Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Deer Fencing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rockville planners back allowing 8‑ft "deer fences" in limited front‑yard areas, urge citywide wildlife plan
Summary
After staff presented three options to address deer‑proof fencing, the Planning Commission recommended Option 2 (allowing 8‑ft deer fences between house and street with a small setback) and asked staff to include a county‑style definition and to push the mayor/council for a broader urban wildlife management plan.
Get email alerts on the Deer Fencing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City planning staff introduced a targeted zoning change to address the growing use of deer‑deterrent fencing. Staff explained three options ranging from a limited allowance in certain front‑yard areas to permitting 8‑ft deer fencing covering entire properties; staff recommended Option 2 as a balance between protecting property plantings and preserving front‑yard character.
Staff described a county definition of a deer fence (up to 8 feet tall constructed of open mesh with posts) and said the proposed standard would allow deer fencing in functional rear‑yard areas that are technically front yards under the zoning map, or between the home and the street right‑of‑way (Option 2). The presentation noted the county definition specifies mesh dimensions, material and post types; staff said those details can be incorporated into the draft code.
Commissioners raised questions about how many properties are affected, enforcement difficulties, visual impacts if deer fencing becomes widespread, and whether zoning is the right place for what some called a wildlife‑management problem. Several commissioners urged that the Planning Commission's recommendation include a request for a citywide urban wildlife management plan alongside the code change.
After discussion about definition, pictures and potential setbacks from the right‑of‑way, the commission took a straw vote and supported recommending Option 2 with the county's definition and asked staff to include comments urging a broader wildlife management policy in the transmittal memo to Mayor and Council.
What happens next: Staff will return draft ordinance language that includes a clear deer‑fence definition and the recommended Option 2 geometry; the commission asked that the recommendation memo also call for development of a citywide urban wildlife management plan.
