It’s been often said that good fences make good neighbours … but residents of Erinbrook Estates are unconvinced.
Earlier this month, planner Sally Stull presented a report to council on the storm water management ponds at the Erinbrook subdivision. Prior to that discussion, Mayor Lou Maieron declared a conflict of interest and left the table. That left councillor John Brennan to chair the discussion.
One of the letters submitted to council was from Maieron’s wife Karen Jeffrey, of Silver Creek Aquaculture Ltd., Maieron’s company.
Residents like Brian Gray objected to fencing around the ponds. In a presentation to council, Gray requested council halt plans to install a six foot high chain link perimeter fence around two storm water ponds and instead support alternative options to traditional fences.
Gray said based on his research, “It became clear that the question of whether or not to construct fences around storm water management ponds is complicated, with arguments both for and against the practice. Ultimately, and not surprisingly, the decision needs to be site specific with good rationale for whatever decision is made.
“Either way, there is a growing body of evidence that clearly shows many urban are aggressively looking at ways to aesthetically integrate storm water management facilities into their communities and open spaces that can be safely enjoyed by their residents.
He added that photos sent with the presentation “clearly highlight why towns are moving quickly away from these kinds of installations.”
In addition to not installing the planned chainlink perimeter fencing, Gray asked that Erin champion the concept to not build traditional fences wherever possible and to ensure that storm water ponds are effectively integrated visual assets into residential communities in the future.
He considered the matter “near and dear” to the hearts of those living in the subdivision.
Gray said he is one of the subdivision residents, but was there representing “a portion of the residents living in the Erinbrook Estates.”
He said the subdivision is at a state where the developer was about to start the six foot perimeter chain link fence around the storm water ponds.
The residents want that fence stopped, but that would require an amendment to the development agreement.
Gray said before coming to council, the group researched some best practices and approaches now in use for storm water pond facilities.
“We looked at a variety of different sites and municipalities within Wellington County and other areas in southern Ontario.”
That included the look and aesthetics and how to integrate the ponds into the beauty of the community.
“They can become an asset to what the community has to offer its residents,” Gray said. “Basically these things [chain link fences] are very ugly. That’s the nut of it all. You can dress it up, but at the end of the day, they are still really ugly.”
Gray said there is a growing body of evidence that states there are better ways to do it, and asked council act as champions on behalf of the residents to amend the existing agreement.
“These things can be true assets to our community.”
Councillor Barb Tocher recommended council hear Stull’s report as well.
Stull said it came due to a number of letters on fencing for the storm water ponds.
Fencing was part of the development agreement between the town and Birdseye Farm Limited in 2003. The requirement then was to fully fence storm water ponds.
Stull said such clauses were typical of agreements then. At that time, storm water ponds were typically deeper and seen more as a utilitarian function.
She added the ponds still are in commercial or industrial subdivisions. “But as communities developed, the residents liked the aspect of a common open space for their neighbourhood.”
Ponds became focal points used for community trails, gathering places and natural skating rinks in the winter.
Such is the case in Erinbrook, where residents created a trail around the ponds over the past several years.
In 2006, council amended its municipal servicing agreement to state storm water ponds would be landscaped with native species where appropriate and a trail system constructed to connect with a roadway, park system or open space.
She said the thought then was to remove fencing requirements, where specific grading requirements were met in residential subdivisions – where it abutted a public street.
However, that amendment noted that sloping would need to be designed so that fences would not be required except where abutting private lands.
Stull wrote there are no safety or liability concerns since the designs are such that the grades are shallow enough for a person to crawl out of the pond, and the township liability is no greater risk if it is fenced or unfenced – dependent on the slope grade.
But, she said fences do delineate a separation of private and public lands.
Further, since storm water ponds are intended to be kept in a naturalized form, not as a manicured lawn – fences provide privacy and prevent people from straying onto private property.
Stull noted that today, mailboxes are often placed in those places as community areas.
While it might not be an issue in this subdivision, Stull said without fencing there is the potential of windblown garbage collecting on site.
“I don’t think that will apply in this subdivision.”
Stull anticipated that has something to do with the size of the lots and the makeup of the community.
She said town standards would support no fencing along the road, but still encourage fencing between the private landowners and the pond.
She was uncertain fencing needs to be six feet high.
If the abutting landowners are willing to provide written confirmation they would respect the boundary in terms of mowing and encroachment, the fence would not be needed.
Further, that agreement would state if the landowner decide later that a fence is needed, it would be their responsibility.
She noted everyone is entitled to fence the edge of their own property.
Brennan asked how that affected abutting property owners who are not part of the subdivision. He said there were issues regarding fencing between that other property and the subdivision.
Stull said the subdivision is such that if no letter asks for no fencing, then a fence would be constructed.
Tocher said that includes some fairly wide frontages, so council might consider some means of preventing large items [or vehicles] from getting in. Her suggestion included large cosmetic rocks or stones in front of the storm water ponds so a vehicle could not enter.
Council later passed a resolution to waive the fencing requirements where the storm water ponds abut the public right of way.
In areas where the ponds abut private lands, written confirmation of agreement from landowners is needed by Dec. 1 before the fencing requirement will be waived [or the fences would be installed].
A resident asked who would be responsible if accidents occur in the winter if the pond is covered and a person does not realize a pond is there.
“The town,” Tocher said.
Brennan said to be clear, the fencing amendment affects only the area around the storm water ponds.
Fencing around the subdivision as a whole is a separate matter, he said.
