L5
e lri
i,iuditoty on
emtmmamaamt
ere
housed hofursed lairds should Ilhaave visual and
ft.4.f) in cold ter;ralpemratuures heaat, must be Iprowwiided as heresaaaslry to keep birds
codintota'Llco
Page 37 of 76
6/28/2024
Subject: geese
From: "Peggy Breedlove -Gerard" <pbreedlovegerard@gmail.com>
Sent: 6/28/2024 3:53:24 PM
To: "Kayden Fox" <kaydenfox@_gmail.com>;
To; The Board of Adjustments and Appeals
My husband Paul Gerard and I have been neighbors of Kaden and Jessica Fox for many
years now. It has come to my attention that they are currently having some potential
legal challenges regarding their geese. We would like to go on record and say that we do
enjoy the geese, and have had no problems with them for any reason. If you have any
questions, you may feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Peggy Breedlove -Gerard
pbreedlovegerard@gmail.com
Page 38 of 76
1/1
�d'9111111';';°I
uuMOVIIIIIUipl9 uuulRi u'
0111100
Y MMMM'6N'MM'MININ'MNN'" Nei
� IIIIIIIIIIiiilliiiiliuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuullllllllllMIIIIIIIIIP loiI�INVII
VIII ����I10����1u�"
°I11uL1luIIIIIII11O0
llllllllll Y „IR
uVd x'0 11 1111111111111111111111111111111111110 I"°
16
IIIIIII�V�i°"'
d
Dear City Board Members,
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing in response to the recent request by my
neighbor for approving a garden fence intended to enclose their ducks and geese, as well
as their request to keep these animals, which are currently not permitted under our city
code.
While I understand the need for such a fence to ensure the safety and containment of the
animals, I would like to express my conditional support for this request. I believe that if
there are established rules and a proper permitting process for keeping ducks and geese
within city limits, it could be a positive addition to our community. Such regulations would
ensure that the animals are well -cared for and that their presence does not negatively
impact the neighborhood.
However, I am concerned about the appearance and quality of the proposed fence. To
maintain the aesthetic appeal and overall cohesion of our neighborhood, I recommend that
the fence be constructed of city approved materials. These options would provide the
necessary functionality while blending seamlessly with the existing surroundings, thereby
preserving the visual integrity of our neighborhood.
In the interest of fairness and practicality, I suggest giving my neighbor until spring to put up
a new fence. This extension will provide them with ample time to save up for the
construction of a suitable fence that meets permitting standards.
To support my position, I have included examples of permits and city codes from two other
cities in our state that allow for the keeping of ducks and geese under specific conditions.
Additionally, I have attached a news article from Aurora, Colorado, which recently added
ducks to their list of permitted animals. These examples demonstrate that with proper
regulations and community support, the integration of such animals can be successfully
managed.
In summary, I am supportive of my neighbor's request, provided that it complies with
appropriate regulations and that the fence is constructed from suitable materials. I trust
that the city board will consider these points and make a decision that benefits both our
neighbor and the broader community.
Sincerely,
Page 41 of 76
City of Rochester
DUCK APPLICATION
Rochester Code of Ordinances Chapter 3-5 governs duck permits, With a permit, up to 3 hens
are allowed on any premise. A permit for up to 12 hen ducks may be issued if the applicant its
involved in educational or instructional activity. An applicant must submit a letter of request
with the permit application explaining how the need for the greater number of ducks is
directly related to the educational or instructional activity. Drakes are not permitted.
Permit apppllicatiions must be submitted with a scaled diagram indicating the location of any
duck coop and run, and willll be reviewed by City staff for coirnlplliiaince with the regulations in
the ordinance. The City Council) must approve the application before a permit is issued,
The Duck Application can be found here.
Page 42 of 76
r
Cll
CKEN
ROC
MINN
ESTER
UCK NEW of 'R ENE AL APP
FSR PEERNMTS TI1 $NDMDUALS
CAT
Rochester Code of Ordinances Chapters 3-4i and 3-5 require a permit for the keeping of Chickens or Ducks on the
premises of any property in the City limits. A permit is good for up to two years, and expires on Dec. 315t of its second
year. The fee for a permit is $36. Renewal applications arriving after Dec. 31st will incur a 50% expired license fee.
Required fees must be paid at the time an application is submitted.
