Woodbury City Council — Transcript
Monday, September 28, 2026
Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendments
USS Mer Solar Interim Conditional Use Permit
Votes (2)
Keeping of Chickens Ordinance Amendments for Chapter 5 and Chapter 24 of the U. City code
Dissent: Commissioner Guzig expressed dissent, arguing that existing nuisance laws adequately address concerns regardless of the number of hens and that requesting more survey data might not yield different answers.
Moved by Commissioner Kennedy [1:05:46] · Seconded by Commissioner Swanson [1:05:59]
The discussion centered on proposed ordinance amendments to allow chickens on all single-family detached properties, particularly addressing R4 zones. Staff presented data on community support (49% in 2026 survey, up from 36% in 2024) and outlined permit requirements, coop/run standards, and enforcement via complaint-based system and nuisance ordinances. Public speakers from a community group shared experiences and best practices. Commissioners raised concerns about the number of chickens (six max), suitable coop/run sizes for smaller R4 lots, the invasiveness of city inspections, and the lack of explicit provisions for disease control like bird flu. A proposal for a 'Voluntary Premise ID' for disease tracking was discussed. Some commissioners felt the city was premature in expanding allowances given the split public opinion and potential for neighborhood conflicts.
USS Mer Solar Interim Conditional Use Permit
Dissent: None
Moved by Commissioner Guzig [1:59:11] · Seconded by Commissioner Gentiel [1:59:14]
The proposal by US Solar for a 27-acre community solar garden was presented, emphasizing extensive visual screening through berms, trees (202 coniferous, 174 shrubs), and native grasses, as well as retaining existing trees. The applicant highlighted Woodbury's existing subscription with US Solar and potential savings for residents. Concerns were raised by the applicant regarding specific permit conditions, particularly Condition 7, which allows permit termination if zoning changes, as it impacts financial viability. Staff committed to working with the applicant to address these concerns before the city council meeting. Commissioners discussed the nature of interim conditional use permits (annual review and inspection), the long-term maintenance responsibility, and the benefits of community solar for subscribers.
Notable Quotes (12)
This evaluation occurred in 2025 with no issues identified. Based on this information, council identified the need to gather community input through the 2026 survey. This survey showed that 49% of residents would somewhat or strongly approve the keeping of chickens on standard residential lots, which is up from 36% in the 2024 survey.
We've been so grateful to be working with the city on this. It's been really, really wonderful to be collaborative because I feel like our group has a lot of knowledge and we can help this process along um to be good for the people and the residents of Woodbury whether you have chickens or don't have chickens or want them or don't um and also for the health and safety of the chickens um when we are here.
It bothers me that we're treating our four lots like our two lots with this chicken ordinance. I think six chickens is too much because you're talking about the exact same amount of chickens as an R2 lot, which just doesn't make sense to me. It's, let's do that math. Uh, four, it's 12 times bigger. An R2 lot is 12 times bigger than an R4 lot. I don't think you should be allowed to have the same number of chickens on an R2 versus an R4 lot.
Based on our research many other communities as Samantha uh will stated that are between four and six. I want to be clear that that is the maximum. Uh as we were studying this anecdotally they I have also read that they als they produce an egg a day and if you have six that's that could be 42 eggs and personally for me I wouldn't be able to keep up with that. So maybe I would only get two chickens because that is how you would do it. It is identified to be the maximum.
I would say that we have regular occurrence of city staff entering pro homes uh inspections services certainly uh we do thousands of inspections per year going into homes. ... This is just verifying that the conditions are met for the permit that they've applied for.
I voted no because I would recommend denial. I'm um I think it changes the the neighborhood. I think it changes it. It's a change that cannot be undone at this point. I think it's um in advance of what is would be clearly stated as preference from the the citizens.
I am concerned with some of the conditions that were proposed and um I know we've talked about this a bit and we've decided to talk about some of those condition issues more tomorrow um because some of these just will make this project unfinancable and therefore not feasible. Um, specifically among those is number seven... these are expensive projects to build and if there is any possibility that they will be removed before their 25 or 30 year lifespan, they just won't get built.
Yeah. Uh chair, generally the interim can use use permit should be viewed as a zoning permit that is granted for one year at a time. And so as long as a property is in conformance with all of the standards that are identified within the conditions and other regulatory environments within the city, they should be continued.
I was just looking at the the conditions that we circled and a lot of them seem to do with deal with the landscape and putting up securities for landscaping and the timing of landscaping. For me, the landscaping is what made me really like this project. So I I just want uh everybody to keep an open mind about these conditions as you guys are working through those.
Basically the subscription facilitates the construction of green infrastructure. So it's facilitating a portion of this project. It's not necessarily the subscriber isn't securing clean energy for their use. It's addressing this the city of Woodbury uses X amount of energy. It's increasing the percentage of which is a renewable source.
Our preference is always burming. One of the dialogues that occurred with the applicant is on the long-term maintenance of that. So we couldn't push the burm higher because from a staff standpoint, we were not comfortable with those side slopes from a long-term maintenance standpoint. So we started to compete with what issues we we were solving maybe a visual but we were decreasing the overall maintainability.
It does on the landscaping it does on any sort of noxious weeds um inoperable commercial equipment needs to be removed or equipment needs to be removed on the property maintenance code. This is also layered in with some um conditions regarding the city's ability to abate the uh if there is a violation. So the city can go in and abate and then assess for the removal of the of the project costs and that's a little bit unique um on this item that is in under condition of approval number six.
Ordinances & Resolutions (14)
Portion of Woodbury city code proposed for amendment regarding chicken keeping regulations.
Portion of Woodbury city code proposed for amendment regarding coop and run standards.
Community input survey showing resident approval for chicken keeping.
Earlier community input survey on chicken keeping, used for comparison.
Guiding document supporting environmental stewardship goals.
City plan adopted in 2024, with a chapter on food and agriculture, supporting local food production.
City ordinance governing nuisance conditions, applicable to chicken keeping.
Specific section of city code detailing coop material requirements.
A proposed requirement for the chicken keeping permit to assist with disease tracking.
Identification number for the Keeping of Chickens ordinance amendment project.
Type of permit required for the USS Mer Solar project due to its size and nature.
Identification number for the USS Mer Solar project.
Adopted city plan identifying properties not to be served by municipal utilities until after 2040.
Legal document to be executed, allowing the city to abate costs for project removal if necessary.