Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
Date: August 27, 2022
To: Old Stone Crossing Homeowners Association
Board of Directors and Architectural Committee
Mr. Chris Knors
Mr. James Michael
Mr. Dennis Ellis
Re: Objection to Proposed Fence Plan for 7203 Pebble Gate Drive
Dear Board of Directors & Architectural Committee:
This letter is written on behalf of concerned Owners within the Old Stone Crossing Subdivision. The Owners named below object to the proposed fence for 7203 Pebble Gate Drive, submitted in early July 2021. Key issues, which were previously communicated directly to the Architectural Committee in mid- July by all Owners living adjacent to 7203 Pebble Gate Drive, are as follows:
- Undesirable Front & Side Yard Fencing: The proposed fence would run directly along the front yard lines and extend in front of the street-facing exterior facades of both 8310 Stonetown Avenue & 7207 Pebble Gate Drive. Front yard fencing is generally considered undesirable for aesthetic reasons in comparable neighborhoods throughout the Triangle, and therefore prohibited. The proposed fence would also come down the side yard to the street affecting the property of 7202 Pebble Gate and anyone entering the neighborhood. Given that 7203 Pebble Gate is on a highly exposed corner lot, the fence should not extend toward the street along the driveway. Please reference Exhibit 1 – Front Yard Fencing for a depiction of the negative impact on immediately adjacent properties. Please also reference Exhibit 2 - Hamptons to review restrictive covenant language from our nearest comparable neighborhood, which explicitly prohibits front yard fencing.
- Inconsistent with Neighborhood Standards: No fences in Old Stone Crossing (including those on corner lots) run along a front yard line of adjacent properties or give the appearance of a front yard being fenced. Please also reference Exhibit 3 - Neighborhood Comparable for an example of an appropriate corner lot fence layout, where fencing does not extend in front of the street-facing exterior façade of the adjacent property. This example can be found on the corner of W. Lake Anne Drive and Ortin Lane, less than 200 feet from the subject property.
- Erratic Design: The proposed plan would extend existing perimeter stone wall at 7203 Pebble Gate, therefore introducing erratic lines, mixed materials, and varying heights. Ultimately this design could negatively impact property values not only with the homes in the Stonetown Avenue cul-de-sac and Pebble Gate Drive corridor, but the neighborhood at large.
- No Screening: We have come to learn the total plan would include playground equipment within the proposed fenced area on the Pebble Gate Drive side. Should this be the case, we would also object to placement of any playground equipment that has direct visibility from the street or neighbors. Pebble Gate Drive also maintains high traffic volume and typically serves as a main entry point into our neighborhood.
The Owners named below are disappointed in lack of follow-up from the Architectural Committee, including the failure to act on the commitment made by Mr. Knors via email on July 23, 2021, to open a collective dialogue with our neighbors.
Moreover, the Owners named below wish to remind the Architectural Committee of their responsibility to consider the “effect of the improvements on adjacent or neighboring properties” as defined in Article XI, Architectural Control and Inspection, Section 11.2 Powers:
“The Architectural Committee shall have the right to refuse approval of any plans and specifications for Improvements to be constructed on a Lot (the “Plans & Specifications”) which are not suitable or desirable, in its sole discretion, for aesthetic or any other reasons, provided such approval is not unreasonably withheld. In approving or disapproving Plans & Specifications, the Architectural Committee shall consider the suitability of the proposed Improvements, color, and materials to be used in those Improvements, the site upon which the are proposed to be erected and the effect of the Improvements on adjacent or neighboring properties.”
Since Mr. Knors has not followed up on his July 23, 2021 commitment, the Owners named below request the Old Stone Crossing Board of Directors and Architecture Committee take the following actions:
- Perform your fiduciary duties by acting in the collective interest of all Owners within Old Stone Crossing.
- Reject the submitted fence plan for 7203 Pebble Gate prior to August 31, 2021.
- Confirm in writing to the Owners named below the date on which the Architecture Committee delivered a written non-support communication to the Owners of 7203 Pebble Gate Drive.
