Heber City Council Meeting date: October 6, 2016 Report by: Anthony L. Kohler

Re: Deer Fencing

The Planning Commission met on March 24, April 7, August 18 and September 8, 2016 regarding deer fencing (see minutes for those meetings below). On September 8, 2016, the Planning Commission made the following motion:

Ryan Stack moved to make a recommendation to the City Council that we have fully examined the issue and we find that amending the fence ordinance would not sufficiently or adequately address the [deer] problem because it simply redirects it somewhere else; that doesn't do anything to fix or address it on a bigger citywide scale. To that end I would further recommend that the City Council look at other options including contracting with DNR. Ryan Stack commented that he personally is not recommending that we contract with DNR because his children would be very upset with him but he is recommending that the City Council look at all the options available to them including that. Michael Thurber seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Kieth Rawlings, Michael Thurber, Darryl Glissmeyer, and Ryan Stack. Voting Nay: None. The motion carried.

March 24, 2016 Deer Fence Discussion Planning Commission

Kieth Rawlings introduced the item and asked Anthony Kohler to summarize his staff report. Anthony Kohler indicated that recently City Council discussed deer in the City. Council has elected to not adopt a program for reducing the deer herd in the City and have asked the Planning Commission to investigate the possibility of allowing agricultural fences to keep deer out of gardens. Mr. Kohler explained how the City Council had arrived at their decision. There was brief discussion on the survey that had been taken.

DiAnn Duke Turner expressed her opinion that they had polled the wrong people and that some people who had responded had not had deer in their garden. Anthony Kohler indicated some of the residents who had been present at the Council meeting wanted to speak tonight about an option for an eight foot fence to keep deer out. Mr. Kohler explained that his staff report was long but it was not always a simple as putting up a tall fence. The 8 foot fence is one option and other options are, and an electric fence combined with plants deer do not like to eat. It was noted that if the deer are not able to see through the fence then it is more effective.

Darryl Glissmeyer indicated he would worry about an electric fence in a front yard or side yard which he thought could be potentially dangerous to children. Ryan Stack asked how do you define garden? Do orchards count as well? Permitting fencing of the garden vs. the yard or lot with an eight foot fence was discussed in reference to this question. Another option mentioned was to place a mesh fencing material on top of a 6 foot fence only during the growing season. DiAnn Duke Turner answered that she did not think this would be effective. DiAnn Duke Turner spoke on how important she thought it was to be able to put fences up that are over six feet tall. She criticized the city for not paying for the $1000 liability insurance to hire an archer, and went on record to say that she would gladly pay herself the $1000 liability that the City of Heber needs to hire an archer. David Todd spoke about the problems associated with urban deer including damage to garden gardens, feces, and destruction of ornamental plants. His solution to the problem was an 8 foot fence, probably a 4 foot tall wire mesh on top of four foot tall chain link fencing. As far as the six foot vinyl fencing he had in his yard he would probably leave that and see if they jumped over it or not.

Tony Kohler expressed that if the Commission and Council were going to consider allowing one person to have an 8 foot fence then we should allow everyone the option to have an 8 foot fence. Stack indicated he would like to see a draft ordinance that would allow eight foot fences to side yards and backyards only and that there be consistency of materials; that the ordinance address fencing material and composition, location and positioning.

Shawn Davis indicated he did like the idea of allowing people to have an eight foot fence. Mr. Davis had done some research and had contacted cities such as Salt Lake City and Highland and they had indicated that fencing cannot always work that deer sometimes still jumped even eight foot fencing. If he were to do an eight foot fence he indicated he would make it a temporary fence so that he could still get in with the tractor. The deer also sometimes get caught in the mesh and you have to release them. And sometimes the animal would have to be euthanized if it had been caught in the mesh for too long and had been injured. He expressed that his preference would be for deer control. He indicated that as he had reached out to other cities there had been some discrepancy with what the Department of Wildlife Services said costs would be. Other cities use the dedicated Hunter program that the DWR offers with residents that get a deer license. The City then does not have to pay the archers. He personally would not want the option of building an eight foot fence. Mr. Davis spoke about the number of different programs the cities had implemented and the results. Looking at the North Salt Lake ordinance was referenced. Also wind load needed to be reviewed in regard to fences.

Staff was asked to place this item on the April 7th Planning Commission meeting agenda for further discussion.

