Editorial Reply -- Peter Fuad

In response to the May 29 editorial, “Quit horsing around,” favoring

overturning Glendale’s frontyard fence ordinance, I, too, am tired of

horsing around on this issue. I, and many other homeowners, remain

constantly surprised and dismayed at the unending eagerness of some to

dismantle a law that has protected the openness and charm of Glendale’s

neighborhoods for many years.

The News-Press states that Glendale is a busy metropolitan community

with all the big-city problems. It is for that very reason that Glendale

needs to retain its ban on fences in the front setback. Is a neighborhood

safer when each house is walled off, fortress-like, from the street? Or

is it better to have open frontyards, which allow visibility and invite

neighborly interaction? Is the answer to denser development more

structures? Or does the green belt that is formed by open frontyards

provide a counterbalance to increased development?

The editorial mentions Glendale’s high pedestrian fatality rate. I

understood that this was a result of cars running through crosswalks --

not from a lack of fences. In fact, fences can force neighborhood

children to walk and play nearer to the street by closing off lawns.

The editorial mentions the Rancho area and questions whether the City

Council members believe that horses are more deserving of protection than

children. How would horses be protected? Remember, we are talking about

fences in the front setback only. Would a split rail fence of the type

advocated by some Rancho fence proponents actually keep a horse penned in

a frontyard, and are horses now being corralled in frontyards? Would such

a split-rail fence actually keep a horse out of a frontyard, and are

horses now roaming the streets riderless?

I think the real reason some want to allow split-rail type fences in

the Rancho area is to add a rustic flavor to the neighborhood. That’s

fine. If that’s the goal, however, I would think taxpayer funds would be

better spent in investing in rustic street scape elements, as Burbank has

done in its adjoining horse overlay zone, than in pouring money into

developing and administering a complex fence law.

The News-Press describes the ordinance as “elitist,” “antiquated” and

“outdated, intrusive and impractical.” Is it elitist to keep your yard

open to the street? Is it antiquated to keep Glendale a city of gracious

neighborhoods? Are open street scapes outdated? What is more intrusive,

chockablock fences forming frontyard barriers or open space? What is more

impractical, a clearly enforced ban on fences or micromanaged design

reviews tussling over issues of size, compatibility, maintenance,

personal taste, materials, colors and styles, costing thousands of

taxpayer dollars each year to administer?

The News-Press says those who violate the ordinance should expect

unpleasant visits from city enforcement officials. I was not aware that

unpleasantness was now an argument for not enforcing a duly enacted

ordinance. Sometimes, it seems that the charge to overturn the ordinance

is led by those who have erected illegal fences who then implore the city

to save them from enforcement of an ordinance that most homeowners seem

capable of obeying and firmly support. Talk about fair play!

Allowing fences seems harmless only because we have none now. Will we

mourn the loss of our open frontyards when thousands of new fences spring

up in our neighborhoods? Will all fences be cute and well-maintained?

Will you like your neighbor’s new wall? Are you confident a new city

bureaucracy can diligently enforce a complex fence ordinance regulating

thousands of fences, year after year? Will no property owners push the

envelope on taste? Could the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent each

year to administer a new ordinance be better used elsewhere? How

successful have we been in enforcing the current simple ban?

One need only visit Burbank, Los Angeles, Eagle Rock or Atwater and

gaze upon their walls and fences to understand the time-tested wisdom of

our ordinance. Glendale will not magically escape its ills by some force

of will. The real issue here is not whether we need a new fence

ordinance. The real issue is when do we start enforcing the existing

ordinance. Let’s stop horsing around!

PETER FUAD

President, Northwest Glendale Homeowners’ Assn.