Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

The jumping off discussion area for the rest of the Deck. All things Lakewood.
Please check out our other sections. As we refile many discussions from the past into
their proper sections please check them out and offer suggestions.

Moderators: Jim DeVito, Dan Alaimo

User avatar
Jim O'Bryan
Posts: 13300
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:12 pm
Location: Lakewood
Contact:

Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Jim O'Bryan » Mon Nov 14, 2011 7:29 pm

Well getting closer!

In a late breaking story Mayor Mike Summers has approved a trial on making chickens legal in Lakewood. According to our sources this will be for 3 different families to have up 4 heans each.

More To Follow!


Jim O'Bryan
Lakewood Resident

"The very act of observing disturbs the system."
Werner Heisenberg

"If anything I've said seems useful to you, I'm glad.
If not, don't worry. Just forget about it."
His Holiness The Dalai Lama
Margaret Brinich
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:53 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Margaret Brinich » Mon Nov 14, 2011 7:38 pm

Congrats to the Hen's In Lakewood group for all of their hard work towards this victory and to Animal Safety and Welfare Committee for supporting the trial. Word on the street is that all 3 families will be receiving their official letter allowing their 4 hen trial by Friday!


Monique Smith
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:34 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Monique Smith » Fri Nov 18, 2011 12:16 am

The problem with the news of the backyard hen pilot program is that the mayor and his administration didn't involve city council in a single word of the discussions or the planning that they have apparently been having for quite a while about it. In fact, it's only because of the news that has been reported in the Observer that I even know about this pilot, and I'm a member of Lakewood city council. Pretty sad, eh?

To make it worse, when I reached out to the city's Director of Planning and Development several weeks ago to ask about the rumor that a pilot was in progress or being planned, the only response I received was that there was "no pilot"... and that was after more than one request for the information. So much for transparency and collaboration.

It breaks my heart to say this, because I once publicly supported the campaign of our current mayor and genuinely believed he would bring a very beneficial management style to city hall, but here's the thing: The mayor and some members of his administration are showing increasingly worrisome signs that they have no regard for council or some members of the public in Lakewood who may have opinions that differ from theirs. This backyard hen question is only one example in a pattern that I've been observing and have been worrying quite a bit about. I'm sure the mayor knows that there are members of council and the public who oppose the idea of backyard chickens in a city as densely populated and burdened with extremely serious housing issues (and few resources to handle them) as Lakewood. So how did he choose to deal with that potentially contentious issue? By completely excluding ALL of us from the discussion about this pilot. I regret that I have to take this complaint to the public rather than speaking with the mayor about it, but I feel that I'm left with no choice when members of council are excluded from these kinds of conversations at city hall.

One of my chief concerns about this pilot is that the mayor has said that housing is one of his top priorities, yet he has unilaterally chosen to increase the burden on our housing department and city resources by adding chickens to the residential landscape. It doesn't make sense to me. I'd like the opportunity to hear how it makes sense to him.

I sincerely respect the point of view and efforts of backyard hen supporters in Lakewood because I know that their intention is to provide a new means of making healthy, fresh food accessible to Lakewoodites. However, based on what I know of our city's housing situation, including issues that I see in my own neighborhood every day, and what our city is facing in terms of resource constraints, I can't support the inclusion of chickens in our residential landscape. Though our city has some similarities to other urban areas that allow backyard chickens, we also have many key differences and very unique challenges to manage. While the City of Cleveland may have some very appropriate conditions for raising backyard chickens, Lakewood simply does not.

Thank you to the publishers of the Observer and the readers of this forum for giving me a place to share my opinion on this. Unfortunately, I haven't had the same opportunity at city hall.


Scott Meeson
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 12:08 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Scott Meeson » Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:35 am

Monique Smith wrote:The problem with the news of the backyard hen pilot program is that the mayor and his administration didn't involve city council in a single word of the discussions or the planning that they have apparently been having for quite a while about it. In fact, it's only because of the news that has been reported in the Observer that I even know about this pilot, and I'm a member of Lakewood city council. Pretty sad, eh?

