Prior to 2004, a fence could only be built if it were 30 feet in from the property line in our area. Several fences were built on the property line during this time without permission. In 2004, the code was changed to allow a fence to be placed 12 feet in from the property line. Considering the fact that the fences were against code when they were built and they are still against the current code, are the fences considered "grandfathered" simply because the code was changed?
2007-07-13 15:08:17 · 5 answers · asked by G 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The fences would not be protected under a grandfather clause. That only applies if they were legal at the time.
But, if the code now allows for the shorter distance, it doesn't matter if the fences where there before (except, possibly, for a citation for code violation). Any suit now would use the current standard.
2007-07-13 16:24:50 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fences are allowed on property lines. Other restrictions may apply, but you can always put a fence around your property. So, the fence doesn't need to be grandfathered in.
2007-07-13 15:20:55 · answer #2 · answered by toetagme 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not at all sure as to ur comments above:
However, there is the expression re:
U guys don't have to worry - "you'll be grandfathered in"
It relates to a given situation that has to change / is changed and thus leaves certain people and/or working staff at their employment or in other situations out in the cold!
As an example - some people may be past the time to obtain new benefits or whatever, however, they are grandfathered in -and thus retained and / or allowed to continue as before due to long service or whatever.
The introduction of the new (whatever) not applicable to them.
2007-07-13 15:26:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they fail to pass code may or may not be the deciding factor in this case. Code, as you explained, is a matter of proximity. The local courts will need to make this call, and grandfather law could be overturned, if the court deems it so !
Did any of that make sense ?
2007-07-13 15:24:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
nonconforming capacity the form isn't in compliance to interior sight codes. i'm uncertain yet this sounds like it is a ability flood problem which might subsequently fee a super sort of $ for coverage. or you are going to be denied flood coverage.
2016-11-09 06:40:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