Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Backyard Chickens topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Prospect Heights staff proposes permit, 20-bird cap and annual checks for backyard chickens; residents push back
Summary
City staff outlined a draft zoning amendment to allow chickens as an accessory use in R-1 yards — proposing registration, a 200 sq ft coop limit, a 20-bird cap, annual inspections and modest fees — prompting residents to urge fewer restrictions and more education; the hearing was continued to Sept. 25 for redrafting.
Prospect Heights city staff on June 26 proposed an ordinance to formally allow backyard chickens in single-family (R-1) yards with permits, registration and defined limits, sparking hours of public comment and prompting the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals to continue the hearing to Sept. 25.
Dan Peterson, the city’s director of building and development, told the board the zoning code currently does not define backyard poultry, so the draft would add definitions and procedures "to make sure that proper decorum and that everyone is heard" and to create a public record of evidence and testimony. Peterson said the draft would require property owners to register with the Illinois Department of Agriculture, obtain building and zoning permits before adding a coop, and submit to an initial inspection and annual zoning checks. Under the draft, "20 heads shall be permitted regardless of the lot size," coops and runs would count toward existing accessory-structure limits (a 200-square-foot maximum for a primary accessory structure), and sale or on-site slaughtering of birds would be restricted. Peterson also proposed a one-year compliance window for existing, nonconforming coops and a nominal fee structure (a $50 plan-review/building fee and a $40 zoning-review fee, then $40 annually).
Why it matters: The draft attempts to reconcile the city’s zoning code, floodplain and health rules and to give residents clear standards for where coops and runs can be sited. Peterson said the changes are intended to protect floodplain integrity and the city’s FEMA community-rating status while giving longtime chicken keepers a path to compliance.
Residents who raised their hands to speak were sharply split. Grace Martinez, who identified herself as a chicken owner, urged the board to rethink annual inspections and warned of biosecurity implications: "Chickens carry diseases that can affect other chickens. They don't affect people," she said, adding that annual inspections could require biosecurity steps that make five-minute inspections impractical. Several speakers said the proposed ban on selling eggs or slaughtering on-site leaves owners with no lawful way to manage unexpected surplus birds.
Other longtime keepers said the draft is overly prescriptive. "I slaughtered 50 chickens. I did not sell them," said Randall Brace, urging the board to avoid rules that would penalize customary backyard use. Supporters of a lighter-touch approach proposed a volunteer community chicken board to provide education and mediation rather than broad enforcement.
Commissioners pressed staff on several technical points: how the 20-bird cap relates to accessory-structure math; how the accessory-structure maximums (one 200-sq.-ft. structure plus smaller structures) could limit practical coop size; and how the city could enforce rooster noise and smell complaints, which were raised as public nuisances. Commissioner Patel summarized a common worry: early-morning rooster crowing that could disturb neighbors; other commissioners asked whether a complaint-based, "three-strikes" approach might be more workable than routine annual checks.
Peterson acknowledged the draft is an initial proposal and recommended additional stakeholder work. Because several commissioners said the ordinance needs substantive revisions, the applicant asked to continue the hearing. The board voted to reopen and continue the public hearing to Sept. 25 to allow staff time to revise the draft and to work with both chicken owners and other residents.
What happens next: Staff will revise the draft ordinance with input from residents and commissioners and return to the PCBA on Sept. 25. If the board adopts a recommendation, the item will go to city council for final action. The PCBA also announced a July 16 joint meeting with the council and the city’s zoning consultant on the broader zoning-code rewrite.
Sources: Testimony and exchanges between Dan Peterson (director of building and development), Chairman Kempa and multiple residents during the June 26 PCBA public hearing on case ZBA24-01 PUD. The hearing record remains open and the board continued the matter to Sept. 25.