- Ask the Owners of 7203 Pebble Gate to come up with a new plan for the neighbors and the Architectural Committee to review.
Sincerely,
Old Stone Crossing Owner
More like this
Petition to a Proposal to Develop Preserve at Holt
Appeal to James Creek Homeowners: Support Needed to Urge the Current Board to…
Updates
August 29, 2021
The Architectural Committee remains silent about our formal objections to the fence plans. Post the link to this petition on your personal Facebook page and tag the HOA board members directly. We need to keep the pressure on them until they provide a public response.
August 29, 2021
The amount of support we have gathered proves that our neighbors refuse to accept this eyesore in our community. Call the board members listed in the petition today and demand they reject this fence plan. Send this link to three neighbors who live on our street right now.
36 Comments
The intent of this petition is to encourage open discussion regarding proposed placement of the fence at 7203 Pebble Gate, with consideration for both adjacent property owners and the neighborhood in general. Our Architecture Committee committed to organize such a discussion (after receiving written objections from numerous neighbors and prior neighbor-to-neighbor conversations did not overcome gridlock) - but failed to do so. I have a fence and fully support all of our neighbors installing a fence. However, I worked in conjunction with my neighbors before installing my fence to ensure they were comfortable with the design. My hope is all of us - and our Architecture Committee - would extend the same courtesy.
Sorry we're late to respond to this, but I don't think we fully understand this petition. As James pointed out, there are many corner lot homes on high traffic intersections in this neighborhood that have similar fences and that appear within community standards and compliant with OSC by-laws. Also, as a family with young kids who frequently run into the street without pause, we understand the necessity of having a fence for the safety of our children; given that this neighbor has a corner lot at a busy intersection with limited visibility (Pebble Gate and Stonetown), their property poses particularly high risk for their children without a fence in place.
First, the Architecture Committee should perform due diligence prior to reviewing proposed improvements. Your loose inventory was collected only after this petition emerged. Had the Architecture Committee honored its commitment to organize a discussion with impacted parties, then we would have had an opportunity to discuss the two relevant examples: 1. 7026 Rippling Stone Lane. The side fence abuts the neighboring lot, but does not extend beyond the footprint of the neighboring lot's stairwell and fence. Further, this side fence is at a relatively lower elevation than the neighboring home's facade. Therefore, this fence placement does not create the appearance of a fence being in one's front yard. 2. 8104 Ortin Lane. Please consultant your map of our HOA. The side fence line you mention does not abut an Old Stone Crossing Member.
I appreciate the dialogue, Patrick. I want to make it full clear I support all of our neighbors installing a fence. Like you, I have a lot with exposure to a busy street and have a fence. And I worked in conjunction with my neighbors before installing my fence to ensure they were comfortable with the design. This petition originated in response to our Architecture Committee failing to honor their commitment to organize a dialogue with concerned neighbors. No effort was made to compromise. Instead, adjacent lot owners have felt completely ignored and neglected.
As a long time resident of OSC, I have to agree with James and Nathan. I'm embarrassed at the response by our neighborhood and the "warm" welcome we've shown our new neighbors. As someone who lives on a corner lot, with a fence, I completely understand their concerns around child safety. They're on a busy street, where people drive way too fast and don't pay attention. Instead of bullying them, why don't we try to work on an agreeable compromise that allows them have a fence without jeopardizing aesthetics. I'm pretty confident we all have more important things to spend our time on. If you don't, please find a hobby.
Its not very nice to send out petitions against your new neighbors and hand out pitch forks and torches when your own non standard wooden fence is in serious disrepair, and is perhaps the most visible fence in all the neighborhood. Right along the entrance on Ortin all wonky, rotten and falling over. How would you feel if I sent a petition around for you to fix your rickety fence? We should be neighborly and work through disagreements, but to tell a young family that they cant protect their children because you don't want a fence next to your house is disgraceful. I am little disappointed in those of you that signed this, if I am being honest. Not that it will stop me from waving or saying hi to you or having you over for drinks and the occasional firework, but you should be better.
