ZBA Interprets Animal Code: Fowl Means Any Bird, Split Vote on Coop Setbacks

The Croton Zoning Board of Appeals spent its June 16 meeting parsing a single sentence of village code, issuing interpretations on what qualifies as a domestic animal, what counts as fowl, and whether birds can be kept near property lines.

The interpretations were requested by Village Engineer Vincent Salanitro, who said the zoning provision on keeping animals has proven difficult to enforce because its language is ambiguous. "I'm basically just asking for an interpretation of this sentence,"Read 0:50▶ Salanitro told the board. The village code, Section 230-9.1(A)(10)(f), reads: "Keeping domestic animals, except pigs, for individual domestic purposes or as pets, provided that not more than three dogs over six months old and not more than 25 fowl shall be permitted, and no animals, except dogs or cats, or fowl shall be penned or housed within 50 feet of any lot line." Salanitro asked the board to interpret three questions: what is included in the definition of fowl, whether fowl are allowed to be penned or housed within 50 feet of a lot line, and what qualifies as a domestic animal. Several residents spoke during the public hearing. Matthew Rubenstein of Truesdale Drive said he appreciated the effort to clarify the code, noting that the comma-separated sentence structure can read differently to a lawyer, an enforcement officer, or a resident. A neighboring resident said the pigeon coop next door did not concern his family. The pigeon keeper said he bought his home and built a coop specifically to keep pigeons after being told by village staff that he could. He said he had contacted the Village about keeping the birds, received an affirmative answer, pulled a permit and had it signed off, and spent considerable money building the coop. He said he did not feel welcomed. Chair James Tuman reminded him that the hearing was about code interpretation, not his specific situation, and that the board's ruling would apply village-wide. Allison Rosen, a resident, urged the board to exclude pigeons from the definition of fowl, citing health concerns including avian flu, cryptococcus, and psittacosis. She said pigeons are carriers of diseases that are highly communicable and dangerous to humans, particularly children and immunocompromised residents, and asked the board to prohibit keeping them in densely populated neighborhoods. After closing the public hearing, the board turned to deliberation.

On domestic animals, the board quickly reached consensus. Doug Olcott offered the Merriam-Webster definition — an animal adapted over time by selective breeding from a wild or natural state to live in close association with and to the benefit of humans — and the board adopted it unanimously. The definition of fowl proved more contentious. Olcott said he was inclined to interpret it by the first Merriam-Webster definition: a bird of any kind. He noted that the code uses lay terms like "dogs" and "cats," not scientific species names, and that fowl is commonly used to mean any bird. Bill Goldsmith said he could not find a definition of fowl in New York state law, Westchester County code, or the village's own zoning code. "So at the moment I don't think that we have a definition,"Read 20:10▶ he said, adding that without one, the board should interpret the term as broadly as possible. Tuman initially leaned toward a narrower reading — poultry such as chickens, ducks, and geese — noting that the word derives from old English for bird. But he ultimately joined the other members, and the board voted 5–0 to adopt the broad definition: fowl means a bird of any kind. The 50-foot setback question produced the sharpest split. The code says "no animals, except dogs or cats, or fowl shall be penned or housed within 50 feet of any lot line." Goldsmith read the exception clause narrowly — only dogs and cats are exempt from the setback, meaning fowl must be kept at least 50 feet from property lines. Olcott and Matt Berger read it more broadly, arguing that dogs, cats, and fowl are all exempt. Olcott raised a practical concern with the narrow reading. With that interpretation, "you need to have a 100 foot wide lot,"Read 30:21▶ he said — a lot wide enough for a 50-foot setback on each side. That, he noted, would exclude most properties in the village. The board voted 3-2 in favor of the broader interpretation, allowing fowl to be penned or housed within 50 feet of a lot line. Before the votes, Goldsmith had anticipated a split on both questions. "It sounds to me like we're probably three to two on both of these issues,"Read 33:38▶ he said, adding that a non-unanimous vote would give the Village Board of Trustees useful information as it considers revising the code. The final division was on the setback question alone; the definition of fowl passed unanimously. Tuman acknowledged the difficulty. He said the board itself could not agree on how the clause reads, and said the discussion had revealed gaps in the code that the Board of Trustees should address. He described the wording as old and called for clearer guidance. The village was incorporated in 1898, according to its official history.

Assistant Village Engineer Ron Wegner suggested the board could ask the village attorney to prepare a clean resolution incorporating the board's findings for a formal vote at the next meeting. Salanitro said he hoped for an interpretation from this meeting, calling it a pressing matter. The board also approved draft minutes from its May 19 meeting, with a correction to the spelling of Olcott's name.