Fences and Hedges

I am probably the oldest writing today- over 90! Before I had my fence I was robbed twice. I build the fence and now no one (knock on wood) has robbed me. My ex husband who was in security, said fences not only make good neighbors BUT security for those inside as well as for ones animals and children playing in the yard. We maybe a neighborhood but the world is no longer neighborly. WE have too many crack heads around and poverty growing- which causes crime to go up.
Not only is this America and we have the right to protect ourselves- but others have the right to bear arms and I need safty from those who bare arms to steal and rob the elderly.
We must keep our fences if we choose to. venice is a beautiful place filled with high and low fences... and hedges.

TL

Thank you to Jed and all for your hard work. I think this all sounds very reasonable. Thanks!

I think the LUPC did a good job of crafting guidelines that recognize the realities of the fences and hedges debate. For anyone arguing for strict enforcement, I would like to know your answer to these questions:

1) Along some streets, a vast majority of homes have over height fences. These people all put up their fences due to the same concerns about safety and privacy and are happy with the situation.

Who gains by asking these streets to comply with an ordinance that has never been systematically enforced since it was first imposed?

2) If only a small minority of residents on a street want to enforce a low fence height, then why should their will trump what the majority wants?

Aren't land use ordinances written to codify community standards? If the majority want high fences then isn't that what the standard is?

paul t

I am very opposed to "Grandfathering" all the fences and hedges that exceed the code. My property is 3 lots from the ocean. The ocean view from my patio has been completely obliterated by my neighbor's high fence and hedge. My neighbor chose to ignore the code and build a barrier over 5 feet around her front property line. The code enforcement officer chose not to enforce the code--now, you choose to "grandfather" this behavior. Because I obey the code, I am penalized by a) having to live without the ocean view I paid for when purchasing the home and b) by not being able to build a high fence in the future because I did not ignor the code and get "grandfathered" in. How is that fair? I am further distressed because the community officer with a high fence is not in compliance with the code, and HE WILL BENEFIT FINANCIALLY AND LEGALLY if the board votes his position. How is this fair?

1. The "existing situation" for fences is not what the code says, it is what in fact exists, so "grandfathering" really applies to that. I would prefer no grandfathering but I can accommodate what exists. However, when the house is sold the grandfathering must end and compliance with code begin.

2. For all those libertarians out there who say that they can do whatever they want with their property so long as it doesn't endanger anyone, GET REAL! Zoning laws regulating aesthetics have been around for decades, if not a century, and they have been regularly upheld in court. The Romans, and maybe the Greeks before them, figured out a long time ago that you can't just do what you want. One law said that a building could not be more than twice as high as the width of the street it faced.

3. So why did the VNC reject the recommendation? Would they accept a grandfathering such as I propose above? And why does someone want to add 4 people to the LUPC? I have received equivocal responses as to how additional people would help, particularly since they only work through the whole committee and no sub-committees. Are the members elected? Is this the FDR court-packing scheme all over again, done to change the recommendations of the LUPC committee? The recommendation to let each block decide was really way out there. Would that create the opportunity for division with your neighbor? Oh yes.

My two cents

I was at the Venice Neighborhood Council meeting last night for the first time to witness the VNC vote down the proposed amendment. I am happy to see that logic and rule of law and not willful rule breakers, dictate the actions of the committee.

Before the vote, someone from the audience asked the President of the VNC if members on the VNC who have high fences should recuse themselves. I was honestly shocked by his answer, and even more shocked by the logic he used to try and defend his answer. He said, “He has a short fence (pointing to a community officer), I have no fence, and he has a tall fence, all are represented and I’m going to allow it.” WHAT THE HELL. Let’s break this logic down… The person with the short fence is in compliance with the code and will not benefit financially or legally by the decision in any way. The President, Mike Newhouse, stated he has no fence, so he is in compliance with the code and will not benefit financially or legally by the decision in any way. The community officer with a high fence is not in compliance with the code, SO HE WILL BENEFIT FINANCIALLY AND LEGALLY if the board votes his position.

