Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bradenton adopts backyard‑chicken rules: four hens, no roosters, 25‑foot setback and solid fence required
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing, the Bradenton City Council approved Ordinance 4058 to allow up to four hens on residential lots with a permitting process retained, a 25‑foot setback from adjacent dwellings, and a six‑foot solid fence installed flush with grade; the vote was 4‑1.
The Bradenton City Council narrowly approved Ordinance 4058 on March 26, changing the city code to allow residents to keep a limited number of backyard chickens. The measure passed 4‑1 after hours of public comment and debate over enforcement, noise and impacts in the city’s denser neighborhoods.
The council’s decision: the ordinance as adopted permits up to four hens per residential property, prohibits roosters, requires a permitting process, mandates a minimum 25‑foot separation from any adjacent residential dwelling and requires a six‑foot solid enclosure (fence or wall) installed flush with grade around the yard portion containing the coop and run. The council rejected a motion to delete the permitting requirement; it adopted the other amendments and removed a veterinary‑proof requirement that had appeared in earlier drafts.
Why it matters: council members and staff said the city’s higher density compared with the county and existing drainage easements and flood‑prone lots make placement and enforcement more complicated. "If there's a permit, we have legal authority to inspect conditions of that permit; without it enforcement relies on neighbor evidence and potential special magistrate hearings," said Robin Singer, the city’s planning and community development director.
What the public said: opponents presented video and photographs and described daily noise, feathers and fecal debris entering yards and pools during storms. "The 6‑foot fence won’t stop feces from flooding under the fence unless it’s installed flush with grade," said Sarah Johnston, a neighbor who opposed the change. Patrick Penousek, another opponent, said the draft lacked a 25‑foot dwelling‑to‑coop separation used by county rules.
Staff and code enforcement said permitting improves the city’s ability to ensure compliance. Falko Royce, the city compliance manager, told council that most chicken complaints had been complaint‑driven and that the city cannot enter private property without permission or a warrant; a permit would provide the legal basis to inspect permitted coops for compliance with permit terms.
Council discussion centered on balancing equity and neighborhood impacts. Supporters said the change would let more residents comply rather than violate the current ban and would help attract younger households who favor small‑scale urban agriculture. Opponents pointed to enforcement challenges and the potential for noise, odor and health concerns in close‑in neighborhoods.
Vote and next steps: Vice Mayor Kramer moved adoption with the amendments; Councilmember Coachman seconded. The ordinance passed 4‑1 (Ward 2 recorded the lone no vote). Staff said the ordinance will be codified and the permitting process and inspection workflow will be finalized for public use.
