HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 06/03/2008 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 072, 2008, AMENDING ITEM NUMBER: 29
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: June 3, 2008
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Ted Shepard
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 072, 2008, Amending Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code
Pertaining to the Definition of Farm Animals and Amending Section 4-117 of the City Code
Pertaining to Chickens.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
On May 15, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Board considered the proposed Text Amendment and
voted 5 —2 to recommend approval.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a citizen-initiated request for a Text Amendment to the Land Use Code. The proposal would
amend Section 5.1.2 which is the definition of"Farm Animals." The effect of the change would
allow up to six chicken hens in all zones of the City. Chickens are presently included in the
definition and,therefore,are allowed only in the zones which allow Farm Animals(RUL,UE,RF).
BACKGROUND
The Land Use Code allows for a Text Amendment to be initiated by a citizen. Presently,chickens
are allowed in the RUL, UE and RF zones, with no restrictions. The request would broaden the
allowance to all zones,but subject to limitations. These restrictions would apply to all zones except
the RUL,UE and RF and be placed in the Animal Control section of the City Code. The limitations
would require that only chicken hens be allowed,with a limit of six. Roosters would be prohibited.
Further,chicken hens must be contained within a secured enclosure at least 15 feet from all property
lines. Finally, no slaughtering would be permitted.
• Larimer County Humane Society
As with all aspects of animal control within the City, the Larimer County Humane Society would
be charged with enforcement. The L.C.H.S. has indicated it has no problem with the proposal.
June 3, 2008 -2- Item No. 29
• City of Fort Collins Police Department
The Police Department opposes the revision due to concerns with disease, noise and the incursion
of non-urban pets.
• Staff Evaluation
Staff has worked with the applicant and researched other cities to find a reasonable compromise that
would allow the responsible raising of chicken hens and yet protect the peace and quiet of residential
neighborhoods. Amending the definition of Farm Animals in the Land Use Code would address the
land use issue.
The enforcement issue,however,is covered under the Animal Control section of the City Code. The
City of Fort Collins Police Department contracts out animal control services to the Larimer County
Humane Society which would have primary responsibility for responding to any complaints
regarding chicken hens in neighborhoods. Based on input from these enforcement agencies,
additional restrictions with regard to chicken hens are added as an amendment to Section 4.117 of
the City Code:
1. No more than six chicken hens may be allowed and only for the purpose of producing eggs.
2. No roosters are allowed.
3. No slaughtering is allowed.
4. Chicken hens shall be kept within a secure enclosure.
5. Enclosures shall be located at least fifteen(15) feet from the nearest property line.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes, May 15, 2008.
2. Summary of the Planning and Zoning Board Discussion, May 15, 2008.
3. Applicant's supporting documentation.
4. Letters from citizens.
5. Coloradoan article dated May 16, 2008.
6. Map of Zone Districts currently allowing chickens.
ATTACHMENT 1
Planning &Zoning Board
May 15, 2008
Page 7
Project: Text Amendment to the Land Use Code to Amend the Definition of Farm
Animal
Project Description: This is a citizen-initiated request for a Recommendation to City Council
regarding a Text Amendment to the Land Use Code. The proposal would
amend Section 5.1.2 which is the definition of"Farm Animals." The effect of the
change would allow up to six chicken hens in all zones of the City. Chickens
are presently included in the definition and, therefore, are allowed only in the
zones which allow Farm Animals (RUL, UE, RF).
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Chief City Planner Ted Shepard reported The Land Use Code allows for a Text Amendment to be
initiated by a citizen. Presently, chickens are allowed in the RUL, UE and RF zones, with no
restrictions. The request would broaden the allowance to all zones, but subject to limitations. These
restrictions would apply to all zones except the RUL, UE and RF and be placed in the Animal Control
section of the City Code. The limitations would require that only chicken hens be allowed with a limit
of six. In addition, roosters would be prohibited. Further, chicken hens must be contained within a
secured enclosure at least 15 feet from all property lines. Finally, no slaughtering would be permitted.
