Proposed chicken ordinance gains momentum in North Huntingdon Township
A proposed ordinance on backyard chickens took center stage during the North Huntingdon Township commissioners meeting on Wednesday.
More than 10 residents put their support for poultry on the record. A majority of the packed audience applauded after each person made brief comments to commissioners.
Although the commissioners will make the final decision, the township's planning commission is tweaking a draft ordinance. It is not clear when a final ordinance will be presented to commissioners.
“I'm still waiting to see a final draft before I can make a final decision,” Commissioner Brian West said. “It still needs to get past the planning commission.”
The planning commissioners could finalize a draft as early as its next meeting, on Monday.
“I think it's our job to get an idea of what the constituents want and act accordingly,” Commissioner Richard Gray said. “At this point, I haven't read the ordinance and it's not before us.”
Rob Painter of North Huntingdon collected about 50 signatures on a petition that he presented to commissioners.
“These are people that are going to take pride in what they do,” he said. “I hope you will listen to everyone with an open mind when it comes to backyard chickens.”
Some residents stood up to make the case that dogs can be noisier and feral cats could produce smellier waste than chickens. Other supporters expressed intent to teach children about a sustainable, healthy lifestyle.
“I think there's somewhat of a lack of education of people that oppose it,” Nick Benevento of North Huntingdon said. “If you oppose it, I hope you read about it to get a better understanding to see they're not the nightmare that everybody makes them out to be.”
Amanda Dolasinski is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8626, or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.