Instead of sending in this form, applications can be submitted online through the Accela Citizen Access portal. See the
following instructions:
Register Public User Account (video): hatps://lforochestermnogov/IDocuments/ElectronicFileoaspx?dbud=0&docid=761.31.0
Applying for a New License (PDF): hops://www.rochestermn.gov/home/showdocument?id=2.5959
Fill in all blanks. Write N/A if a question is not applicable.
Is this a renewal of an existing or previous permit with the City of Rochester?
nYes
❑ No
STEP 1. PREMISE ADDRESS
Address and Owner Informt
n
Address Where Animals Are Kept
City
State
Zip Code
Property Owner Name
Email Address
Primary Telephone Number
Alternate Phone Number
What is your preferred spoken language?
What is your preferred written language?
Do you need an interpreter?
nYes
T7 No
Office of the City Clerk www,rocheste_rmn.gov 507-328-2900 Ilicenses@rochestermn,.gov
Last updated: 07/14/2023
Page 43 of 76
STEP 2. CONTACT INFORMATION
Application Information
Provide information about who is completing this application
(may or may not be the same as the person obtaining the permit)
First Name
Last Name
Primary Phone Number
Type of Phone
Cell Business
nHome❑Other
Alternative Phone Number
Type of Phone
nCell nBusiness
nHomenOther
Email Address
Account Mailing Address
City
State
Zip Code
Please send official notices relating to this permit to:
❑Mailing Address Email
LICENSE HOLDER
Provide information about who this license will be issued to
First Name
Last Name
Primary Phone Number
Type of Phone
Cell Business
nHome❑Other
Alternative Phone Number
Type of Phone
Cell Business
nHomenOther
Email Address
STEP 3. INFORMATION ABOUT ANIMALS TO BE KEPT ON PREMISES IN THE CITY LIMITS
Type of animal requested:
T7 Chicken T7 Duck
Number of Birds to be kept: (Note: Roosters are not allowed.)
NOTE: Limit of 3 birds applies unless you are involved in educational or instructional activity; up to 12 birds can be
approved with information about the educational or instructional activity. Are you attaching any additional
information or documentation to support a request for 4-12 hens?
In Yes In No
Location of coop and enclosed outside yard/run:
Size of coop:
Sized of enclosed outside yard/run:
STEP 4. REQUIRED DOCUMENTS AND PAYMENT
Attached scaled diagram indicating location of any coop
or enclosed run from adjoining structures and property
lines
Yes
❑ No
License fee of $36 submitted for a two year permit
(Permit expires on Dec. 31St of its second year)
nYes No
COMPLETE THE REQUIRED NOTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION SECTION, INCLUDING REQUIRED.
SIGNATURE, ON THE NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM
Office of the City Clerk www,rochestermn..g.oy. 507-328-2900 IIIceinses__..roclhesterm n.,.gov
Last updated: 07/14/2023
Page 44 of 76
NI
STEP 5+
TIFICATION AND VERIFIC
TION
The information collected and required as part of this application will be used to determine eligibility for a City of Rochester
License or Permit. Disclosure of this information is voluntary. It is not legally required to provide requested data, however,
failure to do so may mean the City of Rochester is unable to process this application.
All information contained in this application is public information upon submission pursuant to the Government Data Practices
Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13. Individuals have the right to see and obtain copies of the data maintained on them,
including private data, and also have the right to be told the contents and meaning of the data, and to contest the accuracy and
completeness of the data.
Notice of Ability to Sign up for Electronic Notifications of Proposed City Ordinances
As an applicant for a license or permit or renewal of an existing license or permit, you are also hereby notified that the City of
Rochester distributes general city information and notices through an electronic notification system, and you may sign up to
receive notices through this electronic notification system on the City's website at N ttp. //www.._roc_hes..erm...ggyi.: wart.::,
tQLslig.0 p_._(.oIr/el aul...uapda_ es This includes notice of proposed ordinances at least 10 days prior to final adoption by the City
Council in accordance with Minn. Stat. 415.19.
A SIGNATURE IS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO PROCESS YOUR LICENSE APPLICATION
I, (print name) , have read and understand the above information regarding my
rights as a subject of government data and that all information I provide as part of this application is public. I acknowledge I
have been provided information about what is required for me as an individual to obtain a permit from the City of Rochester,
and how to receive notifications of proposed City ordinances. I agree I will strictly comply with all ordinances of the City of
Rochester relating to the permit for which I have applied, and understand I can review all current City ordinances on the City
website or in the City Clerk's Office. I further understand that the giving of false information as part of this application,
regardless of when it is discovered, or failure to meet the requirements set forth in RCO Chapter 3-4 or 3-5, including all
requirements relating to coops and runs, can constitute cause for denial, suspension, or revocation of my permit.