To make it worse, when I reached out to the city's Director of Planning and Development several weeks ago to ask about the rumor that a pilot was in progress or being planned, the only response I received was that there was "no pilot"... and that was after more than one request for the information. So much for transparency and collaboration.

It breaks my heart to say this, because I once publicly supported the campaign of our current mayor and genuinely believed he would bring a very beneficial management style to city hall, but here's the thing: The mayor and some members of his administration are showing increasingly worrisome signs that they have no regard for council or some members of the public in Lakewood who may have opinions that differ from theirs. This backyard hen question is only one example in a pattern that I've been observing and have been worrying quite a bit about. I'm sure the mayor knows that there are members of council and the public who oppose the idea of backyard chickens in a city as densely populated and burdened with extremely serious housing issues (and few resources to handle them) as Lakewood. So how did he choose to deal with that potentially contentious issue? By completely excluding ALL of us from the discussion about this pilot. I regret that I have to take this complaint to the public rather than speaking with the mayor about it, but I feel that I'm left with no choice when members of council are excluded from these kinds of conversations at city hall.

One of my chief concerns about this pilot is that the mayor has said that housing is one of his top priorities, yet he has unilaterally chosen to increase the burden on our housing department and city resources by adding chickens to the residential landscape. It doesn't make sense to me. I'd like the opportunity to hear how it makes sense to him.

I sincerely respect the point of view and efforts of backyard hen supporters in Lakewood because I know that their intention is to provide a new means of making healthy, fresh food accessible to Lakewoodites. However, based on what I know of our city's housing situation, including issues that I see in my own neighborhood every day, and what our city is facing in terms of resource constraints, I can't support the inclusion of chickens in our residential landscape. Though our city has some similarities to other urban areas that allow backyard chickens, we also have many key differences and very unique challenges to manage. While the City of Cleveland may have some very appropriate conditions for raising backyard chickens, Lakewood simply does not.

Thank you to the publishers of the Observer and the readers of this forum for giving me a place to share my opinion on this. Unfortunately, I haven't had the same opportunity at city hall.


Monique,
For some of the reasons you mentioned, I also think our mayor is making a mistake regarding the raising of backyard chickens. But let's look at the ordinance that I believe our mayor is following:


505.18 CERTAIN ANIMALS PROHIBITED.
(a) No person shall knowingly keep, maintain or have in his possession or under his control within the City any dangerous or carnivorous wild animal or reptile, any vicious domesticated animal, or any other animal or reptile, with vicious or dangerous propensities, except to the extent that an exemption may be applicable pursuant to subsections (c) or (d) hereof.


(b) For the purposes of this section, there shall be an irrebuttable presumption, that, when kept or maintained within the City, the animals listed below are considered dangerous animals to which the prohibition of subsection (a) hereof, in the absence of an exemption pursuant to subsections (c) or (d) hereof, applies:

(1) All crotalid, elapid and venomous colubroid snakes;


(2) Apes; Chimpanzees (Pan); gibbons (hylobates); gorillas (Gorilla); orangutans (Pongo); and siamangs (Symphalangus);

(3) Baboons (Papoi, Manrillus);

(4) Bears (Ursidae);


(5) Bovines (Bovidae), includes all members of the bovine family, for example goats, sheep, bison and buffalo;

(6) Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus);


(7) Crocodilians (Crocodilia);


(8) Constrictor snakes when fourteen feet in length or more;

(9) Coyotes (Canis latrans);


(10) Deer (Cervidae), includes all members of the deer family, for example, white-tailed deer, elk, antelope and moose;

(11) Elephants (Elephas and Loxodonta);

(12) Foxes (Canis vulpes);


(13) Gamecocks and other fighting birds;

(14) Hippopotami (Hippopotamidae);


(15) Horses (Equidae), includes all members of the horse family, for example donkeys, mules and zebras;

(16) Hyenas (Hyaenidae); .

