No, neither are "good". They're all uglier than sin and banned in my neighborhoods. Come to think of it, they've been banned every place I've lived.
Utter nonsense. One side has visible horizontal supports as well as posts, neither of which can be seen from the "good" side.
I did some searching. No mention of such in NYC according to:
An actual "law"? I doubt that, part of HOA agreements, city ordinance and the like I can see but to have such nit-ppicking written as an actual law seems to be stretching the "The Law is an ass" concept.
Harry K
I think the meaning of "law" is being sstretched. That sounds like building code violations. A real "law" will have an RCW (in the state of Washington) (Revised Code of Washington) which spells out what is a violation, penalties, etc.)
Harry K
Ugly or not, allowed or not, for the purposes of this discussion, the good side has no poles.
Chain link fence is still used around schools, ball fields, etc. Poles are always installed on the interior, which is what this thread is about.
Utter what? Your conception of board-on-board fence must be different than everybody else's.
One last note...
I forgot that there is a way to install board-on-board with 2 good sides. If you double up the number of horizontal supports, you can sandwich the posts between the interior and exterior panels. The horizontals and posts would be visible from both sides but it is an approved method in my town. Typically you need to overlap the vertical boards more since they are farther apart and therefore more open when viewed at an angle. In that manner you can have two good sides without doubling the cost of the fence, but it is still more expensive than the one good side method.
Ed Pawlowski wrote the following on 10/19/2012 11:10 PM (ET):
A fence is required by local code in some places when an in-ground pool is installed. The only fencing I have is around my pool with a 6 foot high wooden privacy fence at the property line setback and 4 foot high plastic picket type fencing around the other sides of the pool area. The fencing is to keep little kids from wandering into the pool area. The 4" picket type doesn't keep the deer out if they want to get in there. Just for keeping on the original topic, the 6 foot high fence I had along the property line was a double sided fence (no bad side). I had the pool and fence installed 20 years ago per setback code at 6 inches from the property line. The pool was setback at least 10 feet per code. 20 years later, I had to replace the wooden 'fabric' between the
4"x4" PT posts due to it starting to fall apart. This new wooden fabric was one-sided with the bad side facing my side. At that time, the setback had been increased to 3 feet from the property line. Since I had not removed the original posts and had left them where they were installed 20 years before, I was 'grandfathered' at the 6 foot setback.
It will be a Bylaw
By-law (sometimes also spelled bylaw, by law or byelaw) can refer to a law of local or limited application passed under the authority of a higher law specifying what things may be regulated by the by-law. It can also refer to the internal rules of a company or organization.
In the context of local laws, "by-law" is more frequently used in this context in Canada, the United Kingdom and some Commonwealth countries, whereas in the United States, the words code, ordinance or regulation are more frequent. Accordingly, a bylaw enforcement officer is the Canadian equivalent of the American Code Enforcement Officer or Municipal Regulations Enforcement Officer.
Your point is well taken.
A wooden fence can, however, act as a modest deterrent to the goblins that prowl in the night as well as blocking the sight of unplesantness taking place on either side.
Don't know the answer to either of your questions, but I will share something that will cause you to drop your donuts.
Assume you have a naughty neighbor - unsightly yard, dog on the loose, droopy-boobed, over-weight, common-law wife that sunbathes in the nude, whatever, and, as a result of this continued affront to the sensibilities of you, your family, and all right-thinking people, you decide to erect a fence.
After the sturdy, opaque fence is in place, here's how you twist the knife: You present your neighbor with a bill for half the cost!
And he must (eventually) pay.
What! Am I nuts!
Nope. Follow along.
A contract is a meeting of the minds. When you began constructing the fence, the neighbor agreed to its construction by not objecting. In law, this is called "Assent by Silence," and a contract latches in place. When the fence is completed, he is liable for half its value under the rubric of "unjust enrichment." That is, he is benefiting from a project to which he agreed in advance.
There are deviations from this basic rule: You build a fence out of marble and your neighbor had in mind something less grand or you build the fence before the neighbor was made aware of your intentions (he was out of town, etc.), but, in the main, the foregoing evaluation is bullet-proof and your small claims court will back you up.
Not only, but an alternating-picket fence is much less likely to get blown down in a hurricane (much of the wind can actually go THROUGH the fence).
"HeyBub" wrote in news:s6SdnQ0Hf98cfh_NnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:
This must be locality-dependent. Around here (NJ), a fence must face good side out, and be 1 foot or more inside the property line. Of course, if 2 property owners agree to put up a single fence right on the property line, you most likely can do that, but I am not sure what happens when one of the properties changes hands.
"Han" wrote
When I lived in Philly, fences were on the property line and cost was often shared. Ownership was transferred with property. Many row houses had fences in the back yard on the line if shared, inches inside if not. Since some houses were only 16' wide, it was not practical to put them a foot inside.
Many fences in nearby back yards are shared fences. At least the side fences are. This new back door neighbor is doing a gut renovation of his rowhouse. At least a million dollar renovation. He is putting up all the fences himself, so that he can have a consistent look around his property. I'm happy to not have to share the cost, and happy to get the extra couple of inches of having it all on his property.
Plus the side lines don't line up. His back line abuts two neighbors. So he would have four neighbors to convince to share.
I went out of my way to hire the same surveyor that he hired. This gets me his survey on my survey. Though after his survey he added an extension which isn't shown. See:
The old fence was chain link. Two of the four have wood fences on their property blocking the chain link. I had a stockade fence leaning on it.
But is he going to get all four to agree to his design? So that he can achieve his desired consistency? Plus his fence is a rather expensive cedar one. See:
Don.
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in news:c6qdnenjYoHf_x7NnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:
We've lived here now for 14 years (how time flies) . Our home is just to the left outside the picture on that home page. As shown there, we have "park" at the rear of my property, where we removed the ugly chain link fence. On one side we have 2 neighboring properties, on the other one. The one neighbor has a fence on the property line, which is theirs and which they maintain. On the other side, one of the neighbors owns a path between my and the second neighbor's property, and my fence there is 1 foot inside my property, away from that path. When the second neighbor (who lived there before us) started to plant bushes and other plants on the 1 foot strip between the path and my fence, we made clear that that was on our property, but that it was OK as long as the bushes were trimmed, and that we reserved the right to trim them as we pleased. The bushes provide some figment of privacy. We all are friendly, respectful of each other, and helpful to each other - which is nice in this physically close neighborhood.
Don Wiss wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Seems like Park Slope gentrification and (perhaps) housing bubble. Sometimes I don't like the architectural restrictions we have around here, but sometimes I do like them. Keeps most people from doing horrible things to their properties.
You are correct. It's really a good fence, though I'd probably spend a little more and move the pickets a little closer than 50%; more privacy.
-snip-
I confess to using the term 'law' to include local ordinances in this case.
It is *the law* in this house that you clear your plate--- but no legislature has ever deliberated upon it as far as I know.
Jim
I don't see the objection to using the term law. Requirements for fences are typically part of zoning ordinances that are passed by the governing body, eg town council, township committee, etc, and have every bit as much enforceability as those that set the speed limits on various roads do. Just because it's one small part of all the zoning doesn't mean it's not a law.
Now if a fence rule is adopted by a HOA, then I would agree that it is not an actual law.
You might be wrong there....HOA and condo assns' bylaws have the standing of law in Florida, after state, county, city, etc., and as long as they don't conflict with the higher statutes.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.