15 - Fence Code Review & Discussion

Home Browse Search

6. Prohibited fence placement restrictions and related structural components 7. Permit, plan and fee requirements for construction approval and inspections 8. Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) Permit (Historic District Requirements) 9. Fencing requirements when satisfying incompatible land use screening requirements 10. Construction & maintenance requirements and provisions for nonconforming fences 11. Abatement 12. Variances STATUS OF ISSUE Based upon the amount of time and effort that was put into the substantial updating of this section of City Code in 2008, it would seem that a complete re -write and setting aside of these fence requirements is not in the best interest of the health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community. Based upon the concerns raised by the citizens however, the Council may wish to consider re-evaluation of some elements of the comprehensive fence standards to some extent. From my perspective as a planner working in numerous communities over my professional career, I would suggest from my initial review of the regulations that the Council give consideration to 3 main areas of the code if there is a consensus on the need for any changes. 1. Fence Permit Requirements. The requirements for obtaining a permit to construct a fence vary from community to community. My experience has been that more cities do not require a permit for construction of a fence than the number of communities that do. The main reason for this is two -fold. 1. Greater staff time is required for permitting and inspections. 2. Once the City issues a permit, arguments can arise between neighboring property owners with regard to where the fence is constructed in relation to the property line. Additional surveying fees can be expensive when added to the cost for a new fence and is commonly avoided. The location of the property line is a land owner responsibility and not the City's. However, once the City approves a permit for a fence and disputes arise between neighbors, the City can frequently be brought into the middle of the dispute which can place the City in a position of having to defend its position of not being responsible for such civil disputes. This involves more staff time to assist with research and/or help with best available information. It is not a productive use of staff time when such instances occur and worse, can leave an unfavorable viewpoint of the homeowner towards their city government services. The Council should re -visit the need for a permit and consider eliminating this requirement where an engineering review analysis is not required by either State Pool code requirements in conjunction with a pool, or by the International Code Congress (ICC) for solid fence structures seven (7) feet in height or greater requiring structural engineering analysis. Staff suggests that the council approve a change to eliminate the permit requirement for all fences under seven (7) feet in height, but still require for those solid type fences seven (7) feet in height or greater as required by the ICC. The elimination of this requirement may also be viewed as a lessening of government restriction on land use and building activity; while at the same time reducing the staffing costs associated with permitting, inspections and fence standards explanation for issuance of permits. The COA permit for historic districts should continue to remain in place with respect to regulating the type of materials that fences may be constructed of in those designated residential districts. By eliminating the permit requirements, the remaining standards would still apply. They would then be enforced on a complaint basis when reported or identified by code enforcement, building and planning staff on a case-by-case basis. Page 2 of 4