(17) Jaguars (Panthera onca);

(18) Leopards (Panthera pardus);

(19) Lions (Panthera leo);

(20) Lynxes (Lynx);

(21) Monkeys, old world (Cercopithecidae);

(22) Ostriches (Struthio);

(23) Piranha fish (Characidae);


(24) Puma (Felis concolor), also known as cougars, mountain lions and panthers;

(25) Rhinoceroses (Rhinocerotidae);

(26) Sharks (class Chondrichthyes);


(27) Snow leopards (Panthera uncia);


(28) Swine (Suidae), including Pot-bellied pigs;


(29) Tigers (Panthera tigris);


(30) Wolves (Canis lupus), including wolf hybrids;


(31) All game birds, including but not limited to, water fowl, chickens, roosters, ducks, geese, turkeys and common pigeon (other than a homing pigeon).


(c) Licensed pet shops, menageries, zoological gardens, and circuses shall be exempt from the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) hereof if all of the following conditions are applicable:


(1) The location conforms to the provisions of the City Zoning Code;


(2) All animals and animal quarters are kept in a clean and sanitary condition and so maintained as to eliminate objectionable odors;


(3) Animals are maintained in quarters so constructed as to prevent their escape; and


(4) No person resides within fifty feet of the quarters in which the animals are kept.


(d) Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the Director of Public Safety may grant a specific exemption, on a temporary or permanent basis, from any of the provisions of this section to any person with a legitimate scientific, educational, commercial or other purpose for maintaining the prohibited animals, in accordance with the following provisions:


(1) Written application for exemption shall be filed by any person desiring to obtain an exemption with the Director of Public Safety. The application shall state the applicant's name, address, type and number of animals desired to be kept, general purpose for which the animals will be kept, and a general description of provisions which will be made for safe, sanitary and secure maintenance of the animals.


(2) The Director of Public Safety may grant, deny or restrict the terms of an application for exemption; provided, however, that he shall take some official action on an application within 120 days of its filing.


(3) In considering the merits of an application for exemption, the Director of Public Safety may cause one or more inspections of the applicant's premises to be made by appropriate employees or representatives of the City, and may also refer the application to persons who are technically knowledgeable with respect to the animals involved for an advisory opinion.


(4) In evaluating an application for exemption, the Director of Public Safety shall give consideration to the following criteria:


A. The experience and knowledge of the applicant relative to the animals involved;


B. Whether the applicant has obtained a federal or state permit relative to the animals involved;


C. The relative danger, safety, and health risks to the general public, to persons residing or passing near the applicant's premises, and to the applicant in connection with the animals involved;


D. The provisions which have been or will be made for the safe, sanitary and secure maintenance of the animals for the protection of the general public, persons residing or passing near the applicant's premises, and the applicant;


E. The provisions which have been or will be made to protect the safety and health of the animals involved;


F. Any other logically relevant information.


(5) An application for exemption under this subsection (d) shall be denied unless the Director of Public Safety determines that, in view of all the relevant criteria and any restrictions which he may provide, reasonably appropriate measures commensurate with the degree of risk associated with the animals involved have been or will be taken to assure at least a minimum acceptable level of protection from danger to the health and safety of the general public, persons residing or passing near the applicant's premises, and the applicant.


(6) An exemption granted pursuant to this subsection (d) may be withdrawn by action of the Director of Public Safety in the event that the Director of Public Safety determines that there has been a change in the conditions or assumptions under which it was originally granted or in the event that the applicant fails to comply with restrictions originally placed on the exemption.