In osc there are 11 corner lots. Of those 11 corner lots 4 have fences, 3 out of those 4 are black metal fences with one being a 6 foot privacy wooden fence, all 4 are readily visible from the street. Here are the addresses of the 4 with fences 7208 Rippling Stone, 7302 Meadow Cove, 8203 Ortin, and 8202 Stonetown. Of those 4 corner lots with fences, 2 lots have house placements such that one house around the corner is facing in a perpendicular manner meaning that the back of the corner lot shares a boundary with the side of the neighboring lot. Of those 2 perpendicular situated corner lots with fences 100% of them have a fence line along the side and in front of house that borders the rear of their lot. Those addresses are 7208 Rippling Stone and 7302 Meadow Cove. In addition there are other examples of side yard fences that come past the front of a neighboring house not on a corner 7026 Rippling stone lane is one and 8104 Ortin Lane. In Addition here is an example of a non parallel to lot line fence in order to abut to an existing structure, wall or neighboring fence between 8211 and 8207 Ortin. Due to the above facts and I can show you all pictures it would be outside of rational thought to determine there are not similar and for all intents and purposes identical fences already in the neighborhood and well within the community standards. It would also be outside of rational and normal thought to deny an architectural request by a lot owner that does not violate the OSC covenants or established community standards. For these reasons the request was approved. 7302 Meadow Cove – Corner Lot with exposed side and rear fence line abutting to the front and side yard of next door lot - Black metal. 7208 Rippling Stone - Corner Lot with exposed side and rear fence line abutting to the front and side yard of next door lot – Black metal. 8202 Stonetown – Corner Lot with exposed side fencing – black Metal 8203 Ortin - Corner Lot with exposed sid
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
Date: August 27, 2022
To: Old Stone Crossing Homeowners Association
Board of Directors and Architectural Committee
Mr. Chris Knors
Mr. James Michael
Mr. Dennis Ellis
Re: Objection to Proposed Fence Plan for 7203 Pebble Gate Drive
Dear Board of Directors & Architectural Committee:
This letter is written on behalf of concerned Owners within the Old Stone Crossing Subdivision. The Owners named below object to the proposed fence for 7203 Pebble Gate Drive, submitted in early July 2021. Key issues, which were previously communicated directly to the Architectural Committee in mid- July by all Owners living adjacent to 7203 Pebble Gate Drive, are as follows:
- Undesirable Front & Side Yard Fencing: The proposed fence would run directly along the front yard lines and extend in front of the street-facing exterior facades of both 8310 Stonetown Avenue & 7207 Pebble Gate Drive. Front yard fencing is generally considered undesirable for aesthetic reasons in comparable neighborhoods throughout the Triangle, and therefore prohibited. The proposed fence would also come down the side yard to the street affecting the property of 7202 Pebble Gate and anyone entering the neighborhood. Given that 7203 Pebble Gate is on a highly exposed corner lot, the fence should not extend toward the street along the driveway. Please reference Exhibit 1 – Front Yard Fencing for a depiction of the negative impact on immediately adjacent properties. Please also reference Exhibit 2 - Hamptons to review restrictive covenant language from our nearest comparable neighborhood, which explicitly prohibits front yard fencing.
- Inconsistent with Neighborhood Standards: No fences in Old Stone Crossing (including those on corner lots) run along a front yard line of adjacent properties or give the appearance of a front yard being fenced. Please also reference Exhibit 3 - Neighborhood Comparable for an example of an appropriate corner lot fence layout, where fencing does not extend in front of the street-facing exterior façade of the adjacent property. This example can be found on the corner of W. Lake Anne Drive and Ortin Lane, less than 200 feet from the subject property.
- Erratic Design: The proposed plan would extend existing perimeter stone wall at 7203 Pebble Gate, therefore introducing erratic lines, mixed materials, and varying heights. Ultimately this design could negatively impact property values not only with the homes in the Stonetown Avenue cul-de-sac and Pebble Gate Drive corridor, but the neighborhood at large.
