A split City Council on Monday voted to allow city residents to keep up to six female chickens in their backyards under specific conditions.

The 3-2 vote came after speakers — pro and con — made their views known to the council and audience that filled the Council Chambers. Voting to allow the chickens were Virginia Finnerty, William Pitt and Roland Wyman. Doug Mercer and Richard Brooks voted against the measure.

The majority of the audience broke into applause after the vote was taken.

Before that vote, Mercer’s motion to now allow the chickens failed after only he and Brooks supported it.

The decision to allow residents to keep chickens within city limits was somewhat of a compromise. The city’s Planning Board recommended changing the city’s animal ordinance to allow up to 10 chickens.

As he did in November, John Wehrenberg, developer of the Tree Shade residential development, urged the council to carefully consider allowing chickens inside the city. The majority of the Tree Shade residents he talked with, he said, oppose the proposed amendment. Wehrenberg said chickens would attract predators, which could pose a threat to pets if the predators were unable to get to the chickens. He also wondered about the health and environmental effects chickens in coops would produce.

He renewed his concerns Monday.

“The chicken poop attracts flies. The chicken feed attracts rats. The eggs attract snakes. The chickens themselves attract predators, and chickens just do not add any kind of value to the property,” he said, adding that allowing chickens in backyards would be regressive and not progressive as supporters of backyard chickens believe.

Michael McClure, a Smallwood resident, argued against allowing city residents to keep chickens because they “don’t belong in a residential area.” McClure also said enforcement of the regulations governing backyard chickens could be problematic. He also wondered why ducks, geese and other fowl are not allowed under the new rules.

On Monday, Emma Wood, who made her first argument for allowing chickens in the city in November, made a new case for backyard chickens. Wood said the issue with backyard chickens is a matter of “perception versus reality.” The reality is backyard chickens are not a noise nuisance and they do not lower property values, Wood said. She was supported on those assertions by other speakers who presented information that backed up her claims.

Wood also challenged the claim that chickens attract flies. “The reality is that chickens, when living in a more natural environment like a backyard, actually eat fly larva,” she said. “Interestingly, chickens eat any kind of bug that creates a larva.”

The council accepted the Planning Board’s recommendation to reduce the distance between chicken coops and residences from 100 feet to 50 feet. Under the new rules, no roosters are allowed in backyards. The chickens could not run at large, but would have to be kept in a “suitable” chicken house or coop, which would have to be cleaned at least twice a week. Waste material from the coop must be hauled away or disposed of on-site in a manner that does not cause a bad odor and attract flies.