(e) No exemption granted pursuant to any paragraph of this section shall be construed, nor is it intended by the City as a guaranty or warranty of any kind, whether express or implied to any person, including without limitation the general public, persons residing or passing near the applicant's premises, or the applicant, either in general or individually, as to the danger, or lack thereof, or degree of risk to health or safety of any animal, specifically or generally, or any premises where any animal is maintained or kept pursuant to such exemption.


(f) Whoever violates any of the provisions of this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. A separate offense shall be as deemed committed for each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues.

(Ord. 44-04. Passed 6-21-04; Ord. 34-11. Passed 7-18-11.)


What role does council play regarding this ordinance? Do you feel this chicken issue should follow the same process that allowed dogs in the parks?

Scott Meeson


If you would understand anything, observe its beginning and its development.
- Aristotle
Peter Grossetti
Posts: 1520
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Peter Grossetti » Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:08 pm

@Ms. Smith - A member of council (Dave Anderson) sits on the Lakewood Animal Safety and Welfare Advisory Board ... and Hens in Lakewood (HIL) came to LASWAB seeking our support/endorsement of their proposed pilot project (which we granted). Two other members of council (Tom Bullock and Shawn Juris) have also spoken to me (in my role as LASWAB member) about HIL's pilot program. To insinuate that Council has been out of the loop with regard to HIL is really not fair.

And beside .. if the HIL pilot project goes well (and I am certain it will) and raising hens for eggs IS eventually allowed, I can't believe that everyone and their brother will be rushing to do it. First of all, it is NOT an inexpensive proposition (Giant Eagle a sells eggs a LOT cheaper that any backyard hen raiser), and secondly, there will be myriad rules and regulations set it place that will deter the novice curiosity seeker from moving forward with such an undertaking.

Congrats HIL for the hard work and dedication they have exhibited ..and thank you Mayor Summers for your common sense approach to this issue.


"So, let's make the most of this beautiful day.
Since we're together we might as well say:
Would you be mine? Could you be mine?
Won't you be my neighbor?"

~ Fred (Mr. Rogers) Rogers
Scott Meeson
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 12:08 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Scott Meeson » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:02 pm

Peter Grossetti wrote:@Ms. Smith - A member of council (Dave Anderson) sits on the Lakewood Animal Safety and Welfare Advisory Board ... and Hens in Lakewood (HIL) came to LASWAB seeking our support/endorsement of their proposed pilot project (which we granted). Two other members of council (Tom Bullock and Shawn Juris) have also spoken to me (in my role as LASWAB member) about HIL's pilot program. To insinuate that Council has been out of the loop with regard to HIL is really not fair.

And beside .. if the HIL pilot project goes well (and I am certain it will) and raising hens for eggs IS eventually allowed, I can't believe that everyone and their brother will be rushing to do it. First of all, it is NOT an inexpensive proposition (Giant Eagle a sells eggs a LOT cheaper that any backyard hen raiser), and secondly, there will be myriad rules and regulations set it place that will deter the novice curiosity seeker from moving forward with such an undertaking.

Congrats HIL for the hard work and dedication they have exhibited ..and thank you Mayor Summers for your common sense approach to this issue.


Peter,

Help me understand, how does Lakewood benefit from this pilot project?

Scott Meeson


If you would understand anything, observe its beginning and its development.
- Aristotle
User avatar
marklingm
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: The 'Wood

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby marklingm » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:10 pm

Scott Meeson wrote:What role does council play regarding this ordinance? Do you feel this chicken issue should follow the same process that allowed dogs in the parks?


Scott,

Then Ward 3 Councilperson Mike Summers felt that transparent and accountable city council discussion about allowing dogs in the city parks was a good idea.

Now Mayor Mike Summers appears to feel that such a discussion should not be had regarding chickens.

Perhaps your question should be addressed to Mike Summers instead of At Large Councilwoman Monique Smith?

