Going down rt7 yesterday, I noticed the barrier 'fence' between Dolan drive and the new golub road.

I believe the fence is facing the wrong way. Good side out! Check the rotterdam zoning codes.

I am not familiar with the Town of Rotterdam ordinances.  However, in most towns of which I am familiar with their codes, the good
(i.e., aesthetically pleasing) side is supposed to face adjoining properties.

I would be surprised if good side facing in on the property is the correct way....have always seen good side facing outward from the property it's on

The 'bad side' is facing power lines/dolan drive.
The 'good side' is facing the new road/golub property.
It should be the other way around according to rotterdam's zoning.

The posts are up for the other fence by that house.
The good side is suppose to face 'the house'.
Will it?

Who will enforce it?

Quoted from bumblethru

Who will enforce it?

I hope that it will not be the same Code Enforcement Personnel who determined that the track on Westside ISN'T a racetrack.  

No..........really............it's wrong!!!

Rotterdamians should be calling FDG!! .....really....... so they can correct it before it goes any further.

Well if DelGallo is like Tomassone, you will never hear back.  The good side of the fence should face outward.  Why aren't the Dolan Rd. residents complaining.  Call Mr. Paolino.  that is his neighborhood.

Quoted from 78

I am not familiar with the Town of Rotterdam ordinances.  However, in most towns of which I am familiar with their codes, the good
(i.e., aesthetically pleasing) side is supposed to face adjoining properties.

ARTICLE XVIII Specific Use Regulations (§ 270-138 — § 270-162)

§ 270-143 Fences.


C. Aesthetics. The more aesthetically attractive side of the fence shall face abutting properties. The side which is more aesthetically attractive shall be the side which is more pleasing in appearance to a reasonable person because of finish, painting, woodwork or for whatever other reason.

[quote=84]

ARTICLE XVIII Specific Use Regulations (§ 270-138 — § 270-162)

§ 270-143 Fences.


C. Aesthetics. The more aesthetically attractive side of the fence shall face abutting properties. The side which is more aesthetically attractive shall be the side which is more pleasing in appearance to a reasonable person because of finish, painting, woodwork or for whatever other reason.
[/quot

Its a Acoustical Wooden Wall not a fence

No one will enfore it as ew have building inspectors not code enforcers

Quoted from jiggles

[quote=84]

ARTICLE XVIII Specific Use Regulations (§ 270-138 — § 270-162)

§ 270-143 Fences.


C. Aesthetics. The more aesthetically attractive side of the fence shall face abutting properties. The side which is more aesthetically attractive shall be the side which is more pleasing in appearance to a reasonable person because of finish, painting, woodwork or for whatever other reason.
[/quot

Its a Acoustical Wooden Wall not a fence

                 And your point is  . . . . . .      You must be a Dem!

I believe an acoustical wall is different than a fence.  This was  problem I think years ago in Fairfield County or Westport in CT.

Quoted from 612

I believe an acoustical wall is different than a fence.  This was  problem I think years ago in Fairfield County or Westport in CT.

           Certainly no one would dispute this.  The issue is that there was a right way and a wrong way to install it.  These numbskulls, who do this for a living, chose the obviously wrong way.  Even with a 5/50 chance to get it right, they blew it.  There is no engineering/technical reason to have not reversed the "wall" to minimize an already obtrusive structure making it less offensive to the residents.  Not attacking your post, just pointing out the enormous stupidity level in this Town!

Quoted from AVON

           Certainly no one would dispute this.  The issue is that there was a right way and a wrong way to install it.  These numbskulls, who do this for a living, chose the obviously wrong way.  Even with a 5/50 chance to get it right, they blew it.  There is no engineering/technical reason to have not reversed the "wall" to minimize an already obtrusive structure making it less offensive to the residents.  Not attacking your post, just pointing out the enormous stupidity level in this Town!

Since there are trees between the fence and the properties on Dolan Dr --- it makes sense to place the least attractive side of the wall that way.

Quoted from AVON

           Certainly no one would dispute this.  The issue is that there was a right way and a wrong way to install it.  These numbskulls, who do this for a living, chose the obviously wrong way.  Even with a 5/50 chance to get it right, they blew it.  There is no engineering/technical reason to have not reversed the "wall" to minimize an already obtrusive structure making it less offensive to the residents.  Not attacking your post, just pointing out the enormous stupidity level in this Town!

There have been a few dolan dr people who are also quesitoning this the way the fence is facing. It will be interesting to see what they do with the fence by that little house by the new intersection. I will say.......the thing is UGLY......necessary.....but UGLY none the less.