Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Ordinance Backyard Chickens topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bristol reviews proposed changes to rules for backyard chickens after resident complaints
Summary
City planner and residents discussed proposed amendments to the city’s code on agricultural uses on residential property, including reducing setbacks, creating a permit and annual fee, and giving the zoning administrator authority to require screening and inspect coops. No vote was taken; the item was heard as a public hearing.
Bristol city staff and residents discussed proposed amendments to Section 50-136 of the city code governing agricultural uses on residential lots, including backyard chickens, during a joint public hearing on Feb. 25.
City planner June McElwam said staff began reviewing the ordinance after multiple complaints in mid‑2024 that started as noise reports involving roosters and expanded into zoning appeals because the current text required a 100‑foot setback from every adjoining property line. McElwam told council that the 100‑foot property‑line requirement was impractical in Bristol because most residential lots are narrower than that and would effectively bar chickens citywide.
McElwam outlined staff recommendations: replace the current R‑district references (R‑1A, R‑1 and R‑2) with a rule applying to single‑family residential lots; reduce the required distance from an adjoining property line to 10 feet and require 25 feet from the nearest non‑owner‑occupied structure; allow the zoning administrator to inspect properties on complaint; require a one‑time permit fee and a recurring annual fee; and give the zoning administrator authority to add conditions such as screening or fencing to reduce impacts on neighbors. The proposed permit fee was listed as $100 initially with a $25 annual renewal in staff materials.
Resident Stephanie Scalp, who identified herself as a Buckner Street homeowner, said she keeps a “couple chickens” and asked that the city shorten the setback so more families could keep chickens for pets and eggs. Scalp said the animals teach responsibility and that she supported rules addressing roosters and cleanliness rather than broad prohibitions.
Councilmembers asked staff how nearby jurisdictions regulate backyard chickens. McElwam said Tri‑Cities jurisdictions require permits with varying setbacks, and that in her research the common range was 10 to 25 feet. She estimated, based on calls and public inquiries, “maybe 50 to 60 properties” in Bristol have chickens, but called that a rough estimate. Several councilmembers urged a modest initial permit fee so residents would comply; one councilmember suggested lowering the first‑year fee so cost‑sensitive households would not be deterred from registering.
McElwam said the proposed permitting and annual fee would allow the city to track properties, reduce repeated zoning‑violation visits, and provide a mechanism for periodic reviews. She noted roosters were a separate enforcement issue and that staff did not recommend changing the rules about roosters at this time.
The council closed the public hearing later in the meeting; no ordinance changes were adopted that night and no final vote was taken. Staff signaled the draft would return for further action after the public‑hearing process and suggested the council appoint a subcommittee to review recommended permit details if needed.
Ending: Councilmembers asked staff to consider lowering the initial permit fee to encourage compliance and to return with a formal ordinance amendment after the public‑comment period and internal review.