This is a textbook case of a conflict of interest. Any other issue before the board where a board member would benefit financially would require that member to recuse himself. Although it had no affect on the outcome, I believe the board should be more careful in following the standards set forth by the Brown Act. If Michael Newhouse would have used The Fair Political Practices Commission's (FPPC) conflict of interest analysis he would have come to a different conclusion.

The FPPC analysis involves answering a series of questions:
1- Are you a public official? (yes)
2- Are you making, influencing or participating in a governmental decision?(yes)
3- What are your economic interests? (no fines, no having to put fence into compliance)
4- Are you economic interests directly or indirectly involved in the governmental decision? (yes)
5- Are you economic interests material? (yes
6- Is it reasonably foreseeable that the materiality standard will be met by the governmental decision? (yep)
7- If you have a conflict of interest, does the “public generally” exception apply? (nope)
8-If you have a disqualifying conflict of interest, is you participation legally required? (NO)
The VNC has a duty to serve under the Brown Act, they should take better care to avoid conflicts of interest in the future.

The Fences and Hedges Issue

A few points/things I saw
Grandfather clause:
The term grandfather is not used correctly in the context of the hedges and fences issue. “A grandfather clause is a term used in U.S. English for an exception that allows an old rule to continue to apply to some existing situations, when a new rule will apply to all future situations. For example, a "grandfathered power plant" might be exempt from newer and tougher pollution laws. Often, such a provision is used as a compromise, to effect new rules without upsetting a well-established logistical or political situation. This extends the idea of a rule not being retroactively applied.“ (wikipedia) The key phrase in this definition is “retroactively applied.” The VNC wouldn’t be grandfathering in a formerly legal practice, they would allowing previous rule breakers to continue to break the rules.

We should be able to do what we want:
"Should a gathering of people be able to dictate the specific look and aesthetic of an individual's property, outside of considerations of public safety?"
This comment is indicative of those that want to allow high fences. The answer to this question is YES, we should allow a community to dictate how we want the community to look!
Zoning regulations and codes are there to give a community a say in what goes on in said community. If the community didn’t have a say we could very well have some land uses that caused some serious nuisances. Some worried about a slippery slope, but the slope goes both ways… today we allow people to break rules about high fences, tomorrow its noise ordinances, next year its zoning.

-There are a few points here:
-When you buy a piece of property you are not buying an absolute right to use said property as you see fit. You are buying the piece of property and agreeing to the restrictions and rules set forth by the community, and its YOUR responsibility to make sure you follow those rules.

Some Perspective:
Let’s say, for argument’s sake that I need a dependable cellphone connection from my home, so I agree to let AT&T to put up a cell phone tower in my front yard for everyone to see. Lets’ also assume the tower is prohibited and most would find it ugly. Its not a public safety issue, its on my land, and the only thing that would be bothering anyone is the impact on the aesthetic value. Now lets say my neighbor decided to do it, then another and another. My neighbors who didn’t like the towers, would, and SHOULD, have the right to do something to stop me and others from violating city rules. Additionally, my neighbors should not be forced to endure structures that they and the city find aesthetically unappealing.

During the comments section someone got up and said“VENICE IS NO SANTA MONICA” in reference to someone else's comments..
DAMN STRAIGHT BROTHER….
This Lloyd Benson moment from the 1988 Vice Presidential debates cracked me up, although I couldn’t have disagreed with his comments more.
“This is Venice”
When I was growing up I often heard these three words especially when situations were getting tense. While semantically they mean “where you happen to be right now is in the venice community” what it really meant was, “you’re in a place unlike any other place so you better be careful” (to put it nicely) I hated hearing it, because it usually meant there was going to be some altercation. But as I heard people talk about their experiences with Venice and their belief that they should be allowed to circumvent community standards, I couldn’t help flashing on those three words over and over. It was as if people wanted to move to Venice for all the positives, but wanted to insulate themselves from all the negatives, at the expense of residents who’ve been here through thick and thin. THIS IS VENICE, you moved here to be part of one of the most amazing communities in the world, and when you bought property you were agreeing to abide by the rules of the community. Now you’re complaining that without the right to put up a high fence your safety will be at risk. If you thought Venice was so dangerous why did you move here in the first place? The answer: Because the community is so charming that you were willing to chance it. Unfortunately, the people that want high fences and are willing to trade safety for charm are the ones destroying its charm with their high fences. You may have a different feeling about what is charming, but the community standards were in place before most of you moved here (or were born), and the community wants short fences.