Staff recommends approval with restrictions listed in the staff report. Enforcement would be
undertaken by the Larimer Humane Society, they are contracted by the City for animal related Code
enforcement.
Dan Brown, the citizen who initiated the text amendment to the Land Use Code, is in support of the
change of the definition of farm animals because of issues surround sustainability--local food
production and food security. He thinks hens number six or few shall be considered pets and not be
considered farm animals for the purpose of the land use code. He believes hens are viable as pets
because they are:
■ less disruptive to the public than outdoor dogs and cats
• locally raised eggs for personal consumption are a part of the sustainable lifestyle
• positive and public steps to raising urban hens has taken place in places such as Seattle, WA,
Portland, OR, Cedar Falls, IA, Missoula, MT, and Madison, WI
The only impediment to allowing the raising of urban hens in the City of Fort Collins is the wording of
the Land Use Code definition of farm animals. He seeks the Board's support in changing the text.
Member Smith moved to approve the Land Use Code definition of farm animals including the
restrictions listed on page 2 of the staff report. Member Wetzler seconded the motion.
Motion was approved 5:2 with Members Campana and Lingle dissenting.
ATTACHMENT
SUMMARY OF P & Z DISCUSSION
AMENDING DEFINITION OF FARM ANIMALS
At the conclusion of the applicant's presentation, the Board asked the applicant,
Mr. Dan Brown, several questions. These questions, answers and the Boards'
discussion are summarized below.
1. Board Question: How long do chicken hens live?
Applicant Response: Approximately seven to ten years.
2. Question: How long will hens lay eggs?
Response: Approximately five years.
3. Question: How do you dispose of chickens upon death?
Response: Cremation.
4. Question: How do we as a Board guard against setting a precedent for
allowing other farm animals in the City? How do we respond to folks who
want to bring, for example, goats and cows into the urban area?
Response: Advocates for goats and cows would have to go through the
same process as advocates for chicken hens. The Board would then
have the opportunity to evaluate and debate the request, just as you are
doing now. We think there are distinct and different aspects with goats
and cows that could justify the Board not allowing them in the urban area
and that you are not setting a precedent by allowing chicken hens.
5. Question: You mentioned in your presentation that Fort Collins has
historically allowed chicken hens. But, we are not living in historic times
we are living in modern times.
Response: Yes, that is true. That is why the prohibition on roosters and
the maximum number of six and no slaughtering are acceptable
restrictions.
6. Question: How do you care for chickens in the winter?
Response: In the winter, chickens need proper care. This includes
providing a heat source to the chicken coop and keeping the water fresh.
The coop needs a roof for snow and wind protection. The enclosure,
outside the coop, does not need to be heated.
7. Question: Do enclosures need to be large?
Response: No, hens do not need a lot of space.
8. Question: What about odor?
Response: There should be no odor if properly cared for.
9. Could chickens be placed in a community garden of a subdivision?
Response: Yes, if permitted by the homeowners' association but we do
not recommend this approach. Our preference is that chicken hens be the
responsibility of one household so a personal attachment is attained. This
reinforces the pet aspect of owning and caring for chicken hens.
10. Could H.O.A.'s establish minimum standards for chicken coops and
enclosures?
Response: Yes, chicken hens would not be covered under City Code
Sections 12-120, 12-121 and 12-122. These sections prohibit an H.O.A.
from restricting solar collectors, compost bins, clotheslines and xeriscape
landscaping.
End of Board Questions
Citizen Input
1. First Speaker: I support the Text Amendment. Chicken hens are legal
in Loveland. Chicken hens are unobtrusive and not as loud as dogs.
Chickens survive our winters.
2. Second Speaker: I also support the Text Amendment. I live in the
County and have chickens. We have insulated our roost and our
chickens have survived the winter. The biggest challenge in the winter
is to provide fresh water otherwise, the water will freeze. Chickens are
quiet after dark and they are great for kids. They do not bark at night
like some dogs.
