Planning Commission debates 42-inch fence standard, wildlife crossings and administrative approval

The Emigration Canyon Planning Commission spent much of its Feb. 13 meeting debating how to write fence standards for the canyon, with members weighing a 42‑inch default height, exceptions for small enclosures, wildlife crossing requirements and whether the director or the commission should handle exceptions to the rule.

Commissioners said the existing standard — a 42‑inch maximum — traces to earlier canyon guidelines and aims to preserve sight lines, wildlife movement and the canyon’s visual character. Under the draft language commissioners reviewed, property owners could build privacy enclosures or small service areas that exceed the 42‑inch limit if the space is 900 square feet or smaller and does not block identified wildlife corridors.

“That’s kind of the way all the codes are written,” one commissioner said, describing a base requirement and a list of exceptions. Commissioners pressed staff to make the standard clearer and to separate rules that apply specifically to Emigration Canyon Road from rules that govern side and rear yards.

The draft includes detailed design conditions for fences taller than 42 inches: a minimum horizontal articulation every 40 feet, an opening for wildlife movement every 100 linear feet and a three‑foot setback from an adjoining property line to create a corridor between adjacent tall fences. Commissioners said they would like the wildlife‑crossing provisions to apply across the canyon, not only on the main road.

Members discussed process questions at length: whether taller fences that meet listed exceptions should be approved administratively by the development director or whether unique requests should come to the Planning Commission. Commissioners agreed administrative approval could be appropriate when an application clearly meets written exceptions, but that the commission should retain authority to hear requests involving topographic hardship, overriding public‑safety needs or potential impacts to wildlife corridors.

The discussion also flagged inconsistencies across the county’s documents. Commissioners asked staff to reconcile setback language in Title 14 (roadway design standards) and Title 19 (development standards) and to produce an amalgamated draft so the commission could compare zones and avoid contradictory provisions.

Why it matters: Fence height, setback and wildlife crossing requirements affect privacy, property owners’ ability to secure pets or children, roadside visibility for drivers and passage for deer and other wildlife. The rules also determine when an applicant can be approved administratively versus when the commission must review a proposal.

What’s next: Staff will clean up the draft, separate canyon-road frontage rules from general yard rules, confirm how setbacks should be measured (edge of pavement versus property line/build‑to line) and circulate an amalgamated draft for commissioner review ahead of the next meeting.