Matt


User avatar
marklingm
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: The 'Wood

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby marklingm » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:24 pm

Peter Grossetti wrote:@Ms. Smith - A member of council (Dave Anderson) sits on the Lakewood Animal Safety and Welfare Advisory Board ... and Hens in Lakewood (HIL) came to LASWAB seeking our support/endorsement of their proposed pilot project (which we granted). Two other members of council (Tom Bullock and Shawn Juris) have also spoken to me (in my role as LASWAB member) about HIL's pilot program. To insinuate that Council has been out of the loop with regard to HIL is really not fair.


Peter,

I find it hard to believe that Wards 1, 2, and 3 Councilmen David Anderson, Tom Bullock, and Shawn Juris were acting on behalf of City Council at any Lakewood Animal Safety and Welfare Advisory Board (LASWAB) and/or Hens in Lakewood (HIL) meeting.

I am sure that Councilmen Anderson, Bullock, and Juris are well aware of the Ohio Open Meeting Laws and that there would no doubt be public notices (and minutes) of any LASWAB and/or HIL meetings where any one or more of these councilmen were acting on behalf of City Council.

And, in any event, I am also sure that At-Large Councilpersons Brian E. Powers, Monique Smith, and Ryan Nowlin – not to mention Ward 4 Councilwoman and City Council President Mary Louise Madigan – would have liked to be in the same “chicken” loop as their city council colleagues.

Matt


Cherise Sims
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:31 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Cherise Sims » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:25 pm

1. Members of council in the wards that the pilot project families live in were contacted.
2. The ordinance written the way it does allows for exemptions. We followed the law, we went above and beyond by getting the go ahead from council members, the animal welfare board, numerous citizens and local businesses.
3. How does this benefit the city? A few of the businesses we contacted will provide supplies for sale to hen keepers so this supports local buisness and the city shows it is interested in encouraging sustainability and the environment for starters. I have said this before, but here it is again. Urban hen keeping is not some hip NEW trend! Sure, Lakewood is just one of a growing number of major cities that allows backyard hen keeping. However, there was a time in the not distant past where the government encouraged chicken keeping and victory gardening in the city. There are over 500 cities doing this, there have been very few repercussions and the pilot program is going to virtually eliminate the chances of Lakewood failing at this.
Give it a chance before you naysay. You will get the opportunity to see if this works on a very small scale.


User avatar
marklingm
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 7:13 pm
Location: The 'Wood

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby marklingm » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:36 pm

Monique Smith wrote:The problem with the news of the backyard hen pilot program is that the mayor and his administration didn't involve city council in a single word of the discussions or the planning that they have apparently been having for quite a while about it. In fact, it's only because of the news that has been reported in the Observer that I even know about this pilot, and I'm a member of Lakewood city council. Pretty sad, eh?

To make it worse, when I reached out to the city's Director of Planning and Development several weeks ago to ask about the rumor that a pilot was in progress or being planned, the only response I received was that there was "no pilot"... and that was after more than one request for the information. So much for transparency and collaboration.

It breaks my heart to say this, because I once publicly supported the campaign of our current mayor and genuinely believed he would bring a very beneficial management style to city hall, but here's the thing: The mayor and some members of his administration are showing increasingly worrisome signs that they have no regard for council or some members of the public in Lakewood who may have opinions that differ from theirs. This backyard hen question is only one example in a pattern that I've been observing and have been worrying quite a bit about. I'm sure the mayor knows that there are members of council and the public who oppose the idea of backyard chickens in a city as densely populated and burdened with extremely serious housing issues (and few resources to handle them) as Lakewood. So how did he choose to deal with that potentially contentious issue? By completely excluding ALL of us from the discussion about this pilot. I regret that I have to take this complaint to the public rather than speaking with the mayor about it, but I feel that I'm left with no choice when members of council are excluded from these kinds of conversations at city hall.

One of my chief concerns about this pilot is that the mayor has said that housing is one of his top priorities, yet he has unilaterally chosen to increase the burden on our housing department and city resources by adding chickens to the residential landscape. It doesn't make sense to me. I'd like the opportunity to hear how it makes sense to him.