End of Citizen Input
Board Discussion
Member Smith: I move to approve the Text Amendment.
Member Wetzler: Second.
Member Lingle: I will not be supporting the motion. I see in the Staff Report
where the Police Department is also opposed. I am opposed for the same
reasons.
Member Schmidt: It is good that we are prohibiting roosters. Regarding the size
of the enclosures, I have seen children's play structures that are as big as or
bigger than a chicken enclosure. I will be supporting the motion.
Member Lingle: I am concerned about setting a precedent. How will we address
the next request? The rationale that we are using for chicken hens could be the
same rationale for larger farm animals.
Member Stockover: I don't think that by approving this measure, it will lead to a
lot of chicken coops for the simple reason that raising chickens is a lot of work.
In fact, I think most folks will find that raising chickens is too much work and does
not offer sufficient payback in egg production.
Member Rollins: I will be supporting the motion. Yes, raising chicken hens is a
lot of work but the eggs are great. Folks need to know, however, that raising
chicken hens will attract predators through the neighborhood. I think that with
anything else that is new, there will be growing pains. For example, some folks
may try their hand at raising chicken hens and find that it is not for them. I have
chickens (in the County) and it takes a lot of determination. There will be a
learning experience for folks trying it for the first time.
Member Campana: I will not be supporting the motion. It's a simple matter of
compatibility. Chicken hens are not compatible in the urban area. Folks need to
know that raising chickens is not protected by Sections 12-120 — 12-122 of the
City Code and that a H.O.A. can prohibit chickens.
End of Board Discussion
Vote
The Board voted 5 —2 to approve the Text Amendment.
ATTACHMENT3
Supporting Documentation for the Proposed Text Amendment for Definition of
Farm Animals
Given the current climate of awareness of the issues surrounding local food production,
food security, and sustainability, I would like to offer the following proposal to amend
Section 5.1.2 of the Fort Collins City Land Use Code definition of farm animals to
include the following:
Hens numbering six (6) or fewer shall be considered pets and not be considered farm
animals for the purpose of the city land use code.
Whereas responsibly raised hens in an urban setting are less disruptive to the public than
outdoor dogs and cats (1) (2) (3), and
whereas locally raised eggs for personal consumption are a part of the sustainable
lifestyle promoted by the Fort CollinsBelleview based Rocky Mountain Sustainable
Living Association, the Northern Colorado Local Living Economy Project, and
whereas there have been positive and public steps taken toward the responsible raising of
urban hens in such cities as Seattle,WA (4); Portland, OR (5); Cedar Falls, IA (6);
Missoula, MT(7); and Madison, WI(8), and
whereas allowing the raising of urban hens would fit well within the Fort Collins City
Plan values of Sustainability, Choices, Fairness, and Fulfillment, and
whereas in 2000 the Sondburg House Chicken Coop was granted Historic Landmark
designation by the city of Fort Collins (9) for its representation of the property's early
history, thus showing a long-standing tradition of urban chicken raising in Fort Collins,
and
whereas the only impediment to allowing the urban raising of hens in the city of Fort
Collins is in the wording of the Land Use Code definitions,
Be it proposed that the Fort Collins Land Use Code definitions be amended to include the
following:
Hens numbering six (6) or fewer shall be considered pets and not be considered farm
animals for the purpose of the city land use code.
(1) U.S. Humane Society reports that 4.7 million Americans, mostly children, are bitten
by dogs.
http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet care/do(z care/stav doe bite free/questions and answers
about dos bites/
(2)The American Bird Conservancy reports that domestic cats can have a significant
negative affect on native wildlife populations, including songbirds.
http://www.abcbirds.orJabci)rograms/policv/cats/materials/oredation.pdf
(3) An Internet search for injuries caused by chickens resulted in no statistics. It appears
that chickens do not cause a significant number of injuries to make the news.
