Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Udo Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents push back on proposed poultry and livestock limits in UDO rewrite
Summary
Grama Hill residents told the board April 7 that proposed caps on hens, goats and sheep are too restrictive for rural properties; commissioners agreed to continue the UDO text amendment to allow more review and public input.
Residents from Grama Hill and surrounding rural areas pressed the board to revise proposed livestock limits in the Unified Development Ordinance during a public hearing on April 7, saying the draft's per‑acre caps would harm family farms and subsistence producers.
Doug Roberts, who identified himself as the operator of Rabbit Eye Farms and a nonprofit farm school, argued the proposed limits (for example, limiting small livestock totals and placing a 10‑hen cap on certain lot sizes) were ‘‘ludicrous’’ for people with multiple acres and asked the board to create clearer categories by acreage. Carolyn Langford and others described raising multiple animal types on 40‑acre parcels and said the draft's numeric caps would force long‑standing residents to sell animals or move.
Planner Ruth explained edits intended to make the UDO consistent (space dimensions, setback clarifications and segmentation of self‑storage uses) and confirmed corrections to poultry counts across different lot sizes. Commissioners said they needed more time to review the marked‑up draft, accepted public recommendations for clearer language, and voted to continue the item to a future meeting so staff can incorporate feedback and publish the revised draft online for review.
No ordinance was adopted; the board carried a motion to continue the UDO text amendment to allow additional review and public comment.
