Oakmont considers food‑truck rules, backyard chickens and beekeeping and a revised parking ordinance after court challenges

Oakmont Borough Council on Feb. 4 reviewed three draft ordinances from the Planning Commission and heard public concerns about traffic safety and ongoing litigation over a prior parking ordinance.

Planning staff summarized the three drafts: a food‑truck ordinance that would allow mobile food facilities by permit with proof of required inspections and insurance (hours proposed 6 a.m.–10 p.m. commercial; 10 a.m.–10 p.m. in residential areas), a combined backyard‑agriculture ordinance allowing up to six chickens on lots of at least 4,000 square feet and limited beekeeping on larger lots (20,000–40,000 sq. ft., with flyway barriers and water sources), and a reworked commercial parking ordinance intended to correct the Commonwealth Court's equal‑protection ruling by treating existing conditional‑use owners the same as new applicants and by making on‑street parking credits contingent on a traffic study.

Thomas Bre, speaking for business owner John Keef, urged the council not to proceed without consulting traffic experts and emphasized that the prior ordinance was already litigated through zoning and common‑pleas courts and to the Commonwealth Court. “We provided expert testimony ... the Commonwealth Court said you enacted an ordinance in violation of the law,” Bre said, and he urged council to review updated letters and not re‑adopt changes without a traffic study.

Council members debated technical and enforcement issues, particularly around bees. Several council members and staff said beekeeping enforcement is difficult to police (how to prove a particular hive caused a complaint) and that chicken‑coop setbacks and height limits may affect residents with unconventional lot layouts. Multiple members suggested separating the chickens and bees into standalone ordinances and consulting additional subject‑matter experts before advertising the measure.

Planning staff said the ordinances can be advertised as early as March with public hearings and potential adoption in April, but that the council could take more time and return changes to the Planning Commission if necessary.

Christy Bodner's letter about school‑zone safety at Third and Halton was also read during the meeting; she requested accident and citation data and stronger enforcement for barriers and crossing guards to protect children. Council and police staff said a meeting will be set with PennDOT traffic engineers to pursue possible signal or geometry changes and that state law currently limits local police from using radar enforcement.

Next steps: council members asked for more time and additional expert input on the chickens/bees draft, confirmed a public‑notice and hearing timeline for the ordinances, and directed staff to coordinate the PennDOT meeting and follow up on traffic‑safety requests and data.