Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council signals preference for a middle-ground policy on Greenbelt encroachments, asks staff to refine licensing approach
Summary
After a lengthy discussion, the Clive City Council directed staff to pursue a middle-ground approach to private encroachments on city-owned Greenbelt land: no new encroachments, outreach and time-limited compliance for existing low-impact cases, and a potential licensing fee for persistent or larger encroachments.
City staff presented a comprehensive draft policy May 14 to address private encroachments onto Clive's Greenbelt and other city-owned parklands. Staff said the city has an estimated 75'100 encroachments ranging from small mow-ins and flower beds to larger fences, patios and private paths.
Staff outlined three broad policy options: (1) a licensing/grandfathering approach that would allow existing encroachments to remain under an annual license and release of liability; (2) a stringent approach requiring removal of all encroachments on a set timeline; or (3) a do-nothing approach unless a city project required removal. Staff recommended a framework that categorizes encroachments by impact (low/moderate/high) and depth (feet of encroachment), and proposed per-square-foot or tiered license fees as one method to incentivize voluntary reduction.
Councilmembers weighed enforcement costs, legal risk and neighborhood impacts. Several members warned that aggressive, immediate removal could produce substantial pushback and heavy legal costs, while others argued that a clear, uniform rule is fairer. Legal staff noted estoppel and waiver defenses may apply to longstanding encroachments and emphasized the need for a case-by-case review for older sites.
A majority of councilmembers favored a pragmatic, "middle-ground" path: prohibit new encroachments going forward, send notice letters to adjacent property owners documenting existing conditions, pursue time-limited compliance for low-impact encroachments, and develop a licensing model (likely a per-square-foot fee) for situations where removal would impose outsized hardship. Staff estimated about 50 of the cases are low-impact (mowing/landscaping) and 20'30 are medium- or high-impact (patios, fences, structures).
What happens next: Staff will develop a refined policy and an implementation plan that includes a strategy for communications, a proposed fee schedule or sliding scale for licensing, a compliance timeline, and legal review of exceptions and conservation easements. Council members asked staff to prioritize a solution that resolves a large share of cases without protracted litigation.
Provenance: The discussion began at the staff presentation of encroachment options and continued through council debate and direction on May 14.