- No Screening: We have come to learn the total plan would include playground equipment within the proposed fenced area on the Pebble Gate Drive side. Should this be the case, we would also object to placement of any playground equipment that has direct visibility from the street or neighbors. Pebble Gate Drive also maintains high traffic volume and typically serves as a main entry point into our neighborhood.
The Owners named below are disappointed in lack of follow-up from the Architectural Committee, including the failure to act on the commitment made by Mr. Knors via email on July 23, 2021, to open a collective dialogue with our neighbors.
Moreover, the Owners named below wish to remind the Architectural Committee of their responsibility to consider the “effect of the improvements on adjacent or neighboring properties” as defined in Article XI, Architectural Control and Inspection, Section 11.2 Powers:
“The Architectural Committee shall have the right to refuse approval of any plans and specifications for Improvements to be constructed on a Lot (the “Plans & Specifications”) which are not suitable or desirable, in its sole discretion, for aesthetic or any other reasons, provided such approval is not unreasonably withheld. In approving or disapproving Plans & Specifications, the Architectural Committee shall consider the suitability of the proposed Improvements, color, and materials to be used in those Improvements, the site upon which the are proposed to be erected and the effect of the Improvements on adjacent or neighboring properties.”
Since Mr. Knors has not followed up on his July 23, 2021 commitment, the Owners named below request the Old Stone Crossing Board of Directors and Architecture Committee take the following actions:
- Perform your fiduciary duties by acting in the collective interest of all Owners within Old Stone Crossing.
- Reject the submitted fence plan for 7203 Pebble Gate prior to August 31, 2021.
- Confirm in writing to the Owners named below the date on which the Architecture Committee delivered a written non-support communication to the Owners of 7203 Pebble Gate Drive.
- Ask the Owners of 7203 Pebble Gate to come up with a new plan for the neighbors and the Architectural Committee to review.
Sincerely,
Old Stone Crossing Owner
Updates
August 29, 2021
The Architectural Committee remains silent about our formal objections to the fence plans. Post the link to this petition on your personal Facebook page and tag the HOA board members directly. We need to keep the pressure on them until they provide a public response.
August 29, 2021
The amount of support we have gathered proves that our neighbors refuse to accept this eyesore in our community. Call the board members listed in the petition today and demand they reject this fence plan. Send this link to three neighbors who live on our street right now.
36 Comments
James - Everyone supports our neighbors installing a fence. The issue at hand is fence placement, and the Architecture Committee's failure to honor its commitment to organize a discussion with impacted parties. Important to note, you personally chose not to respond to any of the numerous email communications regarding this topic until online petitions demanded your attention. While I appreciate your past service, you should step down from the Board if you don't intend to perform all obligations.
The intent of this petition is to encourage open discussion regarding proposed placement of the fence at 7203 Pebble Gate, with consideration for both adjacent property owners and the neighborhood in general. Our Architecture Committee committed to organize such a discussion (after receiving written objections from numerous neighbors and prior neighbor-to-neighbor conversations did not overcome gridlock) - but failed to do so. I have a fence and fully support all of our neighbors installing a fence. However, I worked in conjunction with my neighbors before installing my fence to ensure they were comfortable with the design. My hope is all of us - and our Architecture Committee - would extend the same courtesy.
Sorry we're late to respond to this, but I don't think we fully understand this petition. As James pointed out, there are many corner lot homes on high traffic intersections in this neighborhood that have similar fences and that appear within community standards and compliant with OSC by-laws. Also, as a family with young kids who frequently run into the street without pause, we understand the necessity of having a fence for the safety of our children; given that this neighbor has a corner lot at a busy intersection with limited visibility (Pebble Gate and Stonetown), their property poses particularly high risk for their children without a fence in place.
