Winter Springs’ City-linked fence handout and its current code do not agree on the cited property-line rule. Do not use the handout’s three-inch instruction alone to lay out a fence. Ask the City which currently effective provision controls the proposed location.

This is a correction to LSL’s earlier guide, which repeated that offset without checking the cited section. It is not permission to build on a boundary or ignore other placement restrictions.

The section cited by the handout was repealed

The one-page Fence Permit Disclosures, still linked from the City’s forms directory on September 12, 2026, says to keep a fence at least three inches from the property line under section 6-193.

In the current municipal code, section 6-193 is reserved. Its editor’s note identifies Ordinance 2024-07, section 2, adopted August 26, 2024, as repealing the property-line-distance section. The handout’s cross-reference therefore cannot substantiate LSL’s former claim of a current three-inch requirement.

Other fence provisions remain. The surrounding article addresses location plans and permits, materials, height, corner visibility, utility access and rights-of-way, as well as private restrictions. Repealing one section does not decide how those provisions apply to a particular lot.

Put the placement question on a sketch

The useful next step is a specific inquiry, not a guess about a replacement setback. The handout gives Community Development’s telephone number as 407-327-5963. Have the address and parcel information from the building application available.

LSL suggests annotating a copy of the property record or plan with:

  • The proposed fence run: show where it starts and ends, its intended height and material, and any gates.
  • The boundary evidence: identify the survey or other record used; mark any uncertain or disputed line as unresolved instead of choosing a convenient one.
  • The street context: show nearby street corners and the fence’s position relative to the building. These details make the City’s corner and height review meaningful.
  • Access constraints: identify shown easements, rights-of-way and planned utility access. Do not assume an existing fence proves the proposed location is allowed.

This is an inquiry aid, not a City-approved survey or substitute permit plan. A concise question is:

The fence handout cites section 6-193, but the current code marks it repealed. Which current provision and location should my plan use, and what property-line evidence do you need?

Keep the City’s response with the exact plan revision it addresses. No City response has been obtained for this article. If a boundary is disputed, resolving that private issue is separate from assembling a City application.

Prepare the final inspection without overstating the handout

The handout calls for final inspection and display of approved drawings and documents. It says property lines may need to be identified, not that every applicant must follow one universal marking method. Ask what identification is needed for the scheduled inspection and have the approved documents available as directed. The handout warns that missing identification and approved documents can result in failure and a reinspection fee; it does not supply a fee amount here.

An appointment is not a passing result. Keep the actual inspection outcome and any requested correction, and confirm the permit’s completion status with the City instead of relying only on an installer’s statement.

Private association approval is separate: the handout places responsibility for obtaining it before work on the owner. A City permit is not that approval, and an association’s approval is not a City permit.

LSL read both complete City PDFs and the browser-rendered fence code article on September 12, 2026. The comparison and sketch brief are editorial work; we did not survey a property, apply for a permit, interpret a covenant or attend an inspection. Because the obsolete cross-reference remains in a City-linked document, the next source review is scheduled for September 19.