(4) Seattle, WA
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/pacificnw/2002/0120/cover.html
(5) Portland, OR
http://www.portlandtribune.com/features/story.php?story id=13510
http://www.2rowin g-gardens.or2/portland-gardening-resources/chickens.phhp
(6)Cedar Falls, IA
htto://www.waterloocourier.conVarticles/2006/08/28/news/top story/6755e264e43la422
862571d8004c7e08.txt
(7) Missoula, MT
http://www.newwest.net/tonic/article/urban chick raising chickens in the city/C520/L
40/
(8) Madison, WI
http://www.madcitychickens.com
ham://www.tarazod.com/filmsmadchicks.html
(9) Sondburg House chicken coop
htti)://fcizov.condcityclerk/pdf/0321 ag.odf
Ted Shepard Chickens in the City Page 1 i
ATTACHMENT
From: "GRETCHEN TASKER" <gmtasker@msn.com>
To: <tshepard@fcgov.com> p$
Date: 5/15/2008 3:28:49 PM O E(r 7 U
Subject: Chickens in the City 1vMpY t
Mr. Shepard,
I've just read that a citizen will be presenting the idea of"Chickens in the City"at tonight's planning
and zoning meeting. I would like to try and attend the meeting but on the off chance I am unable, I wanted
to state my support of chickens in Fort Collins proper.
I think if rules are stringent enough we can avoid some of the problems that might be created by
folks lacking in sense and sensibility(cock fighting, rooster noise, uncontained birds, etc.). My husband
and I garden and would love the benefits of a few chickens. I am also aware of several other gardeners
who would like to be chicken owners but are restricted by current Fort Collins zoning regulations. I
wouldn't mind paying to"register"chickens-whatever it takes! I think its a great idea and I believe you
would be surprised by the number of folks in support of such a measure.
Thanks for your time and interest,
Gretchen Tasker
gmtasker@m sn.com<ma i Ito:g mtasker@msn.com>
1201 Coulter St.
Fort Collins, Co. 80524
472-1291
CC: <asanchersprague@fcgov.com>
'Wolfe, Van -Wckem 4 G pm ccm
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY KENNETH C.WOLFE
1008 CENTREAVENUE CHERYL LEE VAN ACKERN
FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 80526 CHARLES J.CUYPERS
May 19,2008
Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
Brigitte Schmidt
Butch Stockover,
Ruth Rollins
Andy Smith
James Wetzler,
Gino Campano
David Lingle
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Reference: P&Z Welcomes Chickens
What a Dumb Idea
This is the first time a board in the City of Fort Collins has taken an action which caused
me to write to city officials and staff. When I read the Fort Collins Coloradoan on Friday, May
16,2008,which under the above referenced headline reported that the Planning and Zoning
Board voted 5 to 2 to recommend that the City Council amend the city code to permit the
keeping of chickens throughout the city, I could hardly believe my eyes. I do not know whether
the Board was wound up on adrenaline or simply does not know about the husbandry of poultry.
Clearly you do not understand the consequences which are attendant to the keeping of chickens.
It seems like a minor matter but I actually have some experience in this area. I served as
City Attorney for various communities in Nebraska for more than two decades and spent ten
years as the City Attorney for Grand Island,Nebraska during which time we organized and
operated the local code enforcement department out of my office.
Grand Island had substantial Asian and Central American immigrant communities, as
well as hundreds of residents who moved to the city from outlying small towns and farms. It
was not uncommon for our code compliance officers to respond to complaints from neighbors
about the keeping of poultry. The result was that on a regular basis the code compliance office,
health department, social services,police department, and other municipal and county agencies
were responding to complaints ranging from dust, accumulation of feces,depilated structures,
cruelty to animals, unsanitary premises, noise, smell, and just about any other annoyance you can
imagine. Perhaps the most offensive circumstance which code compliance officers and the
health department dealt with on a regular basis was the keeping of poultry in the living area of
TELEPHONE 970493-8787 FAX 970493-8788 OFFICE@WVC-LAW.COM
Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
May 19,2008
Page 2
residences. One particular circumstance which was particularly noteworthy involved an
immigrant family that had more than 30 chickens sharing the entire house, including roosting
and defecating on furnishings, appliances and kitchen counters. The mother and father found
nothing remarkable about their situation and did not feel that it was detrimental to their three
children.
