Trending
City council's residential committee suggested alterations to the city's fence ordinance in its Jan. 25 meeting.
Committee Chairman Evan Newman explained that Planning and Zoning Officer Chip Hank had contacted him recently with concerns from residents who had a dispute over property lines and wanted to build a fence. Newman explained that one resident had built a fence on the property line, while the other had drafted plans to build a fence of their own along the neighbor's existing fence while refusing any formal agreement to share the fence wall.
Hank said that issues of this nature date back to the original passage of the city's fence ordinance, which was modeled off the Cuyahoga Fall's Division of Zoning and Planning. Hank explained that the version passed by the city had left out the section of the template ordinance stating that if residents could not agree to a shared fence line, that fences must be built three feet off the property line to allow for necessary maintenance. As a result, fences have been built next to each other with only inches between, leaving no room for maintenance and leading to overgrowth issues and unsightly property lines, which drives down property values and causes further disputes between neighbors.
Mayor Cyndi Baronzzi Dickey said that her office had also recently received complaints about abutting fences and of new neighbors moving in claiming their property pins were in a particular location, and then building a fence based on their claimed boundaries of the property. Dickey explained that as a result people were building U-shaped fences that did not allow for maintenance, with no agreements to join their fences together or have a shared wall, which was causing many fences to be damaged or destroyed in high winds or to simply collapse due to the extra load.
Councilwoman Jayne Bricker asked if the ordinance had any sections mandating neighbors have an agreement for a shared fence wall. Hank explained that while the ordinance did not explicitly mandate an agreement the necessity of an agreement had been "generally understood."
Dickey suggested adding a section to the ordinance mandating a written agreement between property owners with a shared fence wall, which the committee agreed with.
Councilman Ron Zellers and City Safety Service Director Joe Cappuzzello asked whether there was any language in the current ordinance requiring a survey be conducted before a fence is built. Hank said that while the ordinance currently did not, much of the language in the city's zoning code required surveys for zoning permits, and he felt this would be a good addition should the committee decide to pursue it.
Zellers also asked if any reason had been given for the exclusion of the 3-foot buffer when the ordinance was passed and if the city housing or zoning department would settle fencing disputes for residents. Hank explained that no reason was given that he could recall and the fence dispute after building would be considered a civil dispute and neither department would be involved as a result.
Ultimately the committee voted unanimously to send a request for three changes to the ordinance to Law Director Brooke Zellers to review including: all fencing located along adjacent lot lines shall be constructed so that either the face of the fence is on the property line or the face of the fence is at least three feet from the property line, and any areas set back three feet or more from the property line, which could become enclosed by other similarly located fences must provide at least one gate for access and maintenance equipment; a written agreement between neighboring property owners that they will share a fence wall and the responsibilities that come with it will be submitted to the zoning department upon new construction permit application; and a property survey must be completed by the property owner and shared with the zoning department to build a new fence.
Following review by Brookes, the modified ordinance will then need to be presented to city council for an initial reading, after which it must be reviewed by the zoning commission prior to passage.
The city council will meet next at 7 p.m. Feb. 6.