Signature of Applicant Date
Office of the City Clerk www,rocheste_rmn..gov 507-328-2900 Ilicenses@rochste....n,.gov
Last updated: 07/14/2023
Page 45 of 76
7/30/24, 3:57 PM Rochester, MN Code of Ordinances
CHAPTER 3-5. - DUCKS
Sec. 3-5-1. - Limitation on number allowed.
(a) It is unlawful for any person to keep or harbor ducks on any premises unless issued a permit to
do so as provided in this chapter. Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, no permit
shall be issued for the keeping or harboring of more than three ducks on any premises.
(b) A permit may be issued by the common council for the keeping or harboring of up to 12 ducks if
the applicant is involved in educational or instructional activity, and the need for the greater
number of ducks is directly related to the educational or instructional activity.
(Code 1965, § 113B.01; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018; Ord. No. 4512, §§ 1, 2, 2-5-2024)
Sec. 3-5-2. - Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to
them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Duck coop means a structure for housing ducks made of wood or other similar materials that provides
shelter from the elements.
Duck run means an enclosed outside yard for keeping ducks.
Premises means any platted lot or group of contiguous lots, parcels or tracts of land.
(Code 1965, § 113B.011; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018)
Sec. 3-5-3. - Permit.
No person shall maintain a duck coop and run unless they have been granted a permit by the city. The
permit shall be subject to all terms and conditions of this chapter and any additional conditions deemed
necessary by the city to protect the public health, safety and welfare. The necessary permit applications are
available online and in the city clerk's office. Included with the completed application must be a scaled
diagram that indicates the location of any duck coop and run, and the approximate size and distance from
adjoining structures and property lines. A permit for the keeping of ducks may be revoked or suspended by
the council for any violation of this chapter following written notice and a public hearing. The fee for a
permit shall be established as part of the fee schedule adopted by the common council. Issued permits will
be valid until December 31 of the following year.
(Code 1965, § 113B.02; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018; Ord. No. 4435, § 1, 7-19-2021; Ord. No. 4512, § 3, 2-5-
2024)
about:blank
Page 46 of 76
1/2
7/30/24, 3:57 PM Rochester, MN Code of Ordinances
Sec. 3-5-4. - Confinement.
Every person who owns, controls, keeps, maintains or harbors ducks must keep them confined at all
times while in the city in a duck coop and duck run. Any coop and run shall be screened with a solid fence or
landscaped buffer with a minimum height of four feet. Any coop and run shall be at least 25 feet from any
residential structure on any other premises.
(Code 1965, § 113B.03; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018)
Sec. 3-5-5. - Requirements for duck coops and runs.
All duck coops and runs must be located at least 25 feet from any dwelling on any other premises. All
duck coops must meet the requirements of the building and zoning codes, must not exceed ten square feet
per duck, and must not exceed six feet in total height. Attached fenced -in duck runs must not exceed 20
square feet per duck and must not exceed six feet in total height. Duck runs may be enclosed with wood
and/or woven wire materials, and allow ducks to contact the ground. Duck feed and manure must be kept in
rodent -proof and raccoon -proof containers and must not be placed in yard compost piles.
(Code 1965, § 113B.04; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018)
Sec. 3-5-6. - Conditions.
No person who owns, keeps or harbors hen ducks shall permit the premises where the hen ducks are
kept to be or remain in an unhealthy, unsanitary or noxious condition or to permit the premises to be in
such condition that noxious odors are carried to adjacent public or private property. Any duck coop and run
authorized by permit under this chapter may be inspected at any reasonable time by a city animal control
officer or other agent of the city.
(Code 1965, § 113B.05; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018)
Sec. 3-5-7. - Violations.
Any person who keeps or harbors ducks in the city limits without obtaining or maintaining a current
permit or after a permit has been suspended or revoked by council action shall be guilty of a petty
misdemeanor.
(Code 1965, § 113B.06; Ord. No. 4351.3, § 1, 8-6-2018)
about:blank
Page 47 of 76
2/2
your permit is appro
O
V
Backyard chickens and other fo
q.l
IAD
f"J
UJ
O
E
z
Page 48 of 76
7/30/24, 3:46 PM Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances
63.90. - Fowl.
(a) No person shall keep, harbor, or maintain care, custody, or control over any fowl such as a chicken,
turkey, duck, or pigeon, without obtaining a permit. Any person desiring a permit shall make written
application to MACC. Approval of application is subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by MACC.