In case Dan Brown and Gailmarie Kimmel overlooked anything in their presentation
allow me to comment on some of the characteristics of poultry you and the city council should
consider.
1. Poultry generally live outdoors unless confined. The news article is unclear
whether the allowed poultry must be confined indoors. A basic premise of
persons who raise poultry on other than a commercial basis, is that the birds are to
"free range;"that is,not be confined. You may think that the city can enforce
aesthetics in the raising of poultry,but I do not believe the City of Fort Collins
has enough code compliance officers to shift to that job.
2. Any vegetation in a poultry enclosure is quickly consumed. Chickens
instinctively dig holes and dust themselves. The dust blows.
3. Chickens generate a substantial amount of feces, which they deposit everywhere.
The feces quickly dries out and itself becomes dust. If anyone thinks six chickens
can make a contribution to a compost pile or that chicken owners will police the
feces regularly,you should stop kidding yourself.
4. The idea that the keeping of poultry will have any measurable effect on the waste
stream of food scraps to the landfill is so preposterous that is does not bear
comment. As for those poultry owners that elect to feed their chickens food
scraps, consider what that means—the food scraps will be deposited in an open
feeder,probably outdoors,thereby creating a food supply for flies and vermin and
a potential source for disease. Didn't this nation make a concerted effort to end
practices such as these in the late nineteenth century in order to eliminate typhus
and other infectious diseases.
5. The newspaper article mentioned that residents cannot raise chickens for
slaughter. Poultry are short lived animals so what do you propose to do with a
chicken when it ages or when it is not longer productive?
Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
May 19,2008
Page 3
6. You can buy chicks during a brief time in the spring. Many small time poultry
owners hatch their own chicks. A certain percentage of all chicks grow up to be
roosters. There will be a number of roosters that will be kept and about which
there will be complaints. Does the City of Fort Collins want to get into the"no
roosters allowed" enforcement business?
7. Janis Sanders asked, "Are we constructing something that could be an eyesore?"
I have yet to see a chicken coop or any facility other than a commercial farm that
can be characterized as anything other than an eyesore. Chicken coops in a very
short period of time acquire a patina that is unattractive.
8. Finally,there is the comment by Gailmarie Kimmel that, "We see it as a trend to
relocalizing our food production and reducing our carbon footprint." Since the
chickens are not being raised for slaughter, according to the news article,that
means the gross output of a maximized, legal chicken operation in Fort Collins
would be no more than six eggs per day. An average egg has about 75 calories,
so at best a full blown chicken operation might yield about 450 calories a day,
approximately '/4 of the dietary need of an adult. As for the carbon footprint,most
owners of poultry will have to go somewhere to buy feed. Veterinary care will
require that either the owner or the veterinarian travel. And then there is the
carbon footprint that will be created by city staff regulating chickens,responding
to complaints from neighbors,undertaking inspections for compliance, and
enforcing the code from time to time. You may draw your own conclusions
concerning the"carbon footprint"which will accompany this ordinance.
During the 21 years that I spent representing municipalities in Nebraska and working
with my colleagues in Kansas,where issues like this came up,that is practicing agriculture in
town,the clear majority view in virtually every instance was that citizens,officials, and staff
were desirous of moving animal husbandry and farming operations outside their city;whether
that included cattle feeding, dairy operations,poultry, llamas,pigs, sheep, goats, elk, and you-
name-it.
Without question there are places within the corporate limits of most municipalities,
including Fort Collins,where the location and historical use of a property makes it suitable for
some agricultural activities. On the other hand as I understand the matter,this ordinance
proposes to permit on a citywide basis and in locations that are for the most part entirely
unsuitable,an activity that you cannot effectively regulate and which will surely prove to be an
annoyance, if not a health threat,to many people. If you look back at the history of Fort Collins
Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
May 19,2008
Page 4
it is likely that you will find that at some point years ago,a policy decision was made to
eliminate the raising of poultry in back yards. I still find it hard to believe that there were 5
members out of 7 on the Planning and Zoning Board that voted for this.
