Fences and Hedges in Heavily Trafficked Areas
I just read the post by Feldy and whole-heartedly agree with all points made in that excellent post. I would just like to add a few thoughts:
1. None of the four stated goals (Policies A - D) are adequately served by the proposal. Policy A seeks to "...achieve a balance between individual desire for enclosure/privacy and the community objectives of insuring a sense of belonging to the community..." The proposal would destroy an existing balance by legislating a one-sided solution. In any event there are far more effective ways to build a sense of community. Policy B seeks to "...encourage creative impulses of residents..." This is Venice -- there does not seem to me to be a pressing issue of lack of creativity among its residents. Policy C seeks to "... enhance the safety of residents..." For the reasons already stated elsewhere I believe the safety of my home and family would be adversely impacted by the proposal. Policy D seeks to "...encourage the City to tighten enforcement of the existing regulations ..." Isn't this a bit circular? That is, we are going to tighten enforcement so that we achieve the goal of tightening enforcement.
2. Has there been any serious consideration/evaluation of the costs that this proposal will impose on current residents/constituents? If so, I'd be interested in that analysis. Seems to me anyone who needs to change their property will incur costs measuring in the thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars. Whether these costs are incurred now or in the future (e.g., when the property is sold) isn't really the point.
3. Has there been any serious analysis of the safety implications of the proposal. Policy B assumes without any analysis that the policy would provide a safety benefit. My own belief (and apparently those of the others who have posted on this subject) is that it would adversely impact safety.
Given that the proposal could cost me thousands of dollars, does not appear meet any of the policy objectives for which the proposal was made, and has not been analyzed in any meaningful detail, I strongly oppose the proposal.
Thank you for your time.
JM Trott
Marr St.
- Add new comment
- 101 reads
re: Fences and Hedges in Heavily Trafficked Areas
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. The questions you raise deserve to be addressed before the Task Force sends off its recommendations.
I'd just like to paste an excerpt from a post that was sent to my wife on the "Peachhead / Venice Moms" message board as I think it is very relevant to your last point about safety.
(begin excerpt)
"As a resident of Marina del Rey (part of the VNC territory) and a parent, I am VERY concerned about the possibility of being forced to cut my hedges. I have two little boys ages 6 and 7 and a half and they are entitled to play peacefully in our front yard. I am always right on hand, but sometimes run into the house for a minute or two. The hedges provide a little extra protection from the predators that live in the neighborhood. Yes, there are 9 registered SEX OFFENDERS in our neighborhood.
Any little bit of extra protection that our fences and hedges can afford by keeping our yards more private is critically important.
Our hedges and fence have been the same height since we bought the house in 1999. One of the reasons we bought this house was I was pregnant at the time and the fence and hedges gave us extra security.
Please do not put our children at risk so that our neighborhood can conform to some other people's artistic goals for the community!
In the 90291 zip code, there are even more registered offenders. Please do not give them better access to viewing my children's friends in their own front yards!!!"
(end excerpt)