A short comment on majority rule.
Some of the comments on the website reflect the belief that the committee should have sided with the majority sitting in the auditorium. The VNC has a duty to all Venice residents, not just the ones that come to meetings. Our democracy protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority. I’m sure everyone can think of instances in our history when a policy was enforced against the wishes of a community majority. (think segregation) If a majority wants to break the law, you don’t just throw out the rule book.

Last night at the VNC Board Meeting the Board chose to not support the recommendations of the Ad- Hoc Fences and Hedges Committee.

What does this mean?

There will be no "grandfathering" of existing fences above 3'6".

This decision will encourage more of the same divisive
behavior on both sides of the entire issue.

Be assured unless otherwise directed that the LUPC, the VNC, the LADBS and any other government dept/ agency will
be more vigilant in the code enforcement regarding non-compliant fences and hedges.

Good luck and be well.

Note: I tried to email this to both the board@grvnc.org email and lupc@grvnc.org. email. Both emails came back undelivered with the message, "mailbox full" Nice to see they're really interested in the comments and opinions of the people that actually live in this community they're voting on

Dear Sir,

As a resident of Venice I would like my position considered on the vote tonight regarding the height of fences and hedges.

In my opinion, whether you believe that high or low fences should be the norm in your neighborhood is not the crux of the argument here. The crux of the argument is just this: "Should a gathering of people be able to dictate the specifics look and aesthetic of an individual's property, outside of considerations of public safety."

If safety and fire access are the issue, require a fire access point as they do on a commercial structure with fire access equipment (i.e. Lock boxes with mechanical releases to enter the property in case of fire, etc.)

If the concern is other than public safety, keep your desires to yourself and enact what you want on your OWN property and leave the rest of your community to decide what they want on their own property themselves!

Should you want low fences, put them on your own house. If you want tall fences, put them up. We already live in a world where there is too much intervention on individual rights for no apparent reason other than people love to get into the business of other individuals.

I'm sorry that you want to be closer to your neighbor and you can't because of a high fence. But the reality is, they want a high fence on their own property for whatever reason and, with their individual ownership of their real property, they can do whatever they want. Go find a new friend if they don't want to wave hi to you every day. Maybe they just don't like you. Maybe they're loners. Maybe they're scared. Who knows. But they should have the right to live as they want without you dictating what you like on the property they own and live in.

It's a slippery slope dictating how other people should live. Now it's fences. Next it's style. Then it's color. Please... Just watch your own business and leave everyone else alone.

For the record, I live on 4th & Broadway and I have an open porch, no entry fence or gate, and a glass front door. Probably the only house where you can approach totally unfettered in most of Venice. Anyone can come up and say "hi," if they want or not. And let me tell you, many people that I would prefer never entered my reality do all the time because I have chosen to to have completely open access to my home. But I have decided that I want to live this way and I deal with the ramifications of this choice.

All my neighbors have high fences. They don't want to have open access to the whole world as I do. I feel no need to make them live as I do and choose as I do. I want them to enjoy their homes and lives as they see fit. It makes me feel good to know that they have a life and level of safety and comfort that allows them to feel at peace in their home. I have heard arguments that this safety is an illusion. Whether it is, or it is not is irrelevant. It makes them feel good and enjoy their home for whatever reason so I say, LEAVE THEM ALONE.

Please people. If you paid more attention to your own lives and less to dictating lives of your neighbors, these people would probably be more inclined to come out and say hi to you and be your friend. I guarantee you you'll be a more happy, productive, and fulfilled individual and will draw the friendships that are eluding you into your life.

As a low fence owner I say LEAVE THEM ALONE! Grandfather in the existing hedges and go about getting involved in your own life.

Dominic
4th Avenue
Venice

VNC Board & Land Use an d Planning Committee:

I am a member of the VNC - Environmental committee and believe it is important to serve my neighborhood and Venice community with issues that are important to all of us. Topics such as clean water and healthy beaches, safe affordable housing, homelessness and crime are general concerns for everyone. How tall my fence line is or how I keep my hedges is not a general community concern and instead an invasion of my personal privacy. As a property owner in Los Angeles, I pay very high taxes each year and am entitled to my aesthetic preferences for my home. Why is this even an issue?

