Laserfiche WebLink
5. COMMITTEE BUSINESS <br /> 5.01: Consideration of Permitting Fence Encroachments across Private Property Lines <br /> City Engineer Westby reviewed the staff report, noting the City's policy requires landowners to <br /> install fences a foot or more inside their property line in areas where a potential infrastructure <br /> conflict exists. He advised of the City's current policy and displayed pictures depicting this <br /> situation. As a result, within the Ramsey Town Center 10 Addition, fences are staggered along <br /> rear property lines to avoid damaging an existing underground storm sewer system, resulting in <br /> the unintended consequence of creating remnant strips of land two or more feet in width between <br /> rear fence lines in which property owners are not able to easily maintain their properties so there <br /> are blight and nuisance issues. It was noted the resident's request is to extend their side lot line <br /> fencing across their rear property line to connect to their neighbor's fence, thereby allowing a <br /> shared common rear fence line that would eliminate the remnant strips of property between <br /> fences. City Engineer Westby presented staff s recommendation to change the policy to allow <br /> neighbors to extend fences across private property lines to connect to neighbor's fences <br /> contingent on language being added to the building fence permit to ensure that: City <br /> infrastructure will be protected during fence construction activities; access to City infrastructure <br /> will be maintained on an on -going basis; property owners will not lose property rights as related <br /> to adverse possession laws; and, property owners are reminded to obtain permission from <br /> neighbors via a written agreement. He presented the draft language as detailed in the staff report <br /> and explained the statute relating to adverse possession. City Engineer Westby stated staff is <br /> able to revise the permit language, if so directed. <br /> Chairperson Backous stated the Public Works Committee is familiar with this request, noting it <br /> had been misunderstood that the request was to construct fences on the property line. However, <br /> the request is to stretch a fence to the property line to connect with those posts. He noted the <br /> property owners will have to decide who will have the posts on their property and who will have <br /> to stretch their fence to attach to the posts. <br /> City Engineer Westby stated that is a civil matter between two private property owners. Staff <br /> recommends having a written agreement and working with the City Attorney to prepare a draft <br /> template that property owners could expand upon. <br /> Chairperson Backous stated this would provide more flexibility and not be a requirement, but an <br /> option, so he would not object. <br /> Motion by Chairperson Backous, seconded by Councilmember Kuzma, to recommend that the <br /> City Council change the City policy allowing fences to be extended across property lines, <br /> contingent on the draft (building) fence permit language being reviewed and approved by the <br /> City Attorney and subsequently added to all (building) fence permits issued in the future. <br /> Further discussion: Councilmember Riley asked if fences will be allowed side -to -side and also <br /> front -to -back and across the utility easements, limiting the City's ability for access of the <br /> easement. He felt some day in the future the City will need to remove someone's fence and <br /> Public Works Committee / July 16, 2013 <br /> Page 2 of 9 <br />