Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Fences Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Harbor staff review code-enforcement practices and propose fence-code changes
Summary
City code enforcement officer described a largely complaint-driven program with a 98.4% compliance rate; planning staff proposed allowing 6-to-7-foot residential fences without permits and removing a 10-foot corner-lot setback, with council asking for more process and timing detail.
Ray Helsley, Oak Harbor’s code enforcement officer, told the City Council at the workshop that the city’s enforcement program is complaint-driven and that he works part time (about 15 hours per week) to respond to reported violations. "I have a 98.4% compliance rate that pretty much stays consistent month to month," Helsley said, describing a process that starts with a notice of violation giving a 10-day period to respond and can progress to a final notice and order and, in rare cases, city abatement and liens.
Development Services Director David Cooley briefed the council on fence regulations and options for code changes. He said current Oak Harbor rules cap residential fences at 6 feet and allow up to 8 feet in commercial zones. Cooley told the council staff could recommend allowing fences up to 7 feet without a permit but warned that any height above 7 feet would trigger building-code review and additional permitting burden. "If you want to go to 7 feet, you wouldn't have an objection from us as long as there's no permit required," Cooley said.
A second, separate code issue staff flagged was a required 10-foot setback for side-yard fences on corner lots. Cooley said staff recommends removing that 10-foot setback so fences can be built at the property line, preventing creation of an unmaintained "no-man's land" between sidewalk and fence. He said permitting taller fences would raise questions about survey costs, inspections, software changes and staff time.
Council members expressed mixed views. Several members, including Mayor Pro Tem, Council members Stuckey and Romero, and others, said they supported removing the corner-lot 10-foot setback and were open to allowing 7-foot fences in principle. Others urged caution on changing fence-height limits now, citing optics, ongoing local controversy, and the potential enforcement and inspection workload. Council member Stuckey praised Helsley’s approach to enforcement: "I like your approach of working with people as opposed to just dropping the hammer right away," he said.
Helsley described the department's enforcement steps: intake via a preprinted complaint form, site visit and photo documentation, assignment of a case number, an initial informal notice with a 10-day response window, a second notice if needed, and a formal final notice and order before the city takes abatement action. He said the program rarely reaches the abatement stage; in six years of electronic records he has issued only one notice of infraction and in one other case the city performed abatement and placed a lien.
Staff said next steps are to draft proposed code language for council direction and return to a future meeting with a formal proposal and communications materials. Cooley indicated the likely staff recommendation: retain 6 feet as the default, allow 6–7 feet without a permit as an option, and avoid permitting requirements above 7 feet because of the extra review and resource needs.
