CCMIN010306 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Iserson said there is a code that requires a conditional use permit for other types of fowl and rabbits and there is no limitation that is expressed in the Municipal Code. In response to an inquiry by Ms. McGovern, Mr. Fialho said staff could track the amount of dogs a resident has based upon whether a resident had applied for a dog license. The majority of these issues are raised by complaint, which is how a majority of code enforcement issues are brought to staff's attention. Ms. McGovern believed a conditional use permit should be retained for those residents in R-1 One-Family Residential zoning districts who have more than one acre of property and might want to keep more than six chickens. Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. Jerry Wagner, a Happy Valley resident, agreed with the wording and conditions of the proposed ordinance. He did not believe the ordinance should be granted to allow anyone to have chickens without informing the neighbors and going through the Planning Commission. By going through the Planning Commission, it puts the neighbors on notice and allows them to counter this and provides the City some type of control. Kevin Close, a Happy Valley resident, expressed concern about the effect of this ordinance on agricultural lots in the City and unincorporated areas. He agreed with staff that up to a limit, a number of chickens should be allowed. He noted it was mentioned at the Planning Commission meeting that the Vineyard Corridor Specific Plan has a limit of keeping twelve chickens similar to the Happy Valley Specific Plan. Vanessa Kawaihau, a Happy Valley resident, pointed out the Happy Valley Specific Plan under the Land Use Standards for the greater Happy Valley area allow the keeping of barn animals on a lot at least 40,000 square feet and residents are allowed to keep 50 mature fowl which include: chickens, ducks, geese turkeys, full rabbits, guinea pigs and other similar small animals and any combination thereof. As other areas annex into the City, she did not want the proposed ordinance to eliminate certain rights that these residents now enjoy and were guaranteed when the Happy Valley Specific Plan was adopted. If the requirement of inoculations for chickens were going to be a part of the proposed ordinance, she asked if the City had a resident physician and/or veterinarian to provide advise on information that is presented by the USDA or any state or local health department? Alicia Brown, a Pleasanton resident, thanked the Planning Commission for revising the proposed ordinance to allow for more backyard hens which is important for families such as hers that have more than one 4-H member involved in the Poultry Project. She expressed concern about the requirements in the proposed ordinance that specify the location of chicken coops and specific coop requirements, which she believed was unfair as there are no other similar requirements for backyard pets. She asked Council to consider removing the requirement regarding the coop location and shelter specifications from the ordinance and have faith the poultry owners would provide for its hens as it does for other backyard animals. Annaliese Sanborn, a Junior Poultry Leader for the Abbey 4-H, agreed that an ordinance was important to keep harmony between the chicken owners and citizens. Based upon her research, most California cities larger than Pleasanton do not require a permit process. She Pleasanton City Council Minutes 6 01/03106