I sincerely respect the point of view and efforts of backyard hen supporters in Lakewood because I know that their intention is to provide a new means of making healthy, fresh food accessible to Lakewoodites. However, based on what I know of our city's housing situation, including issues that I see in my own neighborhood every day, and what our city is facing in terms of resource constraints, I can't support the inclusion of chickens in our residential landscape. Though our city has some similarities to other urban areas that allow backyard chickens, we also have many key differences and very unique challenges to manage. While the City of Cleveland may have some very appropriate conditions for raising backyard chickens, Lakewood simply does not.

Thank you to the publishers of the Observer and the readers of this forum for giving me a place to share my opinion on this. Unfortunately, I haven't had the same opportunity at city hall.


Lakewood may have just found a true leader!

Thank you, At-Large Councilwoman Monique Smith!

As a preliminary matter and in full disclosure, I am by no means a political operative for Councilwoman Smith. In fact, Councilwoman Smith has made it abundantly clear to me that – regardless of whether we both agree on issues facing our city and public schools – she can never endorse or support me based solely upon the fact that I am not a Democrat.

Although I disagree with her approach toward political collaboration, I have newfound respect for my At-Large Councilwoman!

While Councilwoman Smith has just placed herself directly in the crosshairs of “The Machine” and the “Lakewood Shunning of Smith” has reportedly already begun, bullies never like being exposed as such to the public – which is why political bullies detest true transparency and accountability.

Having been at the receiving end of numerous, narcissistic knives in the back, I have the utmost admiration for Councilwoman Smith’s courage to speak the truth.

I hope that Councilwoman Smith’s leadership will encourage others to sacrifice their invitations to black-tie/holiday events in exchange for exposing the emperor as having no clothes.


Cherise Sims
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:31 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Cherise Sims » Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:49 pm

Monique Smith wrote:The problem with the news of the backyard hen pilot program is that the mayor and his administration didn't involve city council in a single word of the discussions or the planning that they have apparently been having for quite a while about it. In fact, it's only because of the news that has been reported in the Observer that I even know about this pilot, and I'm a member of Lakewood city council. Pretty sad, eh?

To make it worse, when I reached out to the city's Director of Planning and Development several weeks ago to ask about the rumor that a pilot was in progress or being planned, the only response I received was that there was "no pilot"... and that was after more than one request for the information. So much for transparency and collaboration.

It breaks my heart to say this, because I once publicly supported the campaign of our current mayor and genuinely believed he would bring a very beneficial management style to city hall, but here's the thing: The mayor and some members of his administration are showing increasingly worrisome signs that they have no regard for council or some members of the public in Lakewood who may have opinions that differ from theirs. This backyard hen question is only one example in a pattern that I've been observing and have been worrying quite a bit about. I'm sure the mayor knows that there are members of council and the public who oppose the idea of backyard chickens in a city as densely populated and burdened with extremely serious housing issues (and few resources to handle them) as Lakewood. So how did he choose to deal with that potentially contentious issue? By completely excluding ALL of us from the discussion about this pilot. I regret that I have to take this complaint to the public rather than speaking with the mayor about it, but I feel that I'm left with no choice when members of council are excluded from these kinds of conversations at city hall.

One of my chief concerns about this pilot is that the mayor has said that housing is one of his top priorities, yet he has unilaterally chosen to increase the burden on our housing department and city resources by adding chickens to the residential landscape. It doesn't make sense to me. I'd like the opportunity to hear how it makes sense to him.

I sincerely respect the point of view and efforts of backyard hen supporters in Lakewood because I know that their intention is to provide a new means of making healthy, fresh food accessible to Lakewoodites. However, based on what I know of our city's housing situation, including issues that I see in my own neighborhood every day, and what our city is facing in terms of resource constraints, I can't support the inclusion of chickens in our residential landscape. Though our city has some similarities to other urban areas that allow backyard chickens, we also have many key differences and very unique challenges to manage. While the City of Cleveland may have some very appropriate conditions for raising backyard chickens, Lakewood simply does not.

Thank you to the publishers of the Observer and the readers of this forum for giving me a place to share my opinion on this. Unfortunately, I haven't had the same opportunity at city hall.


To answer your other points: We were able to find cities with near identical population densities as Lakewood with successful hen keeping programs, and recall that they are allowed in NYC so yes, your concern; while valid, is easily addressed and overcome. We understand the fact that there are situations that are not ideal for hen keeping we are working on and have established some guidelines on who would be an appropriate candidate for this particular pet. Chickens need a minimum 1-2 sq. ft. of coop space and about the same amount for an outdoor run. Ideally 4 chickens would have a 4x4 coop and 4x6 (approximate) run in order to maintain creature comfort. Really small back yards will not accommodate this need. Yes, there have been anecdotal tales of little chickens such as the “silkie” breed living indoors and being potty trained, however for future reference we are only discussing heavy backyard breeds suitable for outdoor living in Northeast, Ohio in all future correspondence. Therefore, apartment dwellers that make up a huge population of this city would not ever be able to properly house hens.
As for city resources, Hens in Lakewood is changing gears to become a component of educational resource. We are planning classes on backyard hen keeping, working with LEAF to provide pamphlets and other resources and I have already personally identified several resources to deal with unwanted hens. Including farms, petting zoos etc.
I am sorry you were not included on this phase of the initial program, but again other members of council were. The ordinance prohibiting hens has not changed, but when we are prepared to submit a change to the ordinance to council I hope you will have gotten a chance to come to an educational seminar, read more about the program and explore the benefits and history of urban hen keeping. Please stay in touch and learn more at http://www.facebook.com/lakewoodohiohens


Peter Grossetti
Posts: 1520
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Peter Grossetti » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:50 pm

Mr. Meeson - "how does Lakewood benefit from this pilot project?" I believe Ms. Sims has answered that more eloquently that I could have hoped to. And beside, pilot projects seem to make sense, don't they? They provide valuable data (both qualitative and quantitative) with VERY little risk. Pilot projects are also en vogue here in Lakewood. Lakewood Outdoor Basketball, for instance (which, btw, I am happy to be a volunteer for and have met some wonderful youngsters on the courts). Even the recent decision by the Planning Commission regarding the new McDonald's restaurant traffic flow could be considered a "pilot project" (McDonald’s must complete another traffic study within one year of opening ... isn't that essentially a pilot project?)


"So, let's make the most of this beautiful day.
Since we're together we might as well say:
Would you be mine? Could you be mine?
Won't you be my neighbor?"

~ Fred (Mr. Rogers) Rogers
Peter Grossetti
Posts: 1520
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Peter Grossetti » Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:58 pm

Mr. Markling - I respectfully stand by my statement: [b]"to insinuate that Council has been out of the loop with regard to HIL is really not fair."


"So, let's make the most of this beautiful day.
Since we're together we might as well say:
Would you be mine? Could you be mine?
Won't you be my neighbor?"

~ Fred (Mr. Rogers) Rogers
Will Brown
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:56 am
Location: Lakewood

Re: Chickens Legal In Lakewood...

Postby Will Brown » Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:01 pm

Many of my ancestors were dairy farmers and kept chickens. I recall that rats were always a concern around the coops and cribs. In fact, I learned to shoot by plinking rats for some of them. Traps didn't seem to be effective and there was some reason they didn't like to use poison. In any event, I have since always associated a large rat population with raising chickens. I know that even having a bird feeder can attract rats, as the birds don't like some of the seeds and throw them on the ground.

So my question is what is being done to insure that we don't become over ratted when we allow people to do their fowl thing?


Society in every state is a blessing, but the Government even in its best state is but a necessary evil...

Return to “Lakewood General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests