A Lakewood woman is suing the village of Lakewood and its Zoning Board of Appeals over a fence she wants to build on her property.

Lynn Kinnear has filed an Article 78 lawsuit asking state Supreme Court Justice Grace Hanlon to determine the Zoning Board’s ruling to be arbitrary and capricious and invalid as a matter of law, nullify the May 8 decision and grant Kinnear’s requested variances.

Kinnear’s attorneys said in her lawsuit that there had been a fence on the eastern border of her property for more than 50 years until it was taken down for a construction project by one of her neighbors. Removing the fence removed privacy from her backyard and means she looks directly at the neighbors’ bedroom windows 3.5 feet from her property line. Along the Kinnear had built a garden area that she enjoyed for decades.

On Jan. 6, 2025, Kinnear filed an application for a zoning permit to install a replacement fence along the eastern side of her property, in what Kinnear said was the same location as the previous fence. The village declined the permit, prompting Kinnear to file an application with the Zoning Board of Appeals for an area variance that would allow her to put up the fence.

Her application was heard on Feb. 3. At the time the fence was taken down, Kinnear said she thought the fence was hers, according to minutes of the February Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Lou Drago, Zoning Board of Appeals member, asked why the fence can’t be located 2 feet off the property line rather than the proposed six inches. Kinnear said there are trees and bushes that would have to be removed to place the fence further back from the property line. Kinnear was also proposing an 8 foot fence when the maximum is 6 feet tall. No one on the Zoning Board voted in favor of the fence, with Drago saying, according to the meeting minutes, that the Zoning Board of Appeals would allow the new fence if it was 6 feet tall and 2 feet from the property line.

The minutes of the Feb. 3 meeting doesn’t show discussion of the fence request’s impact on the character of the neighborhood. Anthony Faraco, Kinnear’s attorney, argues the denial of the fence permit is arbitrary, capricious and illegal since the Zoning Board of Appeals didn’t discuss the character of the neighborhood during its hearing before relying on that reasoning to deny the petition.

“On May 8, 2025, the deputy chair of the Zoning Board filed the Zoning Board’s official denial of Petitioner’s application. The Zoning Board’s decision cites that the ‘proposed Area Variance is not in harmony with the Zoning Law and will adversely affect the character of the neighborhood,'” Faraco said in the petition. “The Zoning Board’s decision makes little to no sense. Citing the character of the neighborhood is specifically nonsensical considering that Petitioner merely wanted to place a fence where there already was a fence for decades prior.”