Brighton council discusses draft backyard chicken ordinance; no vote taken

The Brighton City Council discussed a draft ordinance to allow chickens on residential properties during its Aug. 12 meeting but took no vote, directing staff to return with revisions after further input.

Community development manager Mike Caruso presented the draft ordinance and said it "defines the chickens, shall not be kept in any location on property other than the rear yard as defined by section 98-2.2 of the zoning ordinance," and noted the language was drafted after council direction and legal review.

Council members focused discussion on three points: the proposed limit of four birds per property, an annual $50 permit, and an existing ordinance clause that currently requires birds be kept 200 feet from other dwellings. Councilman Reilberg said the 200-foot standard "seems unfeasible for a standard city lot," and Caruso acknowledged that the 200-foot provision is part of an older section of the municipal code that needs adjustment.

Council members asked staff for options that would: clarify and correct the 200-foot reference; consider whether the four‑chicken limit should be increased or tied to lot size; and explain whether an annual permit and $50 fee are necessary. Council member Pettengill noted that several residents already keep chickens and asked how enforcement would work; Caruso said enforcement would follow existing code-enforcement procedures and would likely be "complaint driven." He added the city recently received a complaint about an unmaintained chicken coop and that a codified ordinance would give staff a regulatory basis for follow-up.

A staff speaker identified as Sarah (staff member) said she favored keeping a permitting requirement so coops could be reviewed for proper setbacks and predator-proofing, adding that poorly constructed coops can attract raccoons, foxes and other predators.

Council members agreed not to act immediately and asked staff to return with revisions for further discussion that include alternate numeric limits (for example 4–6 birds and a lot-size scaling option), cleanup of older code language, and options for permit frequency and fees. Council member Pettengill requested the revised ordinance be brought back with the two council members who were absent at this meeting.

The council did not adopt the draft ordinance at the meeting; staff will prepare a revised draft based on direction and return it for additional council review.

Ending: Council members asked staff to prepare alternatives and additional detail — including clearer setback language, lot-size scaling for bird counts and enforcement approach — and brought the item back for a future meeting.