Whiteland resident Shawn Butler holds a chicken at his home in February. The Whiteland Town Council is considering changing its town code after Butler pleaded with them to let him keep his chickens.
Daily Journal File Photo
Members of Whiteland’s planning commission were not satisfied with revisions made to the highly-debated proposal to allow town residents to own backyard chickens.
The Whiteland Advisory Plan Commission voted 6-0 Tuesday evening to disapprove of the newest iteration of an ordinance to allow residents to keep small flocks of hens in town limits. Some members said they thought this version was “getting close” to its best version, however they were all not satisfied with some of the details and inconsistencies in the text.
This is the second time the commission has voted against the proposal. In May, members voted 4-0 to send an unfavorable recommendation on the chicken ordinance to the Whiteland Town Council. Since that vote, the town council worked for three months on amendments to add more details to the ordinance. The most recent version passed the council in July by a vote of 3-2 and returned to the plan commission for another approval.
The most recent version of the chicken ordinance would allow residents to keep up to six adult hens on a single-family or two-family residential lot. Roosters would not be permitted, the draft says. This ordinance would not overrule any already established rules against owning chickens in subdivisions with homeowners’ associations or covenants.
Chickens would have to be kept in a coop, pen or chicken run that is within a fully fenced yard, with a fence at least four feet tall. Coops could not be larger than 120 square feet in area and 10 feet high, with a minimum of six square feet of run space per animal.
A permit would be required to own chickens, which could be acquired through the town zoning department. The $35 fee and procedures followed for regular accessory structures would be applied to this application process.
Much like the process to build another accessory structure, residents would need to show town officials what the enclosure will look like and where on the property it will go, the draft says. The proposed structure would be subject to an in-person inspection by the town or a third party.
Plan commission member Justin Lien on Tuesday asked several questions about specifics he thought should be in the ordinance to protect chickens and nearby neighbors. He said he was concerned the draft was too broad, and it did not include some specifics to prevent predators from getting in coops, exact instructions for how to dispose of waste and how to prevent overcrowding in coops, for example.
“I’m sure that some people will do their due diligence, but there’s also some people who shouldn’t even have dogs,” Lien said.
A previous version of the ordinance not passed by the town council included several specifics about coop layouts, protection from predators and requirements for fencing and landscaping. However, a majority of council members in July said they thought that proposal was too strict and could make it nearly impossible for anyone to obtain a permit.
Another sticking point for some members of the commission was language in the ordinance about notifying nearby neighbors if a resident wants to own chickens.
The current draft says applicants for chicken permits must notify adjoining property owners within “two property depths” or within 660 feet of their property. Neighbors would be allowed to submit written objections or appear at a Board of Zoning Appeals hearing to speak on the chicken permit. However, a different line in the draft says only residents within 200 feet of the property could submit a complaint, despite the requirement in the other section to notify property owners within 660 feet.
Commission members pointed out that difference at the Tuesday meeting, and Stephen Watson, town attorney, said that was an inconsistency he had not caught. There have been several different versions of the backyard chicken ordinance to the point where council members at their July meeting were also confused about which draft had which provisions and what changes needed to be made where.
The inconsistent numbers prompted some plan commission members to vote to disapprove of this ordinance. During this consideration, the commission could not make changes to the draft. Members could only vote to approve or disapprove.
“I think we’re getting close,” said Eric Funkhouser, commission member and the Whiteland Fire Chief. “I don’t like the fact that it’s saying two different numbers in this one here. So based on that, I think that has to be fixed … if we don’t get a chance to make recommendations or changes, I’d be unfavorable tonight based on that.”
With disapproval from the plan commission, the chicken proposal goes back to the town council for a vote. The council can vote it down, make other amendments, or just pass it into law as it is now. The next council meeting is Aug. 8 at 7 p.m. at the Whiteland Town Hall.
