Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Chickens topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff advances draft urban-chicken rules that would limit coops to single‑family lots with council approval
Summary
City staff reviewed a draft ordinance limiting backyard chickens to single‑family residences and zero‑lot‑line duplexes with council approval, proposed an annual nontransferable permit and inspection authority, and flagged questions about setbacks, required classes and zoning/variance processes.
Get email alerts on the Urban Chickens topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A staff member presented a draft urban‑chicken ordinance and asked the committee for guidance on several provisions, including which property types should be eligible and how the city should enforce setbacks and inspections.
The draft — drawn in part from a model sent by Doug Irwin — would allow chickens on single‑family residences and zero‑lot‑line duplexes only with council approval, and it would require applicants in constrained lots to supply landlord or adjacent‑owner consent. The ordinance would require an annual permit that is not transferable with the land, give city staff the right to inspect permitted coops if complaints arise, and ban on‑site slaughtering: “You can’t kill your chickens in the backyard,” a staff member said.
Councilors and staff discussed whether the ordinance should require banding or other identification of birds, whether to retain a mandatory educational class for poultry keepers (one draft line proposed requiring completion of a course offered by the extension office) and whether some situations should be handled through zoning or a variance process rather than council action. One council member urged that the education requirement be removed as overly burdensome; staff said the provision could be struck during redrafting.
Staff recommended refining the draft, coordinating with Doug for a final review, and then bringing a cleaned version to a regular council meeting for formal consideration. The committee generally supported continued work on the draft but asked staff to clarify the variance/zoning implications and enforcement details before the ordinance returns for action.
The committee did not take a final vote on the ordinance at the special meeting; staff will return with a revised draft and legal/zoning guidance.