I strongly disagree with any LA Council decision to tell individual residents how to maintain their properties fences and hedges. In a neighborhood that is still in transition and faces many criminal elements, I feel that my fence height adds to my safety and privacy and I would hate to see that go away unecessarily. I am near a busy street and public bus stop and before my fence was built years ago, trash, beer bottles would end up on my lawn daily from careless passer-bys. Will you be sending someone by to clean up this mess? Will you be adding double the police force to make me safe without my privacy fence?

Your job is to represent us and I am sure we can find more pressing issues to involve ourselves in such as gangs, crime and poverty! I vote to Grandfather current hedges and Fence height and on focus on more important issues facing our neighborhoods going forward. I am at a loss to understand why the city cares more about my fence height than why there are shootings and crimes still going on in my Venice neighborhood!

Monica Ramone
CEO - Synergy TV Productions
Venice, CA 90291

It would be nice to live in utopia where fences and hedges weren't needed, but we need to be realistic. While we love to socialize and talk to our neighbors, We don't consider all the people that walk by our property on the way to the beach "our neighbors". So we feel the need to wall off our small spot in Venice so we can have some privacy from the hordes of tourist visiting this 2nd most popular SoCal destination. Besides the day tourists, the wall is a sound barrier insulating us from the late night bar clientele who's voice level has, I believe, increased with the amount of booze they have consumed. They walk to their cars after 2 in the morning with no concern they are in a neighborhood. One of the greatest things about living in Southern California is the beautiful weather that allows us to be outdoors as much as we please, but really, we would feel exhibits in a zoo if not for our fences and hedges!

Time to come out and let the Board know who you are!

The VNC Ad Hoc Committee on Fences and Hedges has submitted
their recommendations to the VNC Board for discussion and approval. The October 21, 2008 VNC Board Agenda includes these recommendations for discussion, public comment, and perhaps resolution.

The Fences and Hedges Ad Hoc Committee recommends a vote FOR the following motion:

That the VNC Board of Officers RECOMMENDS to the Los Angeles City Council the following actions, amendments to the Los Angeles Municipal Code and/or the Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan and further initiatives regarding fence, wall and hedge (“structure”) heights in the required front yard of private properties*:

1) Provide “grandfather” protection for existing structures over three-and-one-half feet in all subareas at existing heights, with reference to Santa Monica’s process.

2) Recommend that the Board distribute a community-wide survey to provide factual basis for community support.

3) Enable neighborhoods (minimum 1 block) to establish “Specific Plan Fence Height Overlay Districts” to define their own frontage barrier heights.

a) Enable height limits of new structures to increase in proportion to the distance set back from the property line.

b) Encourage neighborhood-friendly “walkability” and visibility.

4) Establish a notification procedure regarding neighborhood regulations for new property owners.

Thanks to blackicewarning for posting the recommendations a couple of days ago. The VNC Board plans to consider the recommendations and hear public comment on September 16, with a vote planned for October 21.

As I have reported previously on this forum, I am very proud of the committee members, who came together from all sides of the issue in order to reach a consensus on recommendations designed to respect and promote the diversity that makes Venice uniquely attractive to the entire world.

To review the materials that formed the foundation for the committee's work, visit the VNC Online Meetings site: http://www.veniceneighborhoodcouncil.com/Meetings, and search for "fences and hedges ad hoc committee" to display the message thread.

You can also review the August 20 meeting minutes, along with a "formal" view of the motion and recommendations, at the meeting notice page: http://venicenc.org/node/1069.

Again, thanks to all for being patient, tolerant and willing to invest your time and energy to improve a system that serves us all.

Jed Pauker
former Chair, F&H Ad Hoc Committee

Please come to the september 16 board meeting to offer suggestions, ideas concerning this proposal by the Fences and Hedges Committee. There will be no action taken by the board at this meeting, only public comment. Bring your ideas! The earliest the board will vote on this issue will be October 21.