Dispute over fence has Radnor couple in knots
RADNOR » Fanny Moinel D’Onofrio and Mark D’Onofrio tried to do everything right.
After a trip to visit relatives in France, they returned to their Bryn Mawr home to find security footage of neighbors amusing themselves in their yard and free-roaming neighborhood dogs using their lawn as a bathroom. So they decided to build a fence.
“When we came back last October, it was a mess,” said Fanny D’Onofrio. “Our backyard was yellow. We found 20 excrements of dogs. People took the liberty to use our land.”
They called the township for advice and were told to either call 911 to complain about trespassers and roving dogs or to build a fence. They chose the latter.
“I told Mark, I do not want to be confrontational,” she said. They have lived in their Arthur Road house for 10 years, but the house has been in Mark’s family since the 1960s.
The couple researched historically compatible fences and decided to use an open, split-rail fence similar to fences at Bartram Gardens in Philadelphia. They hired an architect and a reputable fence company.
On April 2, they received a permit from the township, after submitting plans, an architectural drawing and documentation, for the $6,500 fence, and it was erected on May 3 and 4 after they removed an existing front hedge. Township employees, including the township engineer, were on the street for other reasons and never said anything to them about the fence as it was being built, Mark D’Onofrio said.
D’Onofrio said they spoke to Radnor officials about the fence posts being taller than the 4-foot height, but 99 percent of the fence is at that required height, he said. Also, the fence is in the front yard right-of-way, but that was also something they told township officials beforehand.
“As for the right-of-way, we again had discussed this with the township,” said D’Onofrio. “My dad [Michael D’Onofrio], probably the most experienced restoration contractor in this area, was even there with me. He has over 50 years of continuous construction experience in the Philadelphia Main Line, on some of the most difficult historic buildings to renovate.”
But despite their due diligence, the couple’s problems were only just beginning.
The “neighbors began firing off complaints,” said Mark D’Onofrio.
Like many townships, Radnor relies on residents’ complaints as a method of zoning enforcement. Prior to her complaint to the township, one of the neighbors even sent an email to the D’Onofrios saying the fence was beautiful.
After they received a citation for the fence, the D’Onofrios met with township Manager Robert Zienkowski and believed that he would be coming to visit their property. They talked to him about a possible rain garden in their side yard to help with flooding on their street and changing their asphalt driveway to a pervious surface of oyster shells. The only inlet on Arthur Road is at their property, and when there are heavy rains, the street fills up like a creek. The inlet empties to Meadowbrook Run in woods just behind their land.
But instead of a visit, they received a citation for damaged sidewalks — damage they believe was caused by the flooding and poor drainage on their street, which is a low point with water flowing in from Lancaster Avenue and County Line Road.
At that point, the D’Onofrios hired a lawyer to help them deal with township officials, and they had a meeting with the township Solicitor John Rice.
“It’s very stressful,” said Fanny. “The dogs are still running loose. Maybe once you’ve flagged them, they really go after you.”
In an email to Zienkowski, Mark wrote, “We are upset. We are obviously the victims. And this dispute [with a neighbor] did not start from a random air-conditioner complaint. Rather, we were clearly put in a bad situation by long-term issues [trespassing, animal nuisance, illegal construction and flooding] that we did not cause. And when we followed the advice of the township or even tried to help, the township inexplicably singled us out for our fence and our sidewalk. Maybe it’s bureaucracy, maybe it’s retaliation for our complaints about lax enforcement and flooding. We want to think it’s bureaucracy, a simple misunderstanding.
“In any case, we hope this situation can be resolved amicably. One common point of agreement amongst all our neighbors at the end of Arthur Road is that everybody is angry about flooding and ponding water … The current situation is simply untenable — we are not deputized sheriffs — that is the township’s responsibility.”
Mark said later that the township “is in a pickle.”
“They approved something they are now saying is impermissible,” he said. “In such a case, what is the remedy? Are they going to compensate us for the fence and the hedges we removed? Are they going to let it slide, like the neighboring addition that considerably violates the rear setback? What is even weirder is that our street has sidewalk-fronting hedges. And we provided an older street picture of other fences, including a really tall stockade fence, going to the sidewalk.
“It’s a mess, but even so, what is lost in the morass is that everybody likes this fence, even the neighbor who complained and the township administrators who are executing the complaint. This is a total waste of taxpayer dollars, especially given that our street is flooding and most of that water is directed towards or onto our property.”
Meanwhile, Rice wrote via email that the township would not comment on the situation with the D’Onofrios.