GOING BACK IN TIME: "2011, Council approves Chicken Code"

This is an interesting 2011 report about the process the city went through in passing the "Backyard Chicken" ordinance. The current, approved Chicken ordinance is detailed here.  

Redmond City Council approves backyard chicken code

NOVEMBER 9, 2011:  Council approves Animal Husbandry (backyard chicken) code 6-2 (Carson and Cole voting NO).  A noted requirement is covenants will be honored and supersede the animal husbandry code.

Redmond City Council held a final study session November 7 on "Small Animal Husbandry" - commonly known as "Backyard chickens."  Their normal Tuesday meeting was cancelled for the Election.  Council plans to adopt  "Backyard chicken policy and code" on December 6, without any further study sessions.

After thorough discussion, Council consented to Chicken regulations.  The ordinance is expected to include the following code:

• Mandatory registration.  (Permits, subject to land use requirements, are not required.
• Maximum allowable chickens decided by Residential zoning only.  Lot size is irrelevant.
• One Acre (R-1) and 1/2 acre (R-2) lots are allowed a maximum of 10 chickens (hens only).
• R-4 and R-5 lots are the most common SFH lots in Redmond.  (4-5 lots/acre).  R-4 lots allowed a  maximum of 4 hens, R-5 allowed a maximum of 3 hens.  R-6 maximum 3 hen
• In R-8 lots chickens won't be allowed.
• Setbacks:  15' setbacks for adjacent property required with exceptions.
• Slaughter:  May slaughter 1 chicken per day on site.  More than 1 chicken must be slaughtered off-property in a slaughterhouse, farm, non-residential area. 
• Predators:  sturdy coop required
• City Small Animal Husbandry Code will not supersede Homeowners Associations (HOA). 
• No roosters

Councilmember Kim Allen was the proponent.  She ran the meeting and drove consensus.  Councilmember Hank Margeson had experience in Tacoma with backyard hens in his youth and was considered a council 'expert.'  Hank suggested "no more than a handful of chickens," except for 1/2 acre lots.  He said "chickens should only supplement food, not feed a family of four year-round."  Councilmember Carson has two dogs and his wife was in real estate; he was against backyard chickens.  Councilmember Hank Myers suggested keeping the rules simple saying too many regulations will keep people from participating.  Margeson owns a horse and raised 3 hens as a kid living in Tacoma.  Mayor Marchione was present and quiet throughout the discussion.

Cole, Stilin, and Vache were openly concerned about chicken owners who mistreat or miss-manage their poultry.  Code enforcement was their big issue.  Apparently, the history of chicken neglect and nuisance in other cities is very low.  Cole ended the discussion stating he won't endorse backyard chickens on the basis of:  smell, noise, real estate, disease, predators, potential for harm to the animals.  His property is governed by HOA rules.

Margeson referred to Sustainable Redmond for their help in getting the word out and educating Redmond citizenry.

Reported By Bob Yoder

OPINION Part Two: Thoughts on Council's Land Use Appeal Policy

UDATED OPINION, 6/13, Opinion: Councilmembers Kimberly Allen and Hank Margeson recently proposed taking the legal land use appeal component out of council's hands and into King County Superior Court. As Mr. Margeson stated, it's the Council's job to write policy, not to interpret it. Citizens would still maintain their right to appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. In addition, Council could hold a secondary, legislative appeal to address code issues brought up by citizens. 

Most area cities choose to take the lawyering out of their Council's job description and give it to the county superior court i.e.  Kirkland, Bellevue, Issaquah, Sammamish, Woodinville, Edmonds, Seattle, Everett, and Mercer Island.  We should, too.  Only Redmond and Bothell land use appeals remain "judged" by city councils. 

After trying to participate in the review of three deforestation projects by CAMWEST, the Shauhanessy deforestation project, and Tent City review process, I agree it's time for a change. In fact, Council President Nancy McCormick described her frustration, if not agony, while presiding over the TC-4 and 172nd Ave extension appeals. The 42-lot Shauhanessy Plat/PRD drew a similar response from Nancy when an appeal to Council was remanded by Council back to the Hearing Examiner for a second Public Hearing. Shauhanassy is the longest land use review in the history of Redmond and the project still isn't built.

After thanking Ms. Allen for articulating the Shauhanessy case so well, Council President Nancy McCormick movingly stated:

"The public process may not have been violated but it was twisted. I can't keep from thinking about that couple who appeared at the Tent City public meeting and signed up to the Party of Record only to be denied on appeal to be heard.

The public needs accurate information and timeliness of an appeal, otherwise we make a mockery out of Public Hearings and caring about public involvement."

It is clear recent land use cases have demonstrated that our present public process needs fixing. The public has not been getting accurate information because their elected representatives are not allowed to represent or inform them. Conversely, staff gives full support and guidance to developers who already know the system and what questions to ask.

Councilmember Pat Vache' (and Cole, Carson, Myers) openly support the present quasi-judicial appeal process. They prefer not to give up their lawyering power in judging land-use policy. Rather, Mr. Vache' (and Mr. Myers) look at the present process as a "learning experience to get the feel for the impact of how code impacts the stakeholders". What Mr. Vache' doesn't learn about are his constituents' feelings and their understanding the project during the Review. Thus, mistakes get made (that could have been fixed in legislative appeal to council). Mr. Vache' says the Q-J process is more efficient. Shauhanssey PRD lasted years. Tent City-4 was a breath away from the State Supreme Appellate Court. Perrigo Heights,  The 172nd extension, Pearce, and Tyler Creek land use actions all took valuable time from Council policy-making duties while stressing the neighborhoods and landowners on code issues. No wonder Council work has become a full-time job.

Interestingly, Mr. Vache’ voted for the CAMWEST Perrigo Heights Plat Steep Slope Exception concluding "where else are we going to put the homes"?  Mr. Vache’ lives right off of NE 116th Street behind what later became Mosaic Meadows plat and sown 116th from CAMWEST'S huge Pearce PRD. 

Over time,  part of the issue is Council gets too close to the stakeholders and their judgment becomes affected, despite the appearance of distance and objectivity.
Part One: "Moving Redmond forward on Land Use Appeals"