Residents urge action on fence easement and speeding on neighborhood and arterial streets

During the citizen comment period three residents raised public-safety and property concerns: a homeowner asked the council to allow a temporary fence in a city water easement to keep his small children safe; another resident urged permanent radar/driver-feedback devices on Windermere Drive after repeated near-misses with children; and a longtime resident and former prosecutor warned of general speeding on major arteries and suggested a council committee to address enforcement.

Fence easement: Eric Grady, of 1002 Corbin Court, said nine fence posts on his property encroach into a 75-foot water easement and asked council to treat the fence as a temporary structure rather than a permanent one. Grady said he had spent time and money clearing storm debris and invasive plants from the easement and that moving the posts would force the fence against a large locust tree and split his backyard. He told council he had been told by engineering and planning staff that permanent structures are not permitted in the easement and that a temporary-variance option was not available; he asked council to consider the case as a test case for a temporary variance.

Traffic and speeding concerns: Arthur Schantz and John Palmer described repeated instances of near-misses with children on Windermere Drive and speeding on arterial roads such as Sunbury Road and Schrock Road. Schantz urged the city to install permanent driver-feedback radar monitors similar to those used near schools and said earlier temporary monitors had been removed after neighborhood complaints. Palmer, a longtime resident and former prosecutor, said enforcement appears lacking and recommended a council committee to examine enforcement and traffic-safety measures.

Council response: Council did not respond at length during public comment other than to note that there are established variance processes for easements and to say the traffic concerns would be taken under advisement. Staff and council members referenced the city’s citation data noted in the mayor’s report and asked that staff follow up as appropriate.

What happens next: the variance process described by staff remains the formal path for the fence question; council asked staff to take the traffic-enforcement concerns under advisement and consider options such as permanent radar-feedback devices and other traffic-calming measures where warranted.