Seaview Fence Must Come Down, Planning Rules

By Oliver Lukacs
Staff Writer

Jan 21 -- A fence that has divided neighbors on a quaint beachside walk street over the legality of its height will have to come down, according to a zoning administrative ruling.

While Stephanie Barbanell and Jerry Bass contended that the six-foot-tall fence and 14-foot-high hedge surrounding their house on Seaview Terrace shielded them from the homeless who slept on their lawn, sometimes leaving behind condoms and hypodermic needles, their neighbors complained that it blocked their view.

In last week's ruling, Zoning AdministratorAmanda Schachter sided with those neighbors, finding that by creating a “barrier” the fence is “injurious” and “detrimental” to the neighborhood as a whole, because it “detracts from the pedestrian experience” on one of only three “walk streets” in the City.

Barbanell and Bass, who have until January 29 to appeal the decision to the Planning Commission, said they were disappointed with the ruling.

“We just received the information and our reaction is disappointment,” said Barbanell, who has been known to frequently object to projects in her neighborhood on the basis of zoning technicalities.

As for the appeal, Barbanell said, “We haven’t made our decisions about that yet.”

Unlike all the other homeowners in the surrounding area, Barbanell and Bass refused to conform to the 42-inch height governing fences, walls and hedges on front yard setbacks, arguing that their illegal fence and hedge safeguarded their privacy and added what they said was much-needed security from wandering and drunken homeless.

The City rejected the couple’s contention that their front yard was actually their back yard, and should be treated as a back yard, requiring additional security to protect the family, their guests and clothesline from neighborhood crime.

“The applicant’s contention that a compliant fence would compromise the use of the undeveloped front yard portion of the lot is not supported by the evidence,” Schachter ruled.

By hampering the “pedestrian oriented environment,” the fence also “is contrary to and in conflict with” two aspects of the City’s General Plan, the ruling said.

One “which aims to enhance the image and unique character of residential neighborhoods in the City,” and another “which seeks to enhance the pedestrian scale and character of streets and public places,” according to the ruling.

“Construction of tall structures that reduce visual access to the front yards and a pedestrian’s connection to the local environment between the walk street, adjacent properties, and the subject property, compromises the integrity and character of this residential neighborhood and is contrary to pedestrian oriented objectives,” Schachter wrote.

Related Stories:

"In Defense of a Fence," November 12