Sincerely yours,
��� 44V-
Charles J.Cuypers
CJC:js
PC: Mayor Doug Hutchinson
Ben Manvel,Council Member
Lisa Poppaw,Council Member
Diggs Brown,Council Member
Wade Troxell,Council Member
Kelly Ohlson, Council Member
David Roy, Council Member
Cameron Gloss,Planning and Zoning Director
Ted Shepard,Chief Planner
1
May 27, 2008
Fort Collins City Council
Mayor Hutchinson
Reference: Charles J. Cuypers Letter Regarding Keeping Urban Chickens
In response to local attorney Charles J. Cuypers' recent letter to the Planning and Zoning Board and the City
Council, I'm responding on behalf of chickens,people who keep chickens, and people who want a
sustainable, self-reliant community.
The Planning and Zoning Board recently voted 5-2 recommending the City Council amend the city code to
permit the keeping of six chicken hens for egg-laying purposes. After months of work by citizens to bring the
issue this far, the City Council will soon decide whether or not they believe it is a good idea. As a keeper of
egg-laying chickens myself(don't worry, I live outside of city limits!), I'll offer up my opinion on what Mr.
Cuypers believes is a bad idea for the city of Fort Collins. Even though I am unaffected in some ways by the
outcome of your decision, I do think having the option to keep chickens is the sign of a thoughtful and
involved government—and if I lived within city limits, as I might someday, I would want the option to keep
chicken hens for egg-laying purposes. Cities as diverse as New York City, NY and Madison,WI allow
chickens within city limits because they recognize the value in allowing residents to keep chickens. In his
letter dated May 19, 2008, among other alarmist rhetoric, Mr. Cuypers basically states that:
1. Humans cannot be trusted to police animals they keep.
2. All chicken coops are an eyesore.
3. The keeping of chickens in our backyards will lead us back to the 19f century, and will lead to typhus
and other infectious diseases.
4. That chicken hen owners will have no idea what to do with dead chickens.
5. It is pointless to raise one's own eggs,and there is no reason to try to reduce one's own carbon
footprint by being more self-reliant and more intimate with where one's own food comes from.
Granted, I am horribly biased toward anything that connects humans with the actual world, and with anything
that shows the pleasures and realities of our local food systems. I am a writer, not an attorney, so please
2
understand that I am equipped with an entirely different set of linguistic skills than Mr. Cuypers. Here are my
responses to some of the points he raises:
1. A large percentage of humans keep animals as pets in city limits—dogs,cats, snakes, birds, etc.There
are unwritten rules and enforced laws in place that govern the keeping of these animals. None of
these animals provide food for the body,but they do provide love, affection, and companionship, so
we as a society have become accustomed to the realities of dogs barking at all hours of the day and
night,cats endlessly killing wild song birds, and the occasional snake that gets away from its owner.
Why do we not trust humans that keep chickens, especially when the chickens provide a valuable and
healthy service?
2. I have built a few chicken coops that are not eyesores, and even when using recycled materials, the
coops are functional and pleasing to look at. I can say the same for many other chicken coops built
by friends. Mr. Cuypers must not be looking at the right coops.
3. When chickens are kept with carp and attention, the risk for disease is minimal. The Center for
Disease Control's website clearly states that backyard chicken flocks are not a threat.With
each animal kept by humans there are different things to be careful of and chickens are no different.
This is similar to when a pregnant woman is warned not to clean-up the litter box of a cat. This is an
educational problem, not an absolute statement that humans should be scared of keeping chickens.
4. All animals die. All people die. We don't see humans throwing dead cats and dogs into the streets,
and we will not see humans throwing dead chickens into the streets. Mr. Cuypers somehow makes
the connection that people who want to keep and raise chickens are barbarians that will not be able
to figure out what to do with a dead chicken.
5. Some people have not figured out that heat does not"come" from the thermostat, and that food
does not"come" from the grocery store. Re-localization efforts are flourishing here in Fort Collins,
and this amendment to the city code to allow chickens is a step in the right direction toward making
our local economy sustainable and more self-reliant. Feeding kitchen scraps to chickens is a
tremendous way to reduce household waste and divert organic waste from the landfill. Better than
sustainable, this amendment could make life more enjoyable and rich, could start to connect people
with the land and their food, and could connect neighbors with neighbors in far different ways than
any other animal. In a recent study published in the 2007 October/November issue of Mother Earth
News,eggs raised in the backyard have 1/3 less cholesterol, '/a less saturated fat, 2/3 more vitamin A,
2x more Omega-3 fatty oils, 3x more vitamin E, and 7x more beta carotene than conventional,
factory eggs. This amendment could help shift our culture toward a better future. Mr. Cuypers
believes that allowing city residents to keep chickens will not reduce our carbon footprint,but I like
to think the contrary.When chickens are kept in an urban setting such as Fort Collins, the chickens
can be looked at as an "indicator species,"in that they indicate humans who are willing to do the real
work toward creating a healthy community trying to undue decades of gross negligence in the realm
of self-reliance and land stewardship.These values are immeasurable.
Conclusion
The level of inaccurate information and alarmist rhetoric present in Mr. Cuypers' letter is tragic and sad. He
obviously is as biased as I am, although in a far different direction. I want more people to keep chickens and
to teach their children about keeping chickens. The eggs taste far better than any you can find at the grocery
3
stores. The lessons learned from keeping chickens far outweigh the work needed to keep them, and the doors
they can open to learning about sustaining one's family are priceless in a world with escalating food prices,
fears of our transportation systems collapsing, and the endless debates on how we will sustain ourselves in an
ever-changing world.
Respectfully yours,
Todd S on
970.227.9383
Todd
farm@yahoo.com
THE FORECAST
FORT COLLINS cewarnier sunny,breezyand
F R I D A Y 0 loges ton ay: 45
MAY 16, 2006 C70
01 -A-N MORE 1 PAGE 68
www.coloradoon.com
JWW.COLORADOAN .COM A GANNETT NEWSPAPER
P&Z welcomes
DT N A L L I E WOODS would divert waste from dissenting votes. The pro- residents to have up to six
Zoning board Halliewoods the landfill, since chickens posed amendment will now chickens in a coop.
®coioradoan.com can be fed food scraps and head to council. Roosters wouldn't be
to recommend Dan Brown lives in would support composting Chickens, which are allowed because they're
urban Fort Collins, but he because chicken manure is labeled farm animals by noisy, and residents could-
hopes the city will clear the also used for compost, the city, are currently n't raise chickens for
council!! allow
way for some feathered He just might get his allowed in three zoning slaughter.
,�I��„ + �� barnyard animals. wish. areas in Fort Collins:rural "We see this as a great
lmiWd flock Brown, who wants to The city of Fort Collins land district, urban estate opportunity not only to
promote local food produc- Planning and Zoning board and rural foothills,said Ted deal with the food and sus-
of f)()Ulq tion and composting, has voted 5-2 Thursday to rec. Shepard, chief planner for tainability issues,but also
r —•r asked the city of Fort ommend the amendment the ciWa planning, devel- to benefit the city as far as
in LQI'ppn� Clt� Collins to allow chickens to City Council with board opment and transportation solid waste,"Brown said.
