Council tells man that the gaps between the slats on his fence are too narrow

Rowan Macdonald has been served an abatement notice by the Nelson City Council in New Zealand, saying that the gaps between the slats of his new fence are too small. The gap must be 25mm, the council says. Macdonald's counter is that spacing of that width would not only invade his privacy but also create a biting hazard for children who might put their fingers through the gaps to pet his three big dogs. He says the natural shrinkage of the slats as the timber dries will widen the spacing to 10mm and that you can already see through the gaps. But he's still faced with an abatement notice - and says he'll fight the council in the Environment Court rather than give in to a ruling he maintains is simply wrong. At Thursday night's Rules Reduction Taskforce meeting in Nelson he got support from the housing minister, Nelson MP Nick Smith, who already knew all about it.

"When Rowan told me the story I was a bit gobsmacked and went down and had a look," Smith said. "It is a perfectly respectable fence and if he'd like to build the same fence on my property I'd be pleased to have it." Macdonald, one of a series of speakers who told the government taskforce members of problems encountered through the Resource Management Act and Building Act as applied by councils, said he'd been told by council representatives that his fence breached the RMA, which aimed to promote safer communities by ensuring that people could see out of their sections into the street, and vice versa. He said the council had provided him with three different "official" requirements for the gap: a thumb's width, 20mm and 25mm, finding the latter, he believed, having "sat around a room and measured their thumbs and come up with an average measurement".
A gap that wide would invade his privacy, he said. "I'm disgusted by that. My house is on three levels, the living area is on the second level and I have a bedroom on the third level. They look over the frickin' fence anyway." A council officer had told him he could apply for an exemption at a cost of $1000, he said, but had also indicated the council would look forward to seeing its ruling tested in court. He would be filing papers with the Environment Court on Monday. "The Act says that fences have to be visually permeable. You can see through my fence. If it was a straight iron fence or a straight concrete fence you couldn't see through it. I'm dismayed at this rule and having to defend myself in court for a measurement that doesn't even exist." Taskforce member, Far North mayor and former MP John Carter said Macdonald's case involved a local rule resulting from the Act.
"That's when it becomes complicated. That's the stuff that Nick's trying to fix so that we can get on to some of this dopey stuff and get it changed." Nelson Mayor Rachel Reese, also a taskforce member, said the fence was a very good example of what the taskforce was looking for as it prepared to write a report on how to weed out pedantic and frustrating rules around property and housing. "The trouble is, once the rule's been made, it's very difficult and slow to get rid of it." Council strategy and environment group manager Clare Barton said the new fence rules had been in place since July 2012 and aimed to create more streetscape openness and a better sense of safety. Fences constructed before then could be replaced like with like. Barton said council officers assessed each case on its own merits to determine if anyone walking down the street could see through the fence into the property. Macdonald had been advised that his fence was in breach. He could apply for a resource consent for the fence as it stands, or alter it. He'd elected to do neither, she said.