First, the Architecture Committee should perform due diligence prior to reviewing proposed improvements. Your loose inventory was collected only after this petition emerged. Had the Architecture Committee honored its commitment to organize a discussion with impacted parties, then we would have had an opportunity to discuss the two relevant examples: 1. 7026 Rippling Stone Lane. The side fence abuts the neighboring lot, but does not extend beyond the footprint of the neighboring lot's stairwell and fence. Further, this side fence is at a relatively lower elevation than the neighboring home's facade. Therefore, this fence placement does not create the appearance of a fence being in one's front yard. 2. 8104 Ortin Lane. Please consultant your map of our HOA. The side fence line you mention does not abut an Old Stone Crossing Member.
I appreciate the dialogue, Patrick. I want to make it full clear I support all of our neighbors installing a fence. Like you, I have a lot with exposure to a busy street and have a fence. And I worked in conjunction with my neighbors before installing my fence to ensure they were comfortable with the design. This petition originated in response to our Architecture Committee failing to honor their commitment to organize a dialogue with concerned neighbors. No effort was made to compromise. Instead, adjacent lot owners have felt completely ignored and neglected.
As a long time resident of OSC, I have to agree with James and Nathan. I'm embarrassed at the response by our neighborhood and the "warm" welcome we've shown our new neighbors. As someone who lives on a corner lot, with a fence, I completely understand their concerns around child safety. They're on a busy street, where people drive way too fast and don't pay attention. Instead of bullying them, why don't we try to work on an agreeable compromise that allows them have a fence without jeopardizing aesthetics. I'm pretty confident we all have more important things to spend our time on. If you don't, please find a hobby.
Its not very nice to send out petitions against your new neighbors and hand out pitch forks and torches when your own non standard wooden fence is in serious disrepair, and is perhaps the most visible fence in all the neighborhood. Right along the entrance on Ortin all wonky, rotten and falling over. How would you feel if I sent a petition around for you to fix your rickety fence? We should be neighborly and work through disagreements, but to tell a young family that they cant protect their children because you don't want a fence next to your house is disgraceful. I am little disappointed in those of you that signed this, if I am being honest. Not that it will stop me from waving or saying hi to you or having you over for drinks and the occasional firework, but you should be better.
In osc there are 11 corner lots. Of those 11 corner lots 4 have fences, 3 out of those 4 are black metal fences with one being a 6 foot privacy wooden fence, all 4 are readily visible from the street. Here are the addresses of the 4 with fences 7208 Rippling Stone, 7302 Meadow Cove, 8203 Ortin, and 8202 Stonetown. Of those 4 corner lots with fences, 2 lots have house placements such that one house around the corner is facing in a perpendicular manner meaning that the back of the corner lot shares a boundary with the side of the neighboring lot. Of those 2 perpendicular situated corner lots with fences 100% of them have a fence line along the side and in front of house that borders the rear of their lot. Those addresses are 7208 Rippling Stone and 7302 Meadow Cove. In addition there are other examples of side yard fences that come past the front of a neighboring house not on a corner 7026 Rippling stone lane is one and 8104 Ortin Lane. In Addition here is an example of a non parallel to lot line fence in order to abut to an existing structure, wall or neighboring fence between 8211 and 8207 Ortin. Due to the above facts and I can show you all pictures it would be outside of rational thought to determine there are not similar and for all intents and purposes identical fences already in the neighborhood and well within the community standards. It would also be outside of rational and normal thought to deny an architectural request by a lot owner that does not violate the OSC covenants or established community standards. For these reasons the request was approved. 7302 Meadow Cove – Corner Lot with exposed side and rear fence line abutting to the front and side yard of next door lot - Black metal. 7208 Rippling Stone - Corner Lot with exposed side and rear fence line abutting to the front and side yard of next door lot – Black metal. 8202 Stonetown – Corner Lot with exposed side fencing – black Metal 8203 Ortin - Corner Lot with exposed sid
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
James - Everyone supports our neighbors installing a fence. The issue at hand is fence placement, and the Architecture Committee's failure to honor its commitment to organize a discussion with impacted parties. Important to note, you personally chose not to respond to any of the numerous email communications regarding this topic until online petitions demanded your attention. While I appreciate your past service, you should step down from the Board if you don't intend to perform all obligations.