ShareThis Page

Urban chicken farming remains no-go in Penn Hills

| Monday, March 7, 2016, 11:00 p.m.

Plans to allow chickens in Penn Hills still haven't hatched.

Council tabled plans to amend the municipality's zoning ordinance that would have allowed residents to keep up to four hens in backyard coops.

Councilman Gary Underwood said he had concerns about the wording of the ordinance and how it was being incorporated into the municipality's code.

“I'd like more detail,” he said.

Several residents who spoke in favor of urban chicken farming said they were disappointed.

Resident Pete McQuillin said he has raised chickens and that the ordinance is “clear and enforceable.”

“All the problems I've seen with keeping chickens are addressed in this ordinance,” he said.

Municipal planners said the popularity of urban farming is growing, and residents have asked whether they are allowed to keep hens.

The amendment would allow residents to keep hens on their property if they obtain a permit and ensure that the chickens have a fenced outdoor area or a predator-proof coop. Roosters and the slaughtering of hens would not be permitted.

Owners would be responsible for the upkeep and safety of the chickens, and they would have to manage noise, odor and vermin.

Nearby communities such as Forest Hills, Plum and the city of Pittsburgh allow chicken coops, which are popular among people concerned about food stability and sourcing.

Kelsey Shea is a Tribune-Review staff writer. She can be reached at 412-320-7845 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.

click me