Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 20,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Leskinen stated licensing roosters would not be practical. <br /> Gaffron noted there are a number of cities that do ban roosters. In March of this year, Shorewood totally <br /> revamped their animal regulations and they banned roosters. At that time Shorewood did a very extensive <br /> review of their ordinance and many of the things that were incorporated in their new regulations are <br /> things that Orono already has in place. Staff is not recommending that there is any need to totally change <br /> the animal ordinance. <br /> Schoenzeit stated based on the discussion at the work session, it appears that you can have a successful <br /> chicken operation without a rooster. <br /> Thiesse commented that he did have chickens that pecked themselves to death until a rooster was <br /> included with them. Thiesse stated he would like more research done on that issue. <br /> Levang asked what a successful chicken operation would be. <br /> Schoenzeit stated in his mind a steady supply of eggs and chickens to eat would be a successful operation. <br /> Gaffron asked whether roosters are necessary to lay eggs. <br /> Thiesse indicated they are not but that roosters can be necessary to protect the pecking order. <br /> Landgraver stated the City's guiding principles denote a change from a rural agricultural community to a <br /> rural residential community. <br /> Gaffron stated that statement goes back 30 to 40 years ago. In the 1960s and 1970s, Orono was more of a <br /> farming community. In 1975,the City adopted a new zoning code that established two and five acre <br /> zones. The city fathers recognized at that time that there is a difference between rural residential and <br /> rural agricultural. At the same time,they wanted people to be able to have farm animals. The statement <br /> came down to saying the rural residential takes precedent over rural agriculture for the future as the City <br /> develops,which is why it talks about sufficient acreage. Gaffron stated the City's animal regulations <br /> typically deal with the larger lots. <br /> Lemke asked what would happen with the roosters that currently exist if the City should ban them under <br /> their animal regulations. <br /> Gaffron stated Staff did discuss allowing a period of time for those animals to be phased out and that the <br /> CSO would need to work with the violators after that grace period expires. <br /> Landgraver commented it seems that the City has been gradually evolving and that this does not seem to <br /> be a zoning issue. <br /> Schoenzeit stated in his view any size property could have rooster issues. <br /> Thiesse stated this is the first complaint regarding a rooster in ten years and it revolves around a noise . <br /> issue. Since the current case is moving through the court system and a final decision has not been made <br /> yet,Thiesse indicated he does not see the need to change the City's ordinance at this time pending the <br /> outcome. <br /> Page 8 <br />