NEW! Ammended Backyard Chicken Ordinance in KCMO

COMPARED VERSION

AS AMENDED TO CODE BOOKS

ORDINANCE NO. 110479, AS AMENDED

Amending Chapter 14, Code of Ordinances, by repealing Section 14-15, Keeping of small animals and fowl in pens, and enacting in lieu thereof one new section of like number and subject matter pertaining to keeping of small animals and fowl in pens.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KANSAS CITY:

Section 1. That Chapter 14, Code of Ordinances of the City of Kansas City, Missouri, relating to the division of animal health and public safety is hereby amended by repealing Section 14-15, Keeping of small animals and fowl in pens, and enacting in lieu thereof one new section of like number and subject matter, to read as follows:

Sec. 14-15. Keeping of small animals and fowl in pens.

(a)  Location of pens; enclosure required. It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or maintain any chicken coop, dove cote, rabbit hutch or other pen, cage or enclosure for the housing of fowl or small animals, except dogs and cats, closer than 100 feet to the nearest portion of any building occupied by or in any way used by human beings, other than the dwelling occupied by the owner or keeper of the animals or fowl, or closer than 25 feet to the property line of the lot on which such fowl or animals are kept for sale within a bona fide produce market, commission house or store for purposes of trade and while so kept are confined in small coops, boxes or cages, or where such animals or fowl are kept for purposes of research in a laboratory. Animals and fowl so kept or maintained shall be enclosed on all sides and shall not be allowed to run or fly at large, except for homing pigeons.

(b)  Control of odors. Every coop, dove cote, rabbit hutch or other yard establishment shall be kept so that no offensive, disagreeable or noxious smell or odor shall arise therefrom to the injury, annoyance or inconvenience of any inhabitants of the neighborhood.

(c)  Storage and disposal of manure. Every coop, dove cote, rabbit hutch or other yard establishment shall be provided with a watertight and flytight receptacle for manure, of such dimension as to contain all accumulations thereof, which receptacle shall be emptied sufficiently often and in such manner as to prevent its becoming a nuisance. Such receptacle shall be securely covered at all times except when open during the deposit or removal of manure or refuse therefrom. No manure shall be allowed to accumulate except in such receptacle. All such manure, when removed from the receptacle, shall be buried with a covering of not less than six inches of earth, or, if used as fertilizer, thoroughly spaded into the ground, or shall be removed from the property.

(d) Maintenance of enclosures for fowl. All earthen yards or runways wherein fowl are kept or permitted to be shall be spaded and then limed once every three months from the month of April through the month of December. For the purpose of killing flies and other insects, all structures, pens or coops wherein fowl are kept or permitted to be shall be sprayed with such substances as will eliminate such insects.

(e)  Condition of enclosure; inspections. Any structure, pen, coop or yard wherein animals or fowl are kept or permitted to be shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition, devoid of all rodents and vermin, and free from objectionable odors. The enclosed area of all such structures shall be constructed in such a way as to be dry at all times on the inside. The person maintaining any such structure, pen, coop or yard in the city does by such act of maintenance authorize the director of health to at any time inspect any such structure or premises and issue any such order as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.

(f)  Number of animals or fowl; keeping of roosters. Except where fowl, rabbits or other small animals are kept for sale within a bona fide produce market, commission house or store for the purpose of trade and while so kept are confined in small coops, boxes or cages, or where such animals or fowl are kept for purposes of research in a laboratory, or in areas zoned for agricultural use, it shall be unlawful for any person to keep or maintain, within 100 feet of the nearest portion of any dwelling or other building occupied by or in any way used by human beings except for a dwelling occupied by the owner or keeper of such animals, more than 15 chickens or other domestic fowl four months or more of age or 50 chicks or other domestic fowl under four months of age, or more than ten rabbits or other small animals over the age of four months, or more than 25 rabbits or other small animals under the age of four months. No rooster which crows shall be kept within 300 feet of any residence or dwelling except that of the owner or keeper.

(g)  Authority to prescribe additional regulations. As to the keeping and harboring of chickens or other domestic fowl, for whatever purpose maintained, the director of health shall have authority to promulgate regulations to provide that such shall be kept in such a manner as to prevent a nuisance or health hazard.

