reactorpic.jpg

August 22, 2001

Should there be seven Macs on the PC?

A community defines itself by the rules it chooses to enforce strictly and those it enforces with more flexibility and sensitivity. Pacifica, which for many years chose to mostly ignore the leash law for dogs, is re-examining how rigidly dogs must be controlled. My family has suffered in the past because dogs were allowed to run loose. My pre-teen son, two decades ago, was badly bitten in a surprise attack while walking peacefully and quietly on a Sharp Park street. More recently, neighborhood pit bulls in Linda Mar put us in fear. Two dogs on the loose in Linda Mar, a number of years ago, traveled over a mile to break into the 4H farm, where they savaged some sheep so viciously those sheep had to be butchered. The dogs' owner accepted no responsibility. In my opinion, dogs can be a serious danger. Unless they take orders like the superbly trained Shepherds used by the Pacifica police, dogs have no business running loose in this community, even if their owners think they should be allowed to do so and think they're controlling them verbally. Dogs can do a great deal of harm. Dogs can kill.

Fences, on the other hand, ordinarily do no harm, even if they're as tall as some professional basketball players. They don't attack other fences. They don't kill sheep. They don't annoy neighbors with their barking. Some dogs are beautiful. So are some fences.

In the case of the now notorious straw bale fence in Rockaway, I must agree with Commissioner Tim Williams, a minority of one when the Planning Commission told the owner his fence had to go. The fence was built well. It was aesthetically pleasing. Yet so fearful was the Commission of what this fence might do if allowed to, in the words of Mr. Spock of Star Trek, "Live long and prosper" that they rejected the request to let it remain as just what it is, a delightful, original and artistic contribution which the entire community can enjoy.

The purpose of keeping fences at six feet is to avoid annoying or causing problems to the neighbors, because fences can throw neighboring property into deep shade if they're too high. Six feet is an arbitrary number. The limit could have been set at five feet, or two meters, or six feet, 3.7 inches. This particular fence causes no one harm, nor is it in a position to annoy the neighbors, except, perhaps, to make them jealous because they don't have something as pleasing to accent their properties.

There are reasons for building codes, and for Planning Commissions. But Planning Commissioners are appointed with the understanding they've enough brains, compassion and flexibility to deal with special situations. Surely this straw bale fence on a sloping lot is a special case and an example of why we don't appoint my Macintosh computer to the Planning Commission. My Mac is a perfectly useful machine. In many ways it's more intelligent than I am. When Commissioners are afraid to allow a few variances and exceptions to the rules for fear of setting precedents, they've assigned themselves a role that might be better filled by a bank of Macs or PCs. Computers would follow the rules blindly, without making exceptions for special situations. Tim Williams, a human being, used his judgment well. I commend him.

Paul Azevedo's e-mail address is thereactor@earthlink.net and his website listing is http://www.thereactor.net.

 
[This Week] [2001 Archive] [2000 Archive] [1999 Archive] [1998 Archive]