Victorville planning commissioners agree to hear proposal for 24-month vinyl-fence pilot after public comment

The City of Victorville Planning Commission voted unanimously Aug. 31 to place a presentation on the September agenda about a proposed 24-month pilot program that would allow limited use of vinyl fencing in side and rear yards within tract boundaries.

The request came during the meeting’s public comment period from multiple building-industry representatives. "We respectfully request the planning commission bring forward an agenda item for your September meeting to permit the limited use of vinyl fencing within tract boundaries, specifically side yard and rear yard fencing as part of a 24 month pilot program," said Carlos Rodriguez, chief policy officer for the Building Industry Association of Southern California.

Commissioners heard similar testimony from homebuilder and supplier representatives who said an engineered, reinforced vinyl product can meet local wind and durability needs and could reduce construction costs. "The average saving per lot when going vinyl versus block is on average $10,000," said Yvonne Feingold, vice president of operations for Pacific Immunities, adding that savings could be used to buy down interest rates or otherwise improve affordability for buyers.

The presenters said the proposed product would use steel-reinforced posts, concrete footings, UV protection and a 20-year warranty; one installer said upgraded designs could withstand wind loads of 95 to 110 mph. "They designed something that would shorten up the on centers, add steel into the post and into the rail, and then we went ahead and helped them out with calculations," said Rick Cavazos, who identified himself as representing a major local fencing contractor.

Staff clarified that a formal vote was required to agendize the presentation and that a code amendment, if pursued, would require the city’s required noticing (the staff member noted a 20-day notice requirement for formal code amendments). The commission’s process description was provided before the motion: staff recommended the applicants be allowed to give a presentation at the next regular meeting, with the planning commission to determine afterward if actionable requests should be made of staff.

Commissioner Marsh made the motion to agendize a September presentation; Commissioner Marshall seconded. The chair took a roll-call vote: Marsh — yes; Marshall — aye; Chair Kurth — yes. The motion passed unanimously.

Commissioners and staff noted that the September presentation would allow a focused review (including product demonstrations and supporting calculations) and that any formal code amendment would follow the city’s public-notice and review timetable. The commission did not discuss or decide on any code changes at the Aug. 31 meeting; commissioners explicitly closed public comment and said they could not deliberate on a non-agendized item beyond deciding whether to place it on a future agenda.

The presentation will be scheduled for the commission’s regular meeting on Sept. 10, 2025, as established during the Aug. 31 meeting.