One Response

  1. Carol,
    Just between you and me, regarding Charles Robbins’ situation as described under “CItizen Appearances” at the March 2nd City Council meeting:

    Subsequent to Planning Commission’s review of the infamous “chicken ordinance”, we realized that, while 10-1-2 names ten or more varieties in defining household pets, 10-4-4 (B) 3 permits pets “provided that not more than three (3) pets are adult dogs, cats, chickens [to be moved to new paragraph 2.5], ducks or rabbits or any combination of these species”. In other words, the 3-pet limit does not apply to smaller animals such as parrots, hamster, lizards—and, presumably, comparably-sized but unspecified avians such as pigeons. So, unless someone insists that pigeons are really “city chickens” (or commercially-raised “livestock”), Mr. Robbins and his pigeons should be free and clear.

    Just my opinion, of course…as a private citizen casually reading the City’s Zoning Regulations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: