Letter to the Editor: More Fence Controversy in Freedom Township?
May 5, 2016
The fence controversy at Pleasant Lake in Freedom Township took another turn Tuesday evening, May 3rd. The installation of a non-compliant 6-foot, no see through fence (often referred to as a privacy fence) on Hieber Rd. the end of 2014 – a fence unlike any other approved fence at Pleasant Lake – led to a series of events throughout 2015 and into 2016 including over 20 lake resident discussions with the township Board and Planning Commission, 15+ letters and emails, plus a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing – all voicing opposition to large 6-foot, no see through fences in our lake district, requesting a fence update to the township’s zoning ordinance, and begging for help to find a fair solution.
A new zoning ordinance went into effect in 2014 which allowed 6-foot, no see through fences – without consideration for the special fence needs of lake district properties, especially properties on waterfront lots. Only through resident research did we learn this past fall that the previous zoning ordinance allowed 4-foot fences on any lot. To date, we have not been told why the 2014 zoning ordinance excluded the 4-foot fence height rule – at least in the lake district. Was it an oversight? An intentional decision? Why? Lake resident requests to update the lake district fence zoning ordinance on behalf of the lake have instead been met with repeated resistance.
At its April meeting the Board issued a 90-day moratorium on lake fences (thanks to lake residents’ persistence) and suggested a public-input meeting on the topic. Though over 85 lake residents have already signed letters stating they do not want large 6-foot, no see through fences (ie, large privacy fences) in our lake district, especially on waterfront lots, that input was apparently not deemed enough for some township officials.
See example letter here: letter.
I attended the Planning Commission meeting on May 3, 2016 hoping for the best, but prepared for the worst. The Chair pointed to a postcard mailed that day to Pleasant Lake residents announcing a special meeting at 9am, Saturday, May 14, 2016 at the Freedom Township Hall, inviting lake residents to provide input regarding “the regulation of residential fences on waterfront lots.” He then placed in front of him at least five “citizens letters on fences” but tabled any discussion until after the May 14th special meeting. Have those letters been distributed to, and reviewed by, Planning Commission members? We don’t know.
Postcard front. Photo courtesy of Carol Westfall.
A quick review of the postcard heightened my concerns. Not only is the wording offensive to those of us who have been championing this cause for well over a year, it’s perhaps biased and misleading, and it does not accurately represent resident requests. Perhaps the postcard wording and upcoming special meeting are designed to confuse lake residents or attempt to invalidate the significance of their earlier signed letters opposing large fences at the lake (85+ to date)?
For example, the postcard states the township received a request from a group of Pleasant Lake area residents (yes, I’m in that group!) to not only “prohibit privacy fences on waterfront lots” but also “to impose additional fence restrictions for the Pleasant Lake area.”
CLARIFICATION: For the record, we never asked the township to impose additional fence restrictions. This sample letter has been received by the township from over 85 lake residents in recent months:
I would like to voice my opposition to large 6 foot no see through fences in the Township lake district, especially on waterfront lots. We need to do all we can to protect the rural and historic character of the R-3 lake district, as documented in the 2015 Master Plan update and make protective zoning rules more clear.
Postcard back. Photo courtesy of Carol Westfall.
Another example: There are five drawings of types of residential fences on the postcard, yet the 6-ft. Privacy Fence drawing is not portrayed to scale. It’s displayed at the same height as the other examples rather than showing it would be 33% higher and 50% denser than the alternative fence types shown – another source of possible confusion.
A final example: The postcard states the zoning ordinance “already restricts the height of residential fences near the road and near the Pleasant Lake shoreline to a maximum of four feet” and asks whether the “type and height of residential fences be further restricted on waterfront lots in the area between the house and Pleasant Lake?”
CLARIFICATION: What’s missing from the above statement is the most relevant point – that the township’s previous zoning ordinance allowed fences to 4-feet in any area. Period. That wording already existed but was not included in the new 2014 zoning ordinance – not just for areas near the road and near the shoreline, but 4-foot fences throughout. Why not word the postcard to ask lake residents if they want a return to that 4-foot zoning language vs. confuse (or scare?) by asking whether they want further fence restrictions? Lake residents involved in this fence issue for well over a year were more than willing to provide input to help get the right, accurate wording. We were never asked.
During the Planning Commission meeting I asked why the 2014 zoning ordinance fence height was changed from 4-foot to 6-foot. No response. I asked why other restrictions (ie, hedges, where we’ve heard zero complaints) are now being thrown into the fence discussion and creating confusion when what lake residents want is to fix the lake fence zoning now. We understand there are plenty of riparian zoning updates to be made but the existing Riparian Committee can review and update those at a later date – as opposed to complicating the current lake fence discussion with them now. The Chair emphatically stated this is how he wants to do it.
I entered this meeting with optimism, hoping the Planning Commission would do the right thing on behalf of Pleasant Lake fences. I hope I’m wrong, but it feels like we’re being tricked. The need for postcards and a special meeting (vs. trusting the 85+ lake resident letters who have already voiced their preferences), questionable postcard wording; and, complicating the process rather than sticking with the core fence update request? And perhaps, trying to justify a prior zoning decisions rather than simply fixing the problem as more than 85 lake residents requested? My three minutes for audience participation were up, the Chair pointedly reminded me.
The township’s Zoning Ordinance and Master Plan both recommend preserving the R-3 lake district’s rural hamlet character, yet I see nothing rural or hamlet about large, fortress style fences around the lake. Our request for fence zoning protection around Pleasant Lake is not unique. Other state lakes have such protections. Michigan’s Denton Township, for instance, limits all fences within 500 feet of a lake to 4-foot or less. After all, WE live on the lake. WE live with lake fence zoning consequences. It’s OUR property values at stake. Another long-time Pleasant Lake resident said it best when he recently wrote to our township officials that they “…don’t understand the people on Pleasant Lake or their needs. I know you have the power to do whatever you want to do but I am hoping you will listen to the wishes of the people.” There is currently no Pleasant Lake resident on either the Board or Planning Commission.
I’m a Manchester graduate who retired to Pleasant Lake almost seven years ago. I love living here. This is my first-ever conflict with a township or government entity. It’s my first-ever letter to the editor. I’m not a trouble-maker (honest!), but sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe. This is one of those times. I’m baffled by the high level of ongoing resistance, stonewalling of lake resident wishes, and impediments to what should be a simple zoning update. More than 85 signed letters are not enough? How much more time and money is the township spending to fight its lake residents on this fence zoning issue (ie, more planner and attorney fees?) which has been going on now almost a year and a half? Rather than fighting lake residents, how about respecting and partnering with them to just fix the problem?
Carol Westfall
Pleasant Lake Resident
Editor’s Note: We’d like to publish your letter to the editor too. Click HERE for our letter to the editor policy.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login