PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Request for a Variance for a Fence Installation at 7214 167th Terrace NW; Case of Brandon Sis

The resident at 7214 167th Terrace NW (the "Subject Property") submitted a fence permit application in 2016.  Staff rejected the application on the grounds that most of the back yard is encumbered with drainage and utility easement and is part of the stormwater ponding system for the development.  The City does not allow fences through stormwater ponds.


 

Staff attempted to notify all Property Owners within a 350 foot radius of the Subject Property of the Public Hearing via Standard US Mail. The Public Hearing was also published in the City's official newsletter, the Anoka County Union Herald. 

As noted above, a large portion of the Subject Property is encumbered with drainage and utility easement due to the presence of wetland and stormwater pond.  While fencing is oftentimes permitted within drainage and utility easements, they are generally not permitted within stormwater ponds or stormwater management areas.  The proposed fence would be located in an area that, at least at one time, was considered a wetland.  As part of the overall stormwater management system for Brookfield, this wetland area was to serve as additional drainage capacity for a 100-year event, thus making it a part of a stormwater management area.

The Applicant submitted a 3 page letter outlining the reasoning for the proposed fence, which focus primarily on safety for his young children and demarking the property boundary to prevent trespassing.  The proposed fence is a four (4) foot tall black, chain link fence.  The Applicant did note that this style fence generally would allow water to pass through without obstruction yet would still accomplish his primary goals.

Staff has prepared a 2 page review memo outlining the history of the property and the findings when preparing this case for a variance.

Staff has requested a review of the wetland on the property by the Anoka Conservation District (ACD) and a representative from the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to determine its status.  At the time of writing this case, that site visit has not yet occurred.  The input from that visit will help formulate Staff's final recommendation. This case will be updated the week of July 3 with final determinations.

The Applicant is responsible for all costs associated with this request.

Staff recommendation will be dependent on the determination of the wetland status by ACD and BWSR staff.  Staff is hopeful that feedback from ACD and/or BWSR staff will be available for a verbal update at the meeting.
 
If the wetland is still partially functioning then staff recommends denying the variance to allow placing a fence around most of the perimeter of the back yard.  Staff would support placing a fence along the northerly line of the property to define the property boundaries and address the trespassing concerns the applicant has raised.  Staff would also support placing a closed fence near the house to separate the children and pets from the pond.
 
If the wetland is nonfunctioning and does not need wetland protection, then Staff would support the variance request to place the fence around the entire perimeter of the back yard as proposed.

Motion to approve/deny Resolution #17-07-166 granting a Variance for the installation of a fence in the stormwater management area on the Subject Property.