(h)  Special exceptions. The director of neighborhood and community services is hereby authorized to grant special exceptions to the distance requirements set forth in subsection (a) or to the number limitations set forth in subsection (f) of this section for persons who keep or maintain trained fowl such as homing or racing pigeons provided that there is goodsigned consents are obtained from the owners and sufficient cause to grantoccupants of the buildings that are within the minimum distance requirement and provided further that no special exception based upon preexisting conditions or economic conditions.shall be granted for fowl, rabbits, or other small animals kept in front yards.  Any exception granted shall be for an initial period of one year and shall be subject to bi-annualbiannual inspection by the director, or the director’sdirector's designee.  Refusal to allow such inspection by the person who has been granted the exception shall void the exception. The exception is subject to renewal every five (5) years, at which time the director shall require signed consents from the owners and occupants of the buildings that are within the minimum distance requirement in order to renew the exception. The decision of the director on whether to renew the exception may be appealed to the Property Maintenance Appeals Board, as provided for in Section 56-343, by the applicant or the homes association or registered neighborhood organization that serve the site.  Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the granting of a special exception to any other subsection of section 14-15.Section 14-15. Section 88-10-08-C shall govern any conflict between the provisions of this subsection and any private homeowner covenants or restrictions.  Furthermore, no exception to the distance requirements shall be granted under this subsection if such exception creates a nuisance or health hazard. 

(i)  Nothing herein is intended to preclude any person from filing a private nuisance action for any offensive use caused by keeping small animals and fowl.

(j)  In a residentially zoned district, with the exception of R-80, the onsite sale of eggs is prohibited.

____________________________________

Approved as to form and legality:

__________________________________

                                                                        Melody CockrellBeth Murano

Assistant City Attorney

Kansas City, MO Backyard Chicken Ordinance - TODAY- Public Hearing June 29, 10:30am, 26th Floor, City Hall

On the heels of Roeland Park's successful Backyard Hen special permit, KCMO is looking at a change to allow more citizens to participate in having backyard chickens. Six families in Roeland Park have backyard hens and CHIRP's journey is featured in July/August Greenability Magazine.  For those interested in supporting this important issue, please consider attending the hearing.  Many supporters backed CHIRP all along the way, some never intending on having backyard hens, but believing those who wanted to should have the opportunity.

Thank You!  It is our supporters that make all of our work successful!  Here are the details:

The Public Safety and Emergency Services Committee of the Kansas City, MO City Council will hear a proposed change to the city ordinance which regulates chickens in city limits.  The proposal would allow the Director of Neighborhood and Community Services to grant exceptions to the set-back requirements and number limits when occupants and owners of properties within the 100 foot set-back approve of the exception in writing.
 
 Read the ordinance online.
 
 This proposed change would protect the interests of adjacent neighbors and allow for responsible urban chicken-keeping.  It is an expansion of an existing process for exceptions that includes homing and racing pigeons, which has apparently worked well for the city for quite some time.  We encourage you to attend and offer support and encouragement to the Committee in considering this proposal.
 
When: Wednesday, June 29, 10:30am
Where: 26th Floor, City Hall, 414 E. 12th St. Kansas City, MO 64106
 
 If you are interested in urban chickens, you will find a great resource in CHIRP, they offer educational and networking opportunities for people interested in backyard chickens: chirpks@gmail.com or www.chirpks.blogspot.com.

First Permit DELAYED...back to Admin!

	The first permit for keeping backyard hens in Roeland Park was met with a delay based on procedural issues.   More discussion:  Admin Meeting Monday, March 28 · 6:00pm - 8:00pm
Location	Roeland Park City Hall
Created By	City Hens In Roeland Park
More Info	The procedure for the first step in the Permit process is up for clarification. The first permit came before council before Staff received receipt of all of the neighbor notification letters. Timeframe for neighbor response will be discussed. As well as more clarification on procedure. Please join us if you can. And remember, always check the City of Roeland Park website for updates in time, etc. The agenda and packet should be on the City of Roeland Park website late Thursday afternoon.

What are we crowing about now?

Look what's on the agenda again! Let's see a 5-3 vote, permit in place...what could we be crowing about now?
March 7, 2011
6:00 PM Council Workshop - City Hall Discussion/Chicken Ordinance Discussion
7:00 PM City Council Meeting

Join us to see!

Check Out Some Coops!

Check out some of these coop designs for our backyard hens in Roeland Park!  We have a permit...time to apply and start going through the process.  Please email CHIRP if you need assistance in sorting out the pieces. 


http://www.dwell.com/articles/modern-chicken-coop.html-%20Ultra Ultra modern!

http://www.dwell.com/articles/coop-dreams.html - great minimal design that blends in to a backyard.


http://www.dwell.com/articles/urban-hens.html- My favorite-incorporating into a larger garden complex

CHIRP Comments on: Hens OK, for now - KansasCity.com

City Hens in Roeland Park!  Yes! is what the headline reads for those of us like minded folk who believe we are part of a growing trend in lifestyle choice. What our neighbors need to know is that the permit is very strict in regards to housing and other issues. Prospective hen owners have to apply and neighbors will be notified and given a chance to speak. No roosters, no hens running at large. Generous setbacks and strict guidelines on coop designs. And a steep permit fee of $100.00. While CHIRP was hoping for a straight ordinance and less of a fee (any size dogs are only $10.00 to register), we are satisfied that we have an avenue to keep backyard hens in Roeland Park.

