I like state roads for property borders.
Contributor
I like state roads for property borders.
Contributor
IME, height is the main actual rule, with the rest to be worked out by the party or parties involved.
Property lines can be tricky and expensive. I built a house where the survey from one direction had the line 2' different from starting from the opposite direction. That sleeping dog was left alone, and the existing fence line was assumed to be the property line.
Contributor
no limit on the trees and why id rather have them than a fence. Parents 45 feet tall you didnt see the homes that bordered their property. They put a road beside my place and ive done that side as well. Non of them can see into my yard and in my place a bungalow non of the two storey homes can see in. I do cut those trees just high enough to block them out. A fence on that side would have been useless. It was field beside me and behind when I moved here
Moderator
In my jurisdiction, fences require a permit, can be "on the line" (although I put mine on the side 2" off the line) and there's no rules about "good side wherever". On the back line where the fence was separating us from another neighbor who has dogs and a pool that her grandkids use, she agreed to cost sharing for half of the shared distance (100' divided between us) but also requested a privacy fence that was taller than what I was putting up. I agreed to that but limited my contribution to the cost of the 4' aluminum fence I installed elsewhere which was less than the 6' wood privacy fence she wanted. She had no issue with that and put the "good" side toward us. (She also had to span two properties...and got nothing for cost sharing from the folks that own the lot nextdoor) In other words, the zoning specifies the "where" but not the "what" other than a max height limit (6') and some minor setback things that apply at the front of the property. Everything else is common courtesy.
Last edited by Jim Becker; 05-18-2024 at 9:25 PM.
--
The most expensive tool is the one you buy "cheaply" and often...
Contributor
"Bad side out" is how criminals climb your fence....
Contributor
Not sure I follow your logic. You need the fence for dogs (I assume your dogs?) but you're not willing to share the cost because you believe it's his property?Originally Posted by Stan Calow
In our neighbourhood, all the fences were put in on the property lines by the builders. When it was time to replace them neighbours share the cost. Most fences are cedar panels with no good or bad side.
Contributor
From what shows up in searches it appears many jurisdictions restrict fences to six feet tall.IME, height is the main actual rule, with the rest to be worked out by the party or parties involved.
There is also restrictions one what are called "spite fences." This actually can include hedges and trees. Usually if it is put in to block a view or annoy a neighbor.
No complaint, no problem?
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
You have to know where the Public Right of Way is . The fence has to be entirely on your property, or it’s an “obstruction” and you
might have to move it.
Contributor
When we bought our Massachusetts home the elderly lady next door came over to give us the “lay of the land.” She said the common fence had been built by her 1’ onto her property so if she wanted to do anything with it she could. She was a wonderful woman and neighbor, who owned the whole fence.
Contributor
Interesting. This is all news to me about fences on the property line and sharing costs. I as far as I knew, at least around here, you put your fence on your property and it is your fence. Live and learn. I have heard problems where a neighbor made someone move their fence if it was a few inches onto their property.
[OP]
Contributor
Doug, my backyard is fenced on four sides, with four neighbors adjoining. The fences were existing when we bought the property 25+ years ago, put in by the property owner. All of us have dogs that don't like each other so the fence benefits all of us. I replaced the three sides I believed I owned 5 years ago, and it never occurred to me to ask for contribution because of my understanding of property rules. On the fourth side, the neighbor wants to replace the fence and is asking for help. I consider it his fence and his responsibility. I thought this was common practice. I understand sharing costs would be "neighborly" but I want to be clear on what is legally required, and they are not poor.
This is how cedar fences are typically done around here. The "bad" side being the one that shows the joineryThe folklore behind it says you should show your good side to the neighbors and public.
bad side.jpggood .jpg
"Bad Side" "Good Side"
Spite fences: a friend had a problem neighbor who built his fence 15" inches back from the property line. My friend objected to having to mow a 75' strip of his neighbors lawn. So he put in a fence right on the property line so he doesnt see it. Of course 15" is too narrow to get a mower in. The neighbor eventually moved.
Last edited by Stan Calow; 05-19-2024 at 11:47 AM.
< insert spurious quote here >
Contributor
This is where different jurisdictional law and state law comes into play. Some states have laws about dividing the cost of a fence on a property line.
From the state of Washington:
andIf you use your neighbor's fence as part of your own enclosure, you need to pay them for half of its value. This is according to the law in RCW 16.60. 020. However, if the fence has special materials like hog wire, you only need to cover the extra cost if you're also using hog wire for your fencing.
My understanding is in California there is similar law.RCW 16.60.040
Partition fence—Failure to build—Recovery of half of cost.
If, after notice has been given by either party and a reasonable length of time has elapsed, the other party neglect or refuse to erect or cause to be erected, the one-half of such fence, the party giving notice may proceed to erect or cause to be erected the entire partition fence, and collect by law one-half of the cost thereof from the other party.
Surely in some states the reasoning may be, "if you want a fence, you're not only responsible for it, you're going to pay for it."
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
In this part of semi-rural New England a fence is regarded as a very unfriendly act between neighbors, certainly if it blocks the lines of sight. The idea of being forced to pay for someone else's fence I don't want is pretty repugnant. HOAs are much more likely to regulate the details of fences than building/zoning rules, but I'd expect the setbacks to be in the zoning code.
In our town we have a now-ceremonial position "Viewer of Fences" who I imagine was once charged with this sort of thing. We also have a "Surveyor of Trees and Bark" who is also appointed each year at town meeting.
Moderator
Where I grew up in suburbia SoCal and here in New Mexico backyard fences were/are the norm and originally built by the home builder. It would be very strange to me not to have them.
Contributor
I suspect the size of ones lots has something to do with having fences or not. In the suburbs here, with lot sizes in the 1/6 acre (some cities smaller, some larger), if you don't have a fence, you are basically sharing your large with your neighbors, looking into their house (and they, into yours) and a otherwise general lack of any privacy.
But in the more rural areas out here, where houses might be on acre+ lots, fences are less common - the houses are far enough apart, likely to have a fair amount of vegetation between them, etc, so that privacy is still maintained. Or fences that do exist are not as much privacy (redwood here in California), but instead wire or the like that just marks that as the property line and still sufficient to keep animals constrained.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote