Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Residential Fence Permit topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Winchester zoning commission approves six‑foot fence permit at 342 East Wakefield Boulevard

Town of Winchester Zoning Commission · January 29, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Town of Winchester Zoning Commission approved a special permit allowing a six‑foot white cedar fence at 342 East Wakefield Boulevard after the applicant’s representative said hedges that provided privacy had died; the motion passed 3‑1 with one abstention.

On Feb. 9, 2026, the Town of Winchester Zoning Commission approved a special permit (PCC‑25‑22) allowing installation of a fence exceeding four feet at 342 East Wakefield Boulevard, concluding deliberations after a presentation by the applicant’s representative.

The commission voted 3 in favor and 1 abstention to approve the permit; the transcript records the abstention as coming from a member identified in the meeting as "Epstein." Peter Martin moved to approve PCC‑25‑22 and the chair seconded the motion.

At the public hearing, Lynn Carter spoke on behalf of the applicant, saying the existing privacy hedges along the south property line have died despite treatment by a professional arborist and that replacing approximately 30 shrubs would be disruptive. Carter said the applicant proposed a white cedar fence, finished on both sides, to be installed on the applicant’s side of the property line so maintenance would be the applicant’s responsibility.

Carter described the fence run as about 63 feet and said the design would have a solid lower portion about 5 feet high with roughly 20 inches of lattice above, yielding about 6 feet overall. "We're never gonna regain what we had with those, you know, with a 10‑foot privet," Carter said, explaining the fence would not recreate the old hedge's full screening but would provide a buffer between the properties. She also said the neighbor provided a supporting letter that was submitted to staff.

Commissioners and staff verified on‑site conditions and asked about visibility from the street and adjacent properties. Staff confirmed the portion of the fence that is opaque would measure approximately 5 feet and that the lattice top was intended to help the design comply with the town’s semi‑open design standards. Carter said the fence would not be visible from the street and that the applicant chose to place the fence just inside their property line to avoid cost or maintenance burden on the neighbor.

Carter also told the panel that, because a propane tank sits near a garage corner, the proposed fence would enable compliance with fire‑code separation requirements for siting a backup generator that would otherwise be constrained by the hedges.

The permit application was presented under the zoning reference shown in the hearing: Section 415‑113(D)(3) (Highway District). The commission’s approval was recorded during the meeting’s 'old business' agenda item; the motion passed with the noted abstention and no recorded 'no' votes.

The commission did not indicate further conditions in the audio record beyond the site and design descriptions; staff will process the formal permit paperwork and any remaining technical checks after the hearing.

The panel then moved on to other scheduled business and adjourned later in the evening.