City of Powell River Council will contemplate allowing more chickens in residential neighbourhoods.
At the May 14 council meeting, corporate officer Chris Jackson said in April, staff was given direction to come back to council with an amendment to the animal control bylaw to increase the number of chickens in some of the city’s urban areas.
Jackson said the matter was on council’s strategic plan. He said there was an action to revisit local food production and prepare bylaw amendments to promote keeping of rabbits and poultry and becoming a bear smart community.
The way the bylaw is structured, poultry is described as including domestic fowl, which is defined as duck, goose, turkey and similar birds. Jackson said he did not think council was looking for a brand-new class that refers to chickens only.
“I did move forward on that assumption, however, council can tell me that’s not quite right,” said Jackson. “I will use the word poultry from this point forward.”
In terms of zones where poultry may be kept, going back to 1979, the animal control bylaw permitted keeping of poultry and rabbits on larger tracts of land in city zones, and in 2010 and 2012, there were revisions for the specific purpose of allowing poultry within the urban areas. Jackson said in 2012, in the R1, R2 and R3 zones, three poultry were allowed.
“Three has been suggested as too few when you consider how often chickens will lay eggs,” said Jackson.
In a report to council, Jackson said a maximum of six poultry could provide a reasonable number for personal use.
Regarding poultry-at-large, Jackson said that is not allowed within the current bylaw and there are fines already in the animal control bylaw, so he was not recommending any changes. Animal control officers are permitted to seize and impound poultry-at-large.
Jackson outlined poultry enclosures. He said this includes the coop and the run. He said the coop is an interior area where chickens roost and nest, and the run is where chickens forage, where they exercise and “do what chickens do.” There is no requirement that chickens be kept in an enclosure, according to Jackson. One of the problems that arise from free ranging is predation from hawks or eagles.
“We are trying to keep the regulations as minimal as possible to give the maximum freedom for people and hit on the things we really need to,” said Jackson.
In terms of maintenance of poultry enclosures, Jackson said a recurring complaint from neighbours is smell and the presence of flies. These could be addressed through proper care and cleaning, he said. To improve successful enforcement of problematic keeping of poultry, Jackson said amendment bylaws could include regulations that require enclosures to be kept free of soiled and wet bedding, odours and vermin.
“In an urban area, the standard of care has to be so much higher, because you have smaller setbacks and more people in a smaller area,” said Jackson.
Regarding setbacks, the bylaw says poultry enclosures may be as close as 0.9 metres from property lines.
“I’m suggesting we increase that to three metres from property lines,” said Jackson. He said the number is consistent with building setback requirements in agricultural zones. Accessory building setbacks in the R1, R2 and R3 zones range from 0.9 to three metres.
Currently, staff do not recommend introducing permitting or licensing programs to regulate the keeping of poultry.
Councillor George Doubt said as far as the numbers go, he lives in an agricultural property and he has five chickens, which is well below the number that is allowed. He said that’s enough for his family. He said having six chickens does not seem unusual. He added that owners have to make sure they are well protected from predators and neighbours are protected from any smell.
Doubt said he would like to hear more from the public about what they think about the proposals.
Councillor Cindy Elliott asked if people would be allowed to put chickens in their front yards and Jackson said the current bylaw stipulates that chickens must be in the rear of the property.
Elliott asked if people with existing poultry enclosures closer than three metres would have a grandfather clause. Jackson said that would not be the case.
“Having said that, we would work with the landowner if they were 0.9 rather than three metres,” he added. “The issue is, would we be attending the site? And if we were, it would likely be because of complaints and the maintenance of the coop. We would have to be a bit pragmatic in the enforcement of that.”
He said enforcement is complaint driven.
Mayor Dave Formosa said the way he understands matters is the proposal is to go from three chickens to six in residential zones. He said he recalls when the matter of chickens first came up, there was a roomful of angry people in council chambers. He said they consisted of people who did not want chickens.
“Some of these people have reached out to me and asked what was going on,” said Formosa.
He said the city should charge a little bit for people to have chickens, have the bylaw officer go out, look at where the houses are and where the chicken coops are going to be, so they are not putting it right under a neighbour’s window.
Doubt said he recalls a delegation coming to speak against chickens and two weeks later, a delegation about the same size came asking council to allow more chickens.
“We have two groups – one vehemently wanting no chickens and another vehemently wanting more chickens,” said Doubt. “The bylaw being proposed is a reasonable thing. I’ve talked to a number of people who were excited about the idea. If we put this off for a decision two weeks from now, it will give the public an opportunity to tell us what they think. It’s possible to do this in a way that respects people’s neighbours.”
The matter will come back before council at its May 27 meeting.
