HomeMy WebLinkAboutOct 11th BOT Appendix A.pdf Cayuga Heights Board Meeting
Fence discussion
Revised for October 11, 2011
A few months ago, I signed Ron Bors' petition against changing the existing fence
ordinance. As I did then, I still fail to see how more extensive fencing is a community
solution to the Village deer problem.
Certainly people who had such fences would benefit,but it would make it harder for
everyone else,people and deer alike,to co-exist, especially if many property owners turn
to this so-called solution.
Not everyone can afford to put up a fence or has property suitable for fencing, so
unfenced properties will be even more subject to the ravages and dangers of deer shut out
from areas they habitually visit and with even fewer places to graze and less territory to
roam.
For fence owners and their neighbors, in addition to the considerable expense,on both
sides there are aesthetic and maintenance issues, especially as the fence and its
surroundings weather and get older. Deer can and do jump over or through even very
high fencing, sometimes getting injured or caught in the attempt. Property ownership can
change as well, often resulting in differing ideas aboutaesdieties and maintenance
responsibilities.
When Ron Bors came around last spring,the first thing I thought of was what has
happened in a Town of Ithaca neighborhood near mine where property owners have
begun erecting extensive backyard fencing. The beautiful sweep of lawns that once
existed there is gone, and there are fewer opportunities for children and adults to take safe
and convenient shortcuts or to spontaneously play or visit with neighbors. Ruined views,
differences i�ty"fe and quality, and new,unforeseen and unwanted, lanscaping issues for
neighboring property owners are the result.
In my opinion, changing the fencing ordinance is not a community solution.
I hope the Village Board will consider carefully whether new fencing options will
actually mean a solution to human/deer conflict or additional inconvenience and property
damage for the majority of Villagers and increased hardship and lack of options for the
deer until their numbers are reduced.
Leslie Ungberg, Village resident
3 Winthrop Place
Ithaca,NY
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO LOCAL LAW SECTION 9, "FENCES AND
WALLS"
I object to tall fences on or near street-front property lines for two reasons: Tall
fences at street-front property lines would destroy the open look and feel of this
beautiful community.And such emergency fences will be unnecessary when
excessive deer populations are reduced.
About the open look and feel of the Cayuga Heights landscape—a quality-of-life
value that drew many of us to this community in the first place, a landscape that is
much admired by visitors to the village. Imagine your favorite, spacious street (say
Cayuga Heights Road,the Parkway,your own particular street) barricaded by
corridors of tall fencing. Even if only one in ten property owners has tall fences at
the street front,the public view-shed will be one of a Kansas City stockyard, the
pheasant cages at Game Farm Road,some primitive zoo,or a penal colony—pick
your worst nightmare. Allowing tall fences at the street front— by way of zoning—
has as profound effect on the"look" of a village as requiring whitewashed houses
with blue roofs. You are messing with the fundamental, cherished look of this
special place,and—as elected officials —you are betraying the public trust.
Secondly, total exclusion fences will not be necessary as the deer population returns
to naturally sustainable levels. To the extent that drastic changes in fencing rules
might have been an emergency, stop-gap measure several years ago —when deer
remediation was a distant prospect—mega-fencing might have been sensible. Now
we are starting a well-thought-out (if controversial) program of remediation. Let's
give that program a chance to work—without miles of barricade fencing that will
send disoriented deer into the roadways like some kind of Wall Street occupation.
Respectfully submitted,
11 October 2011
H. Roger Segelken
114 Texas Lane
hrs2@cornell.edu
Fence Ordinance
TO: Board of Trustees, Village of Cayuga Heights
Tuesday,October 11,20114:12 PM
TONIGHT YOU WILL BE CHOOSING BETWEEN TWO VERSIONS OF A PROPOSED FENCE
ORDINANCE. A FEW MONTHS AGO, YOU WERE EACH PRESENTED WITH A PETITION, SIGNED
BY 352 VILLAGERS WHO ARE OPPOSED TO 8' HIGH DEER FENCES ON ANY PROPERTY LINE.
YOU WERE ALSO PRESENTED WITH INFORMATION, THAT INDICATED THE NUMBER OF
PETITIONERS WHO SIGNED WAS A VERY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF THE PEOPLE CONTACTED.
TO THE TRUSTEES WHO ARE WILLING TO REPRESENT THE VAST MAJORITY OF YOUR
CONSTITUENTS, WE THANK YOU_
TO THE TRUSTEES WHO ATTEMPTED TO DISCREDIT THAT PETITION, OR CHOSE TO IGNORE
IT, IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO CHANGE YOUR MIND, SO THAT YOU WILL REPRESENT THE WILL OF
THE PEOPLE.
TO MAYOR SUPRON, IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO AVOID POLITICAL DISASTER.
RESPECTFULLY,
RONALD H. BORS
121 TEXAS LANE
CAYUGA HEIGHTS
257-5640
Cayuga Heights Fence Issue Still Unresolved
Recently, Villagers signed a survey stating that 8' property line
fences would "eliminate our park-like atmosphere;" shift deer
damage onto neighbors'yards; and increase accidents. All of
which sounds reasonable except that:
1 our views were long ago compromised by the trees and
hedges which have matured since the existing ordinance
was written. Hedges - legal anywhere on a property -
exclude deer while offering privacy to the owners, and
have become our de facto "park-like atmosphere."
2 deer are in our neighbors' yards. Deer are the uninvited
guests who eat too much at the party, leave their scat, and
ignore our threats.
3 deer are also on our roads - crossing at will. Our
neighboring Town of Ithaca has allowed 8' fences
anywhere on a property since 2009, and has noted no
undue neighborly ire or excess accidents.
Were the signers of this survey told the existing ordinance has rarely
been enforced? or that the ordinance has always allowed fences of
any material or height as long as the property is large enough to
accommodate the setback zones? It's these zones that lead to such
bizarre situations as when adjacent neighbors build parallel side
fences which create a 30' unusable corridor in between their
properties!
Fences to protect children, pets, privacy and landscaping; exclude
scat, unpleasant views and foot/pet traffic; enclose and divide land,
mark a boundary, provide beauty and protect against a potential
hazard. All that is needed is simple, lot-line, 90% open fences
which surround the property. Villagers with both large and small
lots should have these benefits without submitting to a formal
hearing to confirm what should be their legal right.
Elizabeth Mount,
Village of Cayuga Heights
Yes they came to the door and claimed that they were
supporting the existing height limit and did not want a higher
fence approved. Not a repeal of anything as I remember. I
actually thought of you and since it was presented as status quo
did not think it would be a problem.
Page 1 of 3
Mary Mills
From: sally grubb [sally.grubb@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 1:42 PM
To: Kate Supron; Diana Riesman; Beatrice Szekely; Stephen Hamilton; Robert Andolina; Christopher
Crocker, Elizabeth Karns; Mary Mills
Subject: Proposed Revisions to Fencing Ordinance and tonight's Trustees meeting
Village Trustees:
I am writing to you now by email because I may not be able to attend tonight's Trustees
meeting and in any event may be too late for privilege of the floor.
My comments are about the proposed changes to the Fencing Ordinance which you are
discussing tonight and I hope these may be added into the minutes for the record. I had
originally thought the meeting was postponed until next Monday and was planning on
sending you a more detailed statement together with a CD with related images of
Village fences to consider before that meeting. I will now do this so that you have this
information before any public hearing which may be scheduled.
I have no new comments to make about the proposed changes. You have heard my
views many times before. People who garden need to be able to protect their plantings
even if they are within 25ft of the property line. People with small children need to be
able to keep deer and deer scat off their whole property to allow them to play in safety.
People with small yards need to be allowed privacy from their neighbors as well as
protection from deer. Don't say "grow a hedge" —with the current deer population this is
just not an option. You may say that to us when the culling has had an impact on deer
numbers.
However, I will take the opportunity to answer the claims made by Ron Bors when he
submitted his petition against any changes to the fencing ordinance which was signed
by 352 Village residents but represented only approximately 230 properties.
Mr. Bors states:
"We recognize that there is an advantage to an individual property owner who wishes to enclose
his yard with tall fences to exclude the deer. However, this is more than offset by the following
three disadvantages to the village as a whole:
10/11/2011
Page 2 of 3
"The allowance of tall fences on any property line (and the front yard exclosures), will drastically
change the open character of our village, thereby eliminating the "park-like atmosphere"that we all have
enjoyed.
"The burden of deer damage will not be lessened, it will only be shifted to adjacent neighbors.
"If more property is fenced, the deer will be in the roads a greater percentage of the time, thereby
increasing the number of car-deer accidents.
There is absolutely no evidence to support any of these three claims.
The allowance of 8ft high 90% deer fencing on property lines will in no way drastically change
the open character of our village and eliminate its park-like atmosphere. There is very little
open space in the Village any more. Many properties are surrounded by hedgerows, trees and
in many places scrub land which makes ideal deer habitat. The few park like vistas we have
left are mostly provided by the very large yards which have the space for fencing well back
from their property lines. People like their privacy and most long distance park views are
broken with trees, dense hedges and solid fencing. Some of the most beautiful yards in the
Village, which one can see either by invitation or from the street, are only made possible by
high fences. There are already high temporary fences in the Village which are not in
compliance with the current ordinance. Many of these are almost invisible. If the ordinance is
changed to make these fences compliant, all that will happen is that property owners will be
able to make these fences permanent, stronger, and most likely better looking. The park like
vistas will not change.
Deer are already eating everything everywhere in the village that is not behind a fence.
Nothing will change if deer fencing becomes legal. Rather the deer will have access to less
food and so perhaps breed less successfully and not raise so many twins and triplets. The
deer which try to get over my fence already browse my neighbors yard. Some raise their
fawns there.
How is it that fencing properties will cause the deer to be in the roads more often? This
statement makes no sense at all. Deer wander across roads from one grazing area to the
next. If there is no grazing area in a front yard because of a fence the deer will not be there to
wander across the road. Fencing can in fact reduce the number of places deer cross the
roads.
We are not asking to be allowed to put up ugly solid stockade type fencing on our property
lines. We can already do that 25ft and 15ft from front and side lines. We are asking to be
10/11/2011
Page 3 of 3
allowed to put up 8ft high good looking fencing that, above 4 ft, is 90% open. There will not be
many people putting up front yard fences on property lines. But property owners with small
front yards must be allowed to protect their property without recourse to the law.
I am asking to be allowed to cultivate my entire yard. Indeed an exclosure can keep the deer
out but so does it keep me out and makes gardening and weeding extremely difficult. An
exclosure that is only allowed on 75% of the front property line is no use at keeping out the
deer from the rest of my yard.
Images will follow later this week.
Sally Grubb
Sally Grubb
104 Midway Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607 257-6017
10/11/2011