A contingent of Walker Township residents who are pro-poultry sought information from the Huntingdon County Planning Commission Thursday night regarding pending amendments to the zoning ordinance currently before the Walker Township board of supervisors.
Since the Walker Township residents weren’t on the agenda to speak, the commission voted to include them and kicked off the meeting by hearing their concerns.
“We should at least hear what they have to say,” chairman Ron Rabena said.
Jim Ardrey and Connie Householder, who both keep chickens, spoke for the group of roughly 10 township residents and said they are most concerned with how the proposed changes address poultry.
They said they came to the meeting to hear the planning commission’s comments on the amendments.
Planning director James Lettiere said the planning department has not yet received a final version of the amended ordinance, so no comments were available for review at Thursday’s meeting.
“We’re anticipating getting that, once we get it we will comment on it and provide that back to the township for consideration.”
Friday, township solicitor Larry Lashinsky said he was in the process of preparing the amended ordinance and letter for submission this coming week to both the county and township planning commissions. He said clarification for another proposed zoning amendment — restricting single unit RVs to the conservation district — which was addressed by the supervisors at a special meeting March 7, delayed the submission.
Lashinsky said that as far as poultry is concerned, the current draft of the amended ordinance requires a property owner to have at least three quarters of an acre of ground to keep chicken or ducks and gives permission to keep up to six birds. At two acres, between nine and 12 are allowed, he said.
Lashinsky said that, based on his observations, the issue which has caused the most debate between all parties is the setback requirement.
In its current draft, the proposed ordinance requires chicken coops and chicken runs to sit at least 5 feet from a side boundary and 10 feet from a rear boundary.
“It’s the same as any other (yard) accessory,” he said.
Lashinsky said the township planning commission has recommended the township to consider a greater setback distance.
With the two planning commissions set to receive the ordinance next week, Lashinsky said review and comments will likely be made at their April meetings. He said he anticipates the township supervisors hosting a public hearing on the matter no sooner than the end of April.
It will be up to the board to review comments from the planners and public and decide if further changes needed for the amended ordinance are advertised ahead of the final vote, Lashinsky said.
“This is a process, it takes a little bit of time to go through those steps,” he said.
Thursday night, Ardrey told county planners the matter has been the subject of back and forth discussion among supervisions township planners and residents since September. He said that as the months have passed, he felt the board of supervisors and poultry-owning residents like himself had reached an agreement on reasonable regulations but remains concerned about some recommendations suggested by the township’s planning commission. He said at different points in the months-long discussion, a 150-foot setback was proposed, as well as required for a manure management program.
Ardrey challenged the need for imposing manure management regulations for a handful of small animals.
“You’re going to have more manure from a great dane in a week than six chickens,” he said. “We’re not talking about a massive chicken farm, we’re talking about six chickens to three-quarters of an acre.”
Lettiere asked the Walker Township group to appoint a contact person and said that when the planning department receives the amended ordinance and conducts its review, he will reach out and share those comments. He said the group would then be welcome to attend a county planning commission meeting to discuss the comments.
“That’s reasonable to us,” Ardrey said.
“We’re trying to make this more fair for all of the residents of the township,” Householder said.
Lettiere and planning commission chairman Ron Rabena both advised the group that the planning commission’s role in Walker Township’s ordinance amendment is limited. They explained their job is to review and comment; whether comments are taken to heart is entirely up to the township’s elected officials.
“They have the ultimate say,” Rabena said.
The township’s own planning commission is scheduled to meet Monday, March 20, followed by the monthly meeting of the board of supervisors Tuesday night, March 21.
(0)comments
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.