By Geena Monahan—For the North Star Reporter
A proposed bylaw amendment allowing residents to keep chickens by right in residential districts continues to make its way through the review process, drawing heightened scrutiny as officials revise the measure amid concerns over rodents and enforcement.
The measure, first introduced in December 2025, was drafted in response to a growing number of residents seeking special permits from the Zoning Board of Appeals to keep backyard chickens.
Town Councilor Dan Donovan, chair of the Bylaw Subcommittee, said those repeated requests suggest the town’s current zoning language — which broadly groups chickens with other livestock — no longer reflects how residents wish to use their properties.
“When that many people are applying for an exemption, it’s time to look at the zoning bylaw and see if it’s really working the way we want it to,” said Donovan at a Jan. 21 Bylaw Subcommittee meeting, where seven residents spoke against the proposal.
The amendment would regulate chickens specifically and establish licensing, inspection and operational standards. Under the draft version, residents would be allowed to keep a limited number of hens depending on the zoning district, with roosters largely prohibited except in R-40 zones. Chicken coops would be subject to setback requirements, feed and waste management plans, and annual licensing by the town.
While officials say the goal is to bring clarity and enforceability to a practice that already exists, residents raised concerns about how the bylaw could affect densely populated neighborhoods — particularly R-10 districts, where lots and yards are smaller.
Maureen Avila questioned whether allowing up to 12 chickens in some residential zones was realistic, citing proximity of homes and the potential for spilled feed to attract rodents. She also expressed skepticism about enforcement, noting that inspections capture conditions at a single point in time.
“Rodents come at night,” said Avila. “As long as the coop looks good on inspection day, then they’re good.”
Other residents echoed concerns about rats, odors and quality-of-life impacts. Peter Yochim described two recent rodent issues in his neighborhood — one tied to a chicken coop that was resolved quickly, and another involving a dumpster that lingered for years because of limited enforcement options.
Members of the Bylaw Subcommittee emphasized that the proposed bylaw would give the town more enforcement authority than it now has. Donovan likened the licensing system to dog ownership, noting that complaints could trigger follow-up inspections by the Board of Health or Animal Control.
“That’s what worries me,” Yochim said. “You’re putting the onus on neighbors to keep reporting problems.”
Animal Control Officer Stephanie Mitchell said knowing where chickens are located would be especially important in the event of an outbreak like the avian flu, but acknowledged that additional inspections would increase her workload.
Town Manager Michael Borg suggested requiring pre-inspections in R-10 districts to determine whether a property is suitable for a coop before a license is applied for, potentially conducted by a BOH agent, which drew support from numerous subcommittee members.
A discussion also ensued over whether additional safeguards — such as increased setbacks from property lines, minimum lot sizes, fines, license revocation and clear nuisance definitions — should be added. Examples from other Massachusetts communities, including Seekonk, Chelmsford and Framingham, were cited as models for addressing odors, noise complaints and multifamily properties.
Donovan and Bylaw Subcommittee member Ryan Benharris both cautioned against making the regulations so restrictive that it undermines the bylaw’s intent, while acknowledging residents’ concerns about smaller lots.
“We don’t want to make a bylaw that no one can use,” said Benharris. “But we also don’t want to create loopholes that leave Animal Control and the Board of Health chasing problems.”
Despite the pushback, officials stressed the proposal remains in its early stages. Councilor Laura Wagner and Bylaw Subcommittee member John Donahue volunteered to draft a revised version, expected to be reviewed at an upcoming subcommittee meeting in early February.
“I think this can be addressed with proper conditions,” said Wagner. “Overall, I support the idea because the chickens are out there – people do want chickens – and from a health perspective we need to know where they are. It becomes more difficult when there’s no regulations. I believe we can get there.”
Donovan assured residents there would be additional opportunities for public input. Because the measure involves zoning changes, it must go first to the Planning Board for a public hearing, before returning to the Town Council for a second public hearing and final review prior to a vote.
“This isn’t something that’s going to happen quickly,” Donovan said. “It’s a process, and more often than not, that’s a good thing.”