Failure to adhere to permit conditions shall constitute cause for adverse action against the permit and shall
be a violation of this section.
(b) MACC may grant a permit pursuant to this section only after the applicant has met any
educational requirements as established and published by MACC and has provided evidence of
notification to all immediately adjacent property owners, in a format supplied by or approved by
and to the satisfaction of MACC. If the applicant is a renter, approval from the property owner
shall be required. Neighbor notification will be the responsibility of the property owner, though it
may be carried out by the applicant.
(c) Fowl must be purchased or acquired in accordance with Minn. Statute Sections 70.40 and 74.100
and any other applicable law.
(d) The requirements of this section shall not prohibit the adoption of fowl to the public by any
releasing agency, private shelter, rescue group, or public sheltering agency provided the adoption
contract specifies that the animal cannot be sold, transferred, or otherwise disposed of for a
period of six (6) months following the adoption without written consent of the releasing agency,
except for euthanization by a licensed veterinarian to prevent pain and suffering or disease
transmission.
(e) No person having the care, custody, and control of any fowl shall abandon said fowl or allow any
fowl to run at large off the property of its owner or custodian.
(f) All permits shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of issuance unless sooner revoked. The
application fees for such permits shall be as established in the license fee schedule and shall be
payable upon application. MACC may inspect the premises annually or as deemed necessary.
(g) Permits shall be classified into three (3) tiers, with Tier I consisting of one (1) to six (6) hens, Tier II
of seven (7) to fifteen (15) hens, and Tier III of sixteen (16) to thirty (30) hens, with associated fees
as established in the license fee schedule.
(h) Standards of care, practice, restrictions, and enclosure requirements include the following:
(1) Residential coops, pens or other structures shall be limited to six (6) fowl of any kind per
permit. Permits in excess of the allowable number shall need to be approved by MACC and
may require additional conditions.
(2) Location of coop, run, or pen must be in compliance with all zoning code requirements and
enclosed to ensure fowl are confined to permittee's property. The enclosure must be of
proper size for the number and type of fowl being housed as prescribed by MACC.
about:blank
Page 49 of 76
1/3
7/30/24, 3:46 PM Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances
(3) Residential coops, pens, or other structures shall be an allowed accessory to a dwelling
subject to the following:
a. The use shall be located not less than twenty (20) feet from any habitable building on an
adjacent property.
b. The use shall be visually screened from any adjacent residential use.
c. The use shall be constructed of durable materials and shall be compatible with the
principal structure and adjacent residential properties.
d. The use shall be located entirely to the rear of the principal residential structure.
(4) Fecal waste or litter shall be removed at such reasonable times to prevent odors from
emitting over property lines. Such waste or litter must be double bagged and disposed of in
city garbage or composted provided the method used and the location does not present a
public nuisance or health issue.
(5) Slaughter of any kind shall be prohibited within the City of Minneapolis.
(6) Roosters shall be prohibited without special permit.
(7) A permit to keep more than six (6) fowl or to keep roosters shall require the written consent
of at least eighty (80) percent of the occupants of the several descriptions of real estate
situated within one hundred (100) feet of the applicant's real estate. Such written consent
shall be required on the initial application and as often thereafter as MACC deems necessary.
(8) Any coop found to be a public nuisance provided notice to abate the issues has failed to
correct the issue within a reasonable time is prohibited and all permits associated with the
coop may be revoked or denied. The coop and all fowl shall be removed by the property
owner within forty-eight (48) hours of notice of the revoked or denied permit at the expense
of the permit holder or applicant.
(9) MACC may deny, suspend, revoke or take other authorized adverse action against any permit
applied for or granted pursuant to this section if any condition or requirement is violated or if
the keeping of fowl becomes a public nuisance or for other good cause.
(10) Public nuisance for the purpose of coops includes, without limitation, any chicken coop that
on three (3) or more occurrences in a twelve (12) month period receives complaints of noise,
odor, or any other violation from more than one complainant, provided the complaints are
founded and established by MACC.
(11) No person, business, or entity shall maintain or cause to be maintained any commercial
business related to the keeping of fowl on residential property unless otherwise permitted by
the City of Minneapolis. If so permitted, commercial coops must:
a. Maintain any applicable business license, health department permit, zoning permit, and
permit issued by the MACC.
about:blank
Page 50 of 76
2/3
7/30/24, 3:46 PM
Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances
b. Be limited to thirty (30) fowl of any kind with at least four (4) square feet provided for each
fowl housed inside the physical coop and ten (10) square feet for each fowl while housed
in outside run.
c. Be maintained in such a manner as to prevent a public nuisance.
d. Comply with all zoning and health regulations as well as any other applicable law.
e. Be properly identified as required by MACC.
f. Provide adequate care, as defined in this title.
g. Provide adequate safeguards to protect the fowl from animals and to prevent
unauthorized access to the fowl by general members of the public.
h. Be kept in good repair, maintained in a clean and in a sanitary condition, and free of any
vermin, obnoxious smells, and substances. (Ord. No. 2016-009, § 1, 2-12-16)
about:blank
Page 51 of 76
3/3
Aurora adds ducks to list of permitted pets
as long as these rules are met
Aurora City Council voted Monday night to allow domesticated
ducks in city limits
II
LITTLETON, COLORADO — JUNE 15: Ducks and ducklings lounge by a stream in
Denver Botanic Gardens' Chatfield Farms facility in Littleton, Colorado, Wednesday,
June 15, 2022. (Photo by Jintak Han/The Denver Post)
By SAJA HINDI I The Denver Post
UPDATED: August 24, 2022 at 3:51 p.m.
Aurora residents could soon keep domesticated ducks on their properties after the
Aurora City Council approved the measure Monday night.
Council members voted 9-1 in favor of the measure on first reading, with Councilman
Curtis Gardner voting against it. The second vote is likely slated for Sept. 12,
according to city staff.
Duck owners must abide by certain requirements: They have to keep a minimum of
two ducks as the ducks are social animals; single-family properties that are less than
20,000 square feet can have up to six chickens or two ducks and four chickens;
single-family properties with 20,000 or more square feet can have up to eight
Page 52 of 76
chickens or two ducks and six chickens or three ducks and five chickens, or four
ducks and four chickens.
Roosters will still not be allowed on residential properties within city limits.
The ducks and chickens — which were already allowed — have to have a covered
"predator -resistant" house in a fenced -in yard that's at least 2 square feet per hen or
duck and the chicken and hens must have access to the coop and outdoor enclosure
during the day. At night, they have to be secured inside from dusk to dawn. They also
have to be sheltered so "as to prevent them from coming into contact with wild ducks
or geese or their excrement, and to prevent them from running at large."
From April through October, ducks have to have access to a single container with a
minimum of 30 gallons of fresh potable water, according to the ordinance.
And owners will have to get a city permit.
While the City Council had serious questions about ducks running into other people's
yards and water features, they also took advantage of the opportunity to use as many
puns as possible during the discussion.
At one point, Mayor Pro Tern Francoise Bergan asked, "do you have any concerns
about quackery?"
Page 53 of 76
V
Fencing Exhibit
opol111111P1110,4flopq
11110 11011111111111116Himuilloloonllllllll
voolo
co
>-
0
L
U
co 2
w
L
cO d)
c
• y a)
_C C
L
_c c• — ^W
u! O
a)
o o
a-. CO
Q E
• C Q
LL LL <
Page 54 of 76
View looking Southeast July 2024
View looking Southwest July 2024
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
0,0000000000000000000000000,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
00(((((((1���������������������������11111111111
0 000000000000000,00
0,00/0/0/////////000„0”
,
,,;,0,
0loiml»»»»,
i
I,
,,
,
010
Page 56 of 76
1,00,1
View looking East July 2024
uui iitjjjjjjjjii��������'
111111111
mV
v �I�kgomry, oo a
co
N-
N -
0_
r—
'5
co
Lo
a)
0)
as
d
Staff Photos from June 2024
i l Il�ll�lll��lll�lllf �,�1
111111111111111111111
Staff Photos from June 2024
Page 60 of 76
Page 61 of 76
Page 62 of 76
Au
trganglillielnientld
Staff Photos from April 2024
Page 63 of 76
130.04 Other Animals
Definitions. For the purpose of this section., the following definitions shall apply unless the context.
clearly indicates or requires a different
meaning,
OMESTIC ANIMAL. Any of the following animals:
I. Domestic dogs, excluding hybrids with wolves., coyotes, or jackals;
2. Domestic cats, excluding hybrids with ocelots or margays;
3. Farm animals;
4. The following other mammals: chinchillas; pot bellied pigs; and pygmy goats;
5. The following rodents: rabbits; guinea pigs; hamsters; gerbils; mice; and rats;
6. The following reptiles:: iguanas; ano➢es; chameleons; non -venomous snakes; terrapins;
turtles; and tortoises;
7.. The following amphibians:: frogs; toads; and newts;
8. That to➢➢owing bird: captive -bred species of common cage birds, including parakeets;
finches; love birds; cloves; parrots; cocka.atie➢s; cockatoos;
9. Nonpoisonous spiders;
10. Hermit crabs; and
11. Fish.
h.