L7" �Jinside
A members' e s pana servi es. stuest
Advocates saY the move anDavid Gino
would that allow
Sea CHICKENS/Page A2
n
x
z
y
N
Chickens "People have been inter- ban on chickens the city
ested in growing their own could protect homeowners
food," Kimmel said. °The from such a ruling.A 2003
Continued from Page Al neat step that seems logi- ordinance protects resi-
cal is egg production in the dents from homeowner
Government incentives backyard. We see it as a association bans on
to purchase chickens from trend to re-localizing our clotheslines and other con-
local poultry dealers in the food production and reduc- nervation measures that
Flanders region of Europe ing our carbon footprint" encourage its citizens to go
has allowed the area to Because she lives far green.
keep its waste reduction at from her neighbors, the Other concerns include
2005 levels despite growth, clucking of her neighbor's the diseases that come
according to several news chickens wouldn't be an with poultry
reports. issue for Janis Sanders While avian flu is not yet
In 2007, food waste But because she lives in an issue in the Western
made up 13.2 percent of a gated community, she hemisphere,other diseases
the Larimer County doesn't think her home- that can come with birds
Landfill's content, accord- owner's association would could be a concern,said Dr
ing to a report. allow chickens and chicken Adrienne LeBailly,director
Allowing chickens would coops. of the county health
promote a sustainable local "My question Is"Are we department.
economy, said Gailmarie constructing something "People would need to
Kimmel,executive director that could be an eyesore? " wash their hands after
of the Local Living she said."People would be handling birds,"she said.
Economy Project, a non- against that clutter."
profit in Fort Collins. While HOAs could put a — �`
r
Mir
1� -
?,�I`�
Mrs
1111/IIIHIII `w�1 ��I
``111 1�'lllllll'_III11111:111� Ills �'
E.�� L IILPTL4!4'!'Y:'II!L!1111���!4'- ' CAIL'
►�i:C_Il 11Milx,.■1.T Illlelllw ■IP wnn�xr■■: 11111
u111x•xx,.l . nnm:.� 1 Iia ,►n I��'.]
IIIIIILiB9:u�i' .. IIIIIII••II 'oll t
'�' �{\\ /�IIII0111, ,'I �If
_ 1
1��■ILe.1.:rP�IIJ�:.�llxxlalC-�l�.�i, "4 � �� /.,�.
MINN.
'IC-4a IJ"e'_ 1_ Il ,rim-' r_• -rs =
. . .
ORDINANCE NO . 072, 2008
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING SECTION 5 . 1 .2 OF THE LAND USE CODE PERTAINING
TO THE DEFINITION OF FARM ANIMALS AND AMENDING SECTION 4- 117
OF THE CODE OF THE CITY PERTAINING TO CHICKENS
WHEREAS , the City has received an application for a text amendment to the Land Use Code
to change the definition of "farm animal" to include up to six chicken hens in order for citizens and
residents of the City to produce eggs for personal consumption; and
WHEREAS , the Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City that such
limited number of chicken hens be allowed in order to enable citizens to produce eggs for personal
consumption so as to help support a sustainable lifestyle and to support local food production, food
security, and economic sustainability.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows :
Section 1 . That the definition of "Farm animals " as contained in Section 5 . 1 .2 of the
Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows :
Farm animals shall mean animals commonly raised or kept in an agricultural, rather
than an urban, environment including, but not limited to, chickens, pigs, sheep, goats,
horses, cattle, llamas, emus, ostriches, donkeys and mules; provided, however, that
chicken hens, numbering six (6) or fewer, shall not be considered to be farm animals .
Section 2 . That Section 4- 117 of the Code of the City be amended to read as follows :
Sec. 4-117. Sale of chickens and ducklings ; quantity restricted ; keeping of
chicken hens.
(a) Chickens or ducklings younger than eight (8) weeks of age may not
be sold in quantities of less than six (6) to a single purchaser.
(b) Except in those zone districts which permit the keeping of "farm
animals", no more than six (6) chicken hens may be kept for the purpose of
producing eggs, provided that such hens are contained within a secure enclosure
located at least fifteen ( 15 ) feet from all property lines . Neither the keeping of
roosters nor the slaughtering of chickens is allowed.
Introduced and considered favorably on first reading and ordered published this 3rd day of
June, A.D . 2008 , and to be presented for final passage on the 1 st day of July, A.D. 2008 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading this 1st day of July, A . D . 2008 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk