Front yard fence
Actually, there are plenty of quite good debates on this subject in the archives, so if anyone wants one, I suggest they start there.
Tom_Reingold said:
There are a couple of issues. One is whether fences are a good idea. Another is whether the town will allow them. The latter one has been settled. The former is a perfectly good debate.
The town officials may have settled whether fences can be allowed. Well, guess what? Town ordinances can also be rescinded or amended.
Formerlyjerseyjack said:
Tom_Reingold said:The town officials may have settled whether fences can be allowed. Well, guess what? Town ordinances can also be rescinded or amended.
There are a couple of issues. One is whether fences are a good idea. Another is whether the town will allow them. The latter one has been settled. The former is a perfectly good debate.
They can be, but if you ask for that, I'll place a bet that it won't pass.
Then again, most of my predictions prove false.
I doubt they'll even draft anything to consider, let alone pass anything.
There are some sound reasons for no fences in front yards and the most important one is aesthetics. Drive through towns that allow front yard fences and you will see all sorts of fences from cute and attractive to downright ugly, some in good repair others showing an age problem, all of different heights and so on. What one person considers "attractive" another considers ugly beyond belief.
The zoning act that banned fences in front yards is quite old. Its purpose was to make the town look open rather than fenced in. In my 13 years on the Zoning Board the same arguments made by a few folks who wanted fences were always made and I suspect that the support for front yard fences is minimal at best and opposition to front yard fences will be quite large.
Yes, I know many people wish to do with their property as they see fit but what one person does affects the neighbors. So, for example, my neighbor and I could agree to sell one property to the other and then one could build a 10-unit apartment building with a retail establishment on the first floor. Why not? Any argument one makes against that outcome is essentially embodied in the notion of allowable uses in different areas of the town and that is what a zoning ordinance does -- define allowable uses. I can't change my property into a Pub or Massage Therapy outfit or Auto repair shop.
Zoning acts in some towns like Maplewood define uses that create an atmosphere. If one prefers to leave all such decisions solely to individual property owners do understand that in the span of one generation this down would look "butt ugly" as my students are inclined to say. Property values do depend on what the neighborhood looks like, on educational systems, on access (in our case) to NJT, and an attractive town center. It all works together and while fencing in front yards may seem minor, it is very unlikely to change.
@Jude - I understand the zoning laws, and the reasoning behind them. You are right that what some people find adorable others find hideous my only qualm is you could use that reasoning to not let anyone do anything out of the ordinary and you wind up with cookie cutter developments with HOAs that make you have the exact same mailbox as everyone else on the street. Additionally, there are things that hurt property values that aren't against any laws and can be seen all over town. I get it, and it doesn't look like I'll be getting a small fence any time soon, but the focus on things like a fence is odd to me.
max_weisenfeld said:
I don't think it is the town that is focussed on fences.
Perhaps the term focus was incorrect. Maybe "inclusion" would have been a better word.
Just look it up - here is the code....
http://ecode360.com/print/MA1203?guid=9417653
Chapter 271. Zoning and Development Regulations Article IV. Design and Performance Standards § 271-43. Fences and walls and security doors.[Amended 4-21-1987 by Ord. No. 1725; 4-16-1991 by Ord. No. 1850; 6-4-1991 by Ord. No. 1859; 6-6-1995 by Ord. No. 1970; 5-4-1999 by Ord. No. 2096-99; 6-20-2006 by Ord. No. 2361-06]
A. Residential zones.
(1) Fences erected in residential zones, except those required to enclose swimming pools, shall not exceed four feet in height. No fence shall be located closer to the front property line that the building setback line as established in other sections of this chapter. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a six-foot fence may be erected along the rear property line, provided that the property upon which the six-foot fence is to be constructed abuts the rear property line of the adjacent property.[Amended 3-18-2014 by Ord. No. 2743-14]
(2) In the case of a corner property, both street frontages shall be treated separately, and both shall require setbacks as noted in Subsection A(1) above.
(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsections A(1) and A(2), the owner of a corner property may erect a fence not in excess of four feet in height, not closer than 15 feet from the property line, on one frontage only but not in the portion common to both front yards. Should the owner of a corner property erect a fence as permitted by this Subsection A(3), that fence shall be placed such that any line drawn perpendicular to the property line on the frontage where the fence is constructed shall not cross both the fence and the side of the structure facing said property line.
(4) Should a corner property owner erect a fence within a location permitted by Subsection A(3), the fence must be buffered by natural shrubbery which shall consist of densely planted evergreens that form a year-round screen and will be sufficient to completely cover the fence within three years. The screen planting shall be maintained, and any plant material which does not live shall be replaced within one year or one growing season. The planted screen shall be such that the fence is not visible from either street.
B. Fences in commercial zones shall not exceed six feet in height. No fence shall be located closer to the front property line than the building setback line as established in other sections of this chapter.
C. Fences and walls shall not be located in any required sight triangle or within any public right-of-way or easement.
D. Metal accordion, grate or grill-type protective gates or doors for retail or commercial establishments shall be installed in the interior of the premises only and shall be so that visibility into the establishment is not diminished as a result of their installation. There shall be no signage or graphics placed on either the grate or any containment box.
E. If barbed wire is proposed, it shall only be permitted along the top of a fence, it shall be installed within the overall height limits for fencing as established in this chapter, it shall be permitted only on nonresidential properties, and the use of ribbon-type barbed wire shall not be permitted. Where barbed wire is proposed, it shall not be permitted without the written permission of the adjacent owner.
F. Before erecting any fence greater than two feet in height or greater than 16 feet in length, the property owner shall make application to the Construction Official for a fence construction permit.[1] Subsequent to the erection of any such fence, the Construction Official shall inspect the same and, if it is in compliance with this chapter, shall issue a certificate of approval.
[1]: Editor's Note: For fee for fence construction permit, see Ch. 123.
G.All fences and walls having a finished side shall be constructed with the finished side facing outward from the property on which it is constructed and toward adjacent properties or the street. For purposes of this section, the "finished side" shall be defined as the side opposite the posts, rails, supporting boards or piers.
Perhaps gather numerous political yard sign and arrange them in your front yard such that they resemble a fence.
Then appeal the fines on a First Amendment basis vs land use ordinance.
This website needs a like button - that's very funny!
alias said:
Perhaps gather numerous political yard sign and arrange them in your front yard such that they resemble a fence.
Then appeal the fines on a First Amendment basis vs land use ordinance.
I live in a Republican town now which is as casual about home maintenance ordinances as Maplewood is careful. I much prefer Maplewood's way of doing things. Although a pretty expensive town, Morris Plains ignores boats in front yards, chain link fences very close to front yards, back yards full of large plastic children's junk, rampant mature tree destruction, etc. etc. It's odd : result of a fetish about property rights, I guess.
Indeed. We all have opinions, and for every person that wants a front yard or 6-8ft fence, there is another who doesn't.
Personally I would like to do away with chain link fences since I think they are hideous, but well, I know the TC to pass such an ordinance, so I just deal with my displeasure of them.