W I@. l) ANIMAL Any animal other than a domestic animal.
2. Keeping. It is unlawful for any person to keep any wild animal in any part of the city. It is unlawful
for any person to keep any animal which is not approved by the t1.S. Department of Agriculture,
or the State Department of Natural Resources, in any part of the city. Except as otherwise allowed.
in division. (H) below, farm animals, pot bellied pigs, and pygmy goats may be kept only in that
portion of the city zoned for agricultural purposes or where these animals are a permitted,
conditional., or accessory use..
3. Housing. It is unlawful for any .person to keep any domestic or wild animal in any structure infested
by rodents, vermin, flies, or insects.
4. Treatment. It is unlawful for any person to treat any domestic or wild animal in a cruel or inhumane
manner.
5. Restraint and confinement. It is unlawful :for any person to permit any animal to run at large.
6. Trespasses. It is unlawful for any person to herd, ride, or drive any animal over and upon any grass,
turf, boulevard, city park, cemetery, garden, or lot without specific permission therefor :from the
owner.
7. Biting animals.
1. Animals bites human being.
1. Whenever any animal within the corporate limits of the city has bitten any human
ibei_ng, and such animal is of a species which can carry rabies, the city shall
impound. such animal for a period of 10 days separate and apart from. other animals
until it is determined whether the animal had or has rabies. If the animal its found
to be rabid it shall be destroyed. flit is found not to be rabid, it shall be returned to
the owner provided the owner shall first pay for the cost of keeping said animal. If
the owner does not claim or retrieve the animal, the animal may be disposed of as
provided in this code of ordinances.
2. Whenever the city can determine the person owning, possessing or harboring the
animal that has bitten the human being, the city may permit the owner to impound.
such animal for a period of 10 days separate an.d apart from other animals under
the supervision of a licensed veterinarian until it is determined whether the animal
Page 64 of 76
had or has rabies. If the animal is rabid, it shall be destroyed. In all cases, the city
shall make the determination of how the animal shall be impounded, and shall base
its decision upon the owner's ability to properly impound the animal, and the
current rabies vaccination. status of the animal.
2. Animal (rites anima/. Any animal known to have been bitten or exposed to rabies shall be
impounded or destroyed; provided, however, that such animal may be immediately
destroyed, if with reasonable effort it cannot first be taken up and impounded. If such an
animal is irmpounded, it shall not be destroyed if the owner makes provision for suitable
quarantine for a period of not less than 6 months, or proof of itmmunization is furnished
and booster injections are given by a licensed veterinarian at the expense of the owner,
lien chickens.
U. No more than 5 hen chickens are allowed on any parcel of land in the city.
2. Every person who owns, controls, keeps, maintains, or harbors hen chickens must keep
them confined on the premises at all times in a chicken coop or chicken'tun. Hen chickens
are not allowed in any part of a house or garage.
3. Any chicken coop or chicken run must comply with all applicable building and zoning
codes and regulations.
4. No chicken coop or run shall be constructed on any parcel of hind before construction of
the principal building.
5. A chicken coop or run cannot be located in the front or side yard.
6. A chicken coop or run must be setback at least .50 feet from any residential structure on
any adjacent lot and at least 10 feet from the property line.
7. A chicken coop or run must be screened from view with a solid :fence or landscaped buffer
with a 'minimum height of 4 feet..
8. A chicken coop can be no larger than ➢ 0 square feet per chicken and cannot exceed 6 feet
in height. A chicken run cannot exceed 20 square feet per Chicken and the fencing cannot
exceed 6 feet in height. A chicken run may be enclosed with wood or woven wire materials,
and may allow chickens to contact the ground.. A chicken run must have a protective
overhead netting to keep the chickens separated from other animals..
9. A chicken coop must be elevated a minimum of 12 inches and a u iaxirnn urn of 211 inches
above grade to ensure circulation 'beneath the coop.
10, Chicken grains and feed must be stored in rodent -proof containers.
11, No chicken may be kept or raised in a manner as to cause injury or annoyance to persons
on other property in the vicinity by reason of noise, odor, or :filth.
12. Any chicken running at large may be impounded by the city and, after being impounded
for 3 days or more without: being reclaimed by the owner, may be destroyed or sold. A.
person reclaiming any impounded chicken must pay the cost of impounding and keeping
the same.
AGRICULTURAL USE. Allowed only in AG Zone
The use of land for the growing or production of field crops, livestock, or livestock products,
including, but not limited to, the billowing
'Field crops such as barley, soy beans, corn, hay, oats, potatoes, rye, sorghum, and
sunflowers;
Livestock such as dairy and beef cattle, goats, horses, ponies, sheep, hogs, poultry, game
birds, dogs., deer, rabbits, mink, and bees; or
Livestock products such as milk, butter., cheese, eggs, meat, fur, and honey.
Page 65 of 76
Page 66 of 76
6.C.
Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals
August 8, 2024
FROM: Mark Noble, Senior Planner
TO: Board of Adjustment and Appeals
Subject:
PUBLIC HEARING - Setback Variance of ISTS from Bluff Impact Zone
Policy/Action Requested:
Approve Resolution NO PC2024-010, a resolution approving the Variance of the bluff
setback to allow an Individual Sewage Treatment System (ISTS) six (6) feet from the bluff
impact zone, where 50' is the minimum required setback per City Code.
Recommendation:
Approve the requested staff recommendation.
Discussion:
Dale Denn, Homestead Septic, applicant, and Lincoln Castle, property owner, have made
application for a variance for property located at 4935 Eagle Creek Boulevard.
VARIANCE CONSIDERATION
The applicant is proposing to construct a new Individual Sewage Treatment System (ISTS)
for the property owner at 4935 Eagle Creek Blvd., as the current septic system is failing and
the property owner is experiencing substantial backing up of their sewer.
The City, applicant, and County have spent considerable time trying to locate a new septic
system that would meet all of the criteria, with the proposed plan the best alternative that
addresses the issue and would be the most acceptable location due to the limitations from the
current system, setback limitations to their and adjacent properties wells, and the existing
bluff along the rear of the property. There are no plans by the City to install public sanitary
service lines for this or the adjacent property in the near future due to the significant distance
from an existing service. The cost to extend services and hook up to city sanitary for just this
one property would be not feasible.
Bluff is defined as a topographic feature such as a hill, cliff, or embankment with an average
Page 67 of 76
slope of more than 18% over a distance of 50 feet. The Bluff Impact Zone is defined as the
bluff and land located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff. The attached site aerial identifies
the location of the bluff on this property. The applicant has provided a concept site plan
showing what is being proposed, and a short narrative supporting this proposal.
City Planning does not feel that this replacement system will adversely affect this and the
adjacent properties. What is proposed is the least impactful option, and is generally supported
by the city and Scott County.
FINDINGS:
Section 151.015, Subd. B, of the City Code contains provisions for the granting of variances
only if all of the following circumstances are found to exist. Staff has provided draft findings
for purposes of discussion by the Board. The Board may use or modify these draft fmdings as
it sees fit, as well as propose other findings.
Criterion 1
Criterion 1
The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of
circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means
the following:
1.A. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted
by an official control; Finding 1.A. The applicant is proposing a reasonable use of the
property, in a manner that is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code
requirements. The property owner is experiencing a failing sewage system, and construction
of a replacement system that could meet all city and county requirements is not possible. The
design they are proposing is the least impactful to this and surrounding properties.
1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Finding 1.B.
The proposed replacement system in the location identified is the only option available to
them. The property is narrow and the bluff is close to the rear of the residential structure. The
well for this property and adjacent homes are in the front yard and locating this system would
in the front yard would not allow for compliance with setbacks to the wells.
1.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Finding 1.C. The landowner did
not create this situation. They are only dealing with how to install a new system
that minimizes impacts on adjacent properties and the bluff impact zone.
1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Finding
1.D. The variance will not alter the character of the area as the replacement system will
generally be in the same location as the existing failing system, albeit slightly closer to the
bluff impact zone.
Page 68 of 76
1.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not
constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the
ordinance. Finding 1.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. They include
physical limiting considerations.
Criterion 2:
It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the chapter.
Finding 2 The proposed variance would be in hatuiony with the general purpose and intent of
Chapter 151 (Zoning).
Criterion 3
The request is not for a use variance.
Finding 3: The request is not a use variance.
Criterion 4
Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance to
protect the adjacent
properties.
Finding 4: Should the Board support this request, they should provide conditions that would
ensure some foriii of protection of the adjacent properties.
Criterion 5
Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet additional criteria:
Finding 5: (Not applicable since the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone.)
