JANESVILLE — Should trees, bushes and fences be allowed on private property if they obstruct the vision of motorists at intersections?
The city council Monday will consider whether to relax the city’s vision triangle ordinance by excluding private property at intersections controlled by stop signs or traffic signals.
The legs of a vision triangle are 25 feet measured from the street corner.
As the ordinance now reads, objects in that area more than 30 inches tall that might obscure traffic, such as shrubs, are not allowed. Tree limbs must be trimmed at least 7 feet above the sidewalk.
The ordinance came under scrutiny after council member Bill Truman reported a yield sign obscured by a tree at the corner of Johnson and Locust streets.
City staff examined all four corners of the intersection and determined that three out of four did not comply with the vision triangle ordinance.
One of the property owners is K. Andreah Briarmoon, who would have been required to cut down a number of trees and bushes in a vision triangle, Truman said. She asked that the ordinance be studied.
“I did not bring up the vision triangle,” Truman said. “The city took that and spun it around and gave her a notice.”
Truman took the matter to the transportation committee. He believes because it is a controlled intersection the vision triangle needn’t come into play.
The transportation committee recommends that the city reinstate rules that were in effect from 1981 to 2000. The ordinance at that time exempted intersections controlled by stop signs or traffic lights. The new proposal also would include yield signs.
Staff receives 20 to 25 vision triangle complaints a year from residents and the transportation committee, according to a memo by Dennis Ryan, senior engineer.
“Many times, a complaint about one corner of an intersection will result in the observation of other violations at the other corners of the same intersection,” he said.
“After corrective notice letters are sent … it is fairly common to receive a challenge from the property owner. Because of this fact, an ordinance that is relatively straight-forward and easy to understand, interpret and enforce is preferred.”
Truman said many properties in the city violate the current ordinance.
“There are violations all over,” he said.
He pointed, for example, to the parking at Court and High streets near the Armory. The area has been landscaped with trees and grasses that violate the ordinance. Retaining walls at corners around the city also would be considered violations.
Commercial properties, on the other hand, are exempt.
“It’s a real mess,” Truman said.