ᐅ What types of boundaries or fences are permitted? Is a bamboo hedge allowed?

Created on: 22 Apr 2018 09:41

Hi everyone!

Since we don’t want a fence and I have always wanted a bamboo hedge, I’m now in a bit of a tricky situation with my property.

The local authority requires us to implement one of the following three ecological measures:
A) Rainwater cistern
B) Solar system
C) Garden planting with native trees and shrubs

The development plan also states that we must plant two native fruit or deciduous trees.

Regarding boundaries, there is an additional rule: “Instead of fences, the planting of hedges up to a maximum height of 2.0 meters (6.6 feet) is allowed (lower reference point: road surface level of the public street traffic area/traffic area with special purpose designation at the street boundary line; upper reference point: top of the hedge), using native, site-appropriate deciduous woody plants.”

For the required measures, I would obviously choose option C), but there are no specified quantities, so for me, planting the two trees would already fulfill the requirement...

Is there any way to plant a bamboo hedge, for example on my property side, not directly at the boundary line?

Thanks in advance!
Marvin

ypg24 Apr 2018 09:59

#19

Nordlys schrieb:
To Yvonne: I don’t understand those dismissive opinions about cheap cemetery arborvitae that everyone supposedly uses. You don’t like them, so you wouldn’t choose them yourself, but not everyone! And if the Hansens like them: it’s their land. What a dictatorship of taste.

I did not set these rules. I’m just glad my neighbor doesn’t impose something like that on me.

I’m also glad that in our area two-thirds of all houses have to be plastered white.

I deliberately chose to build here because, according to the regulations, it had to become—and indeed became—a great neighborhood.

If someone can’t accept the regulations, they simply don’t build here. That’s fine. It’s all leasehold anyway—so they can happily pass on the entire area here, a) because of the regulations and b) because of the leasehold (who would want that?).

Nordlys24 Apr 2018 12:42

#20

Only in a world where building land is scarce and many people settle for anything just to have something, ideas like "You don’t have to build here" and these taste regulations, in my opinion, are just theoretical and a misuse of power. Karsten

ypg24 Apr 2018 12:56

#21

Nordlys schrieb:
Just in a world where building land is scarce and many people will take whatever they can get, as long as they have something at all, ideas like "You don’t have to build here" are, in my opinion, theoretical—and these kind of taste regulations are an abuse of power. Karsten

Here in general, there are still enough plots available. Many people didn’t want these plots because they are leasehold. Karsten, where there’s a will, there’s a way. If it were the case here that you have to take whatever is left, then design guidelines like these would be completely irrelevant. Then people would be glad to get anything at all.

As long as people complain about it, the market can’t be that bad. These folks can keep looking elsewhere.

This doesn’t have anything to do with abuse of power if it helps ensure that a village (note: a village!) benefits from a new housing development that is deliberately designed so that it clearly stands out from the village center, but improves it (none of us want a dead village center).

There are plenty of other issues in the district that show that some prior thought about zoning plans or development plans is a good idea. I’m not necessarily talking about restrictions on building or eaves heights (or such), but a staged development of building zones or zoning could be a very sensible approach.

@M4rvin Sorry for going off-topic

Alex8524 Apr 2018 13:04

#22

I see it the same way. It’s as if there were a furious crowd in the streets yelling, “Single-family homes, NOW!” People are getting anxious because of low interest rates and see an opportunity that might pass by. Could that be a reason to simply allow everything everywhere, to put it bluntly? Then, 5 to 10 years later, people look back and wonder what they were thinking.

This also has nothing to do with abuse of power. Rules have always existed, and budgets have always been limited. The take-it-or-leave-it approach has not just been around since 2008 and onwards.

M4rvin25 Apr 2018 21:21

#23

Bieber0815 schrieb:
Is there an appendix in the development plan that defines what is considered native? Otherwise, in my opinion, that’s a very vague wording, which could easily lead to misunderstandings and disputes.

There might be, but I haven’t seen or received one yet. We’re just starting to develop the area...

ypg schrieb:

@M4rvin
Sorry for the off-topic comment

No problem, I actually enjoy off-topic discussions.

By the way, I have no issue with native trees and shrubs. I really liked the idea of planting bamboo around the patio, so that’s how I’ll do it.

Is it common or recommended to have a fence with a gate along the street side? Or does it feel unusual to live so “open” without one?

meister keks25 Apr 2018 21:46

#24

ypg schrieb:
We have the restriction: no conifer hedges.
I'm glad, because otherwise everyone would just plant cheap cemetery-style thuja trees along the property line.

Here’s my take.
I like the cemetery-style thuja trees, and I think they look good.

But I’m really surprised by how many regulations there are for your own property.
Two fruit trees, native plants...oh dear.

ᐅ What types of boundaries or fences are permitted? Is a bamboo hedge allowed?

Reaktionen