ATTACHMENTS:
• Resolution PC2024-010
• Narrative
• Septic Drawing
• Site Aerial
Page 69 of 76
RESOLUTION NO. PC2024-010
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, APPROVING A
VARIANCE REQUEST TO CITY CODE SECTIONS 54.15.C.8 AND 151.007.J.4.M
FOR PROPERTY AT 4935 EAGLE CREEK BOULEVARD.
WHEREAS, Dale Denn, Homestead Septic, applicant, and Lincoln Castle, property
owner, have made application for a Variance of the bluff setback to allow an Individual Sewage
Treatment System (ISTS) six (6) feet from the bluff impact zone, where 50' is the minimum
required setback per City Code; and
WHEREAS, the property upon which the requests are being made is legally described
as:
East 100 feet of the West 825 feet of Section 15, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing for the application
were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity
to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Shakopee did review
the application on August 8, 2024 and adopted the following findings:
Findings for the Variance Request to City Code Sections 54.15.C.8 and 151.007.J.4.M.:
Criterion 1
The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of
circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship
means the following:
1.A. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by an official control;
Finding I.A. The applicant is proposing a reasonable use of the property, in a manner that is
consistent with the spirit and intent of the City Code requirements. The property owner is
experiencing a failing sewage system, and construction of a replacement system that could meet
all city and county requirements is not possible. The design they are proposing is the least
impactful to this and surrounding properties.
1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property;
Finding 1.B. The proposed replacement system in the location identified is the only option
available to them. The property is narrow and the bluff is close to the rear of the residential
structure. The well for this property and adjacent homes are in the front yard and locating this
system would in the front yard would not allow for compliance with setbacks to the wells.
1.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner;
Finding 1.C. The landowner did not create this situation. They are only dealing with how to
install a new system that minimizes impacts on adjacent properties and the bluff impact zone.
Page 70 of 76
1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and
Finding 1.D. The variance will not alter the character of the area as the replacement system
will generally be in the same location as the existing failing system, albeit slightly closer to the
bluff impact zone.
1.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do
not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms
of the ordinance.
Finding I.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. They include physical
limiting considerations.
Criterion 2:
It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the chapter.
Finding 2 The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent
of Chapter 151 (Zoning).
Criterion 3
The request is not for a use variance.
Finding 3: The request is not a use variance.
Criterion 4
Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance
to protect the adjacent properties.
Finding 4: Should the Board support this request, they should provide conditions that would
ensure some form of protection of the adjacent properties.
Criterion 5
Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet additional criteria:
Finding 5: (Not applicable since the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone.)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND
APPEALS OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS:
That the variance to City Code Sections 54.15.C.8 and 151.007.J.4.M is hereby approved,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The design of the proposed replacement ISTS shall be similar to the plan submitted,
and subject to final review/approval by the City and Scott County at time of building
permit.
2. A certified land survey shall be required at time of building permit to ensure the
setbacks proposed are met.
3. Obtain a grading permit prior to ground disturbance.
4. Install tree protection fencing at the drip line of all trees proposed to be protected, and
install erosion control fencing at perimeter of project to ensure minimal erosion and
ground disturbance of the bluff impact zone.
Page 71 of 76
Adopted in the regular session of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held the 8th day of August, 2024.
Chairperson,
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
ATTEST:
Michael Kerski,
Director of Planning and Development
PREPARED BY:
City of Shakopee
485 Gorman Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
Page 72 of 76
Mark Noble
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mark,
Dale Denn <Homesteadseptic@outlook.com>
Monday, June 24, 2024 1:23 PM
Mark Noble
4935 Eagle Creek Road Detailed Septic Drawing
4935 Eagle Creek Blvd - Detailed Septic Drawing.pdf
Here is both an aerial shot with contours for accuracy and a fairly detailed, scaled, and accurate
drawing of the proposed septic Mound and Tanks for this property.
As can be seen, the lot is narrow and the bluff and unusable soil take up most of the lot in the
back. The well is in the front and the setback leaves no room to work with in the front. The siting of
the Mound is absolute and has no other options or wiggle room. The number of bedrooms is being
reduced from 5 to 4 to even get this system in and meet property line setbacks.
Please review at your convenience and contact me to discuss what action is needed out of your
department.
Thanks,
Dale Denn
HomeStead Septic
612-310-7887
1
Page 73 of 76
046 Poo 725
A
Page 74 of 76
Page 75 of 76
nyti
\ /
�
\
\ ` e':
�$