April 7, 2016 Deer Fence Discussion Planning Commission

The staff report was referenced; there was only one proposed change to the ordinance which was to allow a fence or wall along a side yard or rear yard to a maximum height of eight feet. Discussion and debate ensued and the following points were made:

• eight foot fences will have to be engineered; this will be costly • run all fence permits through the Building Department as the structure itself would now be regulated • prohibit chain link as a perimeter fencing material; allow it only in the rear yard but not as the rear yard

fence • three feet maximum fencing height in front yard as opposed to four feet maximum fencing height in front

yard • have a setback for eight foot fencing from the street to wait and see what happens with the Form Based

Code instead of "re-inventing the wheel" • ask the consultants about this when they are here to discuss the Form Based Code • the more complex the ordinance the less likely it is to be enforced • an eight foot fence is a large barrier and there is no line of sight where predators and criminals may hide;

this not a beneficial design for a safe community and the Police Department may not be supportive of eight foot fences

• Highland City's plan for eliminating deer, low or no cost for urban hunter(s); analyze Highland City's plan versus amending the fencing ordinance

• notify residents of any changes to the ordinance through their water bill • have residents sign they are aware of the changes when they set up an account for water • There was lengthy discussion on the history of fencing in Heber City. The Commission was hesitant to

rush into anything with the fencing history. The preference was to speak to the consultants for the Form Based Code on this topic.

David Todd was present the last time that eight foot fences were discussed. He indicated he would like to put a four foot wire fence on top of his existing fence and then hook the two fences together. It was noted anything over six foot will have to go through the building department. Mr. Todd explained that having an eight foot fence was somewhat specific to those who have deer in their yards.

August 25, 2016 Deer Fencing Discussion Planning Commission

Issues regarding urban deer and options to eliminate the problems associated with them were discussed. Comments made by the Commission were:

2

• allowing eight foot fences for people who can afford them will essentially push the deer into the yards of those who cannot afford to build an eight foot fence; it does not eliminate the problem euthanasia would not be a good option

• referencing the survey the City performed most people in the City don't mind the deer and don't think anything needs to be done

• the survey results showed that harvesting the deer was unwanted • Shawn Davis' letter was referred to. His letter was interesting, Highland City had hired archers to

eliminate deer. Kieth Rawlings thought that although it was undesirable harvesting was probably the most viable option

• if harvesting were to be allowed Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR) hunters should be used • concern was expressed over allowing just anyone using archery to obtain the deer • one recommendation would be to only have the archers on property if invited to do so • allowing archers on private property is an issue

David Todd discussed his thoughts. He related information from a meeting Chief Booth had scheduled in June wherein he had invited a lot of people who had a problem with deer. He indicated there had probably been 20 or 25 people there along with 5 or 6 people from the Division of Wildlife Resources to answer their questions. The end of the matter was that DWR was not going to do anything for the deer. They are custodians of the deer but this urban deer policy has turned everything over to the City so they are not going to be responsible for taking care of the deer. They are not going to do anything unless the situation is dire; such as in somebody being killed. At the conclusion of the meeting Mr. Todd explained that he had questioned Chief Booth if he would be at this time willing to bring this back to the City Council again and that Chief Booth had replied that his feelings had not changed; he thought the survey was still relevant and that he would not recommend the Council go this way at this time. Mr. Todd noted the people who had attended the meeting all had problems with deer in their yards and were unanimous that they wanted something done. His desire was that he would like to see some type of resolution on this before winter and before the deer settle in his yard. The thoughts he expressed were even if an urban deer policy goes into effect they are not going to kill all the deer, they will thin them out, and he will still have deer in his back yard. Anthony Kohler had visited his yard about three weeks ago and he indicated his understanding was that he (Mr. Kohler) would be writing something up that they could present to the Planning Commission. Kieth Rawlings answered that Mr. Kohler had done this. Mr. Todd replied that there was really nothing saying where they were going to go with this. He referenced how long this had been going on and he would like to see if we could come to some type ofresoiution on this. He commented that what he would like to see would be some conditional use permits for people who have problems with deer.

He indicated he would like to build an I foot fence, he did not think it needs to be engineered. He indicated he has a four foot chain link fence and he would like to put some posts up that and then put another section of four foot fence around the top of that. He stated, "It is not going to be a heavy, heavy eight foot fence." The Commission made a couple of comments on wind resistance and chain link. Di Ann Duke Turner's situation was referenced. Kieth Rawlings thought that Anthony Kohler had visited her property to see the situation as well. Kieth Rawlings also pointed out that Mrs. Turner had threatened to put up an eight foot fence with or without approval. David Todd answered that one of Chief Booth's statements had been, 'if you want to build an eight foot fence and you've got a big deer problem then put it in. I'm the one that has to enforce it and I'm not going to enforce it because I think there is a problem'. David Todd indicated it woul9 be his preference to have something (an ordinance) in place. Kieth Rawlings expressed that this didn't solve the problem. He stated, 'If Mrs. Turner and you (referring to Mr. Todd) put up an eight foot fence it doesn't solve the problem - it helps solve your problem, but it doesn't solve the problem for the City'.

David Todd asked if they could schedule this on the next meeting agenda; his goal would be to get something in place prior to winter coming.

3