Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Patrick Carwile wanted to point out some potential issues with Farmville’s proposed fence ordinance. Speaking to the planning commission during their Wednesday, Nov. 20 meeting, the town resident explained that the changes proposed by the Farmville council might create more problems than they fix. Instead, he asked the commission to focus on the problem that triggered all this. 

“I would actually like you to just address the issue that’s at hand,” Carwile said. “The fence shouldn’t be too close to a sidewalk and it should not be a visual issue for you getting in or out of your driveway. Maybe let’s leave the rest of the ordinances alone until there becomes a time where we need to address height and how the fence actually needs to look.” 

He was referring to the situation that started these months of debate over a fence ordinance. Earlier this year on Longwood Avenue, a Farmville resident built a privacy fence that stretched all the way from the rear of the yard to within the town’s right of way. That made it harder for one of the person’s neighbors, who could no longer see traffic from that direction as they pulled in or out of their driveway. When it was brought up to town officials, the staff found there really was no ordinance in place right now regarding fences. And so the planning commission spent part of the summer developing an ordinance, then the Farmville council spent several months this fall debating and making changes. Now it’s back at the planning commission, for members to review the council’s latest proposals. 

But in his public comment before the commission, Carwile argued that this had gotten out of hand. Instead of just addressing a safety issue, now the proposals deal with everything from the allowed size to how a fence is supposed to look. 

Raising concerns over fence ordinance

Part of the current proposal involves how a fence would be allowed to look. A majority of town council members want to see a ban on solid fences, arguing that they’re a safety risk for law enforcement or delivery carriers, as they don’t know what’s on the other side. Mail carriers could open the fence to find a loose dog, while law enforcement officers. The council also wants rules put in place that wouldn’t allow a fence larger than 8 feet high on the side or rear yard and no higher than four feet in the front yard. If a resident wants to go higher than any of those limits, they would have to pay $500 to request a permit and go before the planning commission and then the town council, to get approval.

Carwile pointed out that some of these restrictions could cause problems for residents who have dogs, like he does. 

“What I notice is a call for fencing to be outside in front of the houses at a four foot standpoint,” Carwile said. “Well, my dogs can jump four foot fences. And if there’s anybody who has a dog, you want to protect that dog from other animals. Having a four foot fence doesn’t fix that issue.” 

As for see-through fences, what happens from a legal standpoint, Carwile asked, if a dog is inside the fenced-in yard, but a child is walking by and decides to stick his or her hand through the fence? Would the dog owner be legally responsible for the child getting bitten? Would that mean dogs couldn’t be allowed in the front yard anymore? 

“We’re talking about children that can put their hands through a fence in the front yard and that can be a concern for animals,” Carwile argued. 

So what happens now? 

Commission members heard Carwile’s arguments and the case itself was reintroduced, with the council’s current proposal read into the record. So what happens next? Now in the coming months, the commission will schedule a public hearing and then decide if they recommend approval. That will take two meetings, one to introduce and discuss, the second to hold the hearing, so it would likely be at least January, if not February of next year before this would come back before council.