"OK for now" - Why the footnote? A majority vote gives citizens an opportunity to keep a few hens (within strict guidelines).  If you read the article, you will see the arguments against listed first.  The positive impact the backyard hen movement has had in cities nationwide, many right here in the Midwest, is hardly mentioned.
CHIRP has provided viable solutions for all of the issues brought forward in this debate. We have watched as incomplete information and inaccuracies have been stated as fact in public meetings. And so our rebuttal...or the rest of the story...

To Councilor Toni Hull:  It was stated at a recent City Council meeting that this part of the animal ordinance was being rewritten to clarify the ambiguous parts of the animal code-whether the hen permit was approved or not.The time spent on the writing of the permit portion of the ordinance should have been minimal since it was modeled closely after another city's ordinance.

How much time and legal fees were spent on a new ordinance governing massage therapists in our community that was passed in 2010?  How many massage therapists are registered to practice in Roeland Park? And is that ordinance not back on the table for revision because it has been discovered there are different licensing/certifications which were not covered or accounted for in the original ordinance? How much staff time is involved here? If money is an issue, perhaps convincing your peers that spending resources on a repeal and vote is contradictory?

To Councilor Bob Meyers:  CHIRP has always been in favor of a clearly stated ordinance that protects not only the city's interest, but also the citizens of this community. We agree that clarity in the process is important. As was discovered when this issue came to light over a year ago, there are lots of inconsistencies in the ordinances on the books. Perhaps this could be a long term goal of the City Council? To review the city ordinances and codes and clarify ambiguous wording and rectify inconsistent language?

CHIRP has done due diligence and discussed in good faith solutions to all the animal control issues brought forward. No one opposing seems genuinely interested in finding solutions. Everyone says they do not know anything about handling chickens and then with the next breath they are an expert on all the things that cannot be done to catch or handle chickens. Which is it?

Regarding the fact that "NEAC will not deal with this."  The NEAC is charged (according to the ordinance on record) with enforcing member cities' ordinances. They have responded to at least two chicken calls (to notify a resident to remove illegal hens), so a precedent has been set. We have been told that a chicken (gallus domesticus) does not qualify as either wild or domestic so they are not responsible for enforcing this ordinance.  So, what animal category do chickens fall under?   And let the record show that among cities with good ordinances like Roeland Park just adopted, there are virtually no animal control issues concerning chickens. Columbia, MO has had only three calls since their ordinance took effect last year. Longmont, CO Animal Control has gone on record saying that they were pleasantly surprised that they had NO increase in calls due to chicken keeping in their city.  It seems a lot of dust is blowing around what will prove to be a non-issue.

To Councilor Scott Gregory:  An overwhelming majority of the citizens attending meetings where this issue was discussed have been supporters of this action.  There have been perhaps a dozen negative comments made by citizens at public meetings.  When a straw poll was taken at the Town Hall meeting, a majority was in favor of this action.  The majority of your peers voted for this issue. Research into city ordinance would probably reveal that there are a lot of ordinances on the books that serve a minority of the population of Roeland Park. Spending more money and resources on a petition and repeal seems counter productive.

Property values are relative. There is no quantitative evidence that backyard hens affect property values either positively or negatively.  A study done in Oregon reports that the communities who allow backyard hens have higher property values. Seven of the Forbes 500 top 10 Most Livable Cities allow backyard hens. Lawrence, Ks and Columbia, MO allow backyard hens. Two families have moved to Roeland Park in the last six months because they will be able to keep backyard hens.

We have spent ten months providing fact based research and resources addressing every issue brought up regarding the keeping of backyard hens. Now that it is in place, why can't we have a chance to show that this just may indeed be a great thing for Roeland Park?

Hens OK, for now - KansasCity.com

5-3 Yes to Hen Keeping in Roeland Park

December 6, 2010 Council Result

We verified the action taken at Monday night's Council Meeting with the City Staff:

The council approved allowing Residents to keep chickens in Roeland Park; motion carried, 5-3.

The council tabled the motion to allow staff to work with the City Attorney to draft an ordinance to be approved by the council. Motion carried, 8-0.

 The Administrative Committee will discuss the proposed draft special permit on December 14th at 6 pm

This begins the next phase, the actual drafting of the special permit from the draft brought to the Council Meeting.  We are so grateful to the City Leaders who have given us this opportunity.

The next step is addressing the issues that have been at the crux of the opposition.  Some valid concerns have been brought forth and we will do our best to provide case studies and other research based solutions to those concerns.

Look for those issues to be posted here...and thank all of you for your support!