Council minutes, Nov. 2007

SECTION 5 OF THE VILLAGE OF CHEVY CHASE

MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING

Date: November 13, 2007

Time: 7:30pm

Place: Chevy Chase Village Hall, 5906 Connecticut Avenue

Present: Margy Abbott; Peter Gray; Frances L. Higgins; Farooq Hussain; Ira Rosenbaum; Andrew Smith; 4 Section 5 residents

1. Minutes

Andrew moved that the October 9, 2007, Council meeting minutes be approved as revised. Peter seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

Margy said that two CD’s were recently renewed; the CD is slightly lower than it was six months ago. The town has received $26,000 in State income tax so far this year; last year at this time the town had received $82,000. A resident suggested that the town contact the State and ask why the town has not received as much money this year as it did last year at this time. Margy told the manager to contact the State about the income tax payments if the town has not received a check for at least $60,000 by December 1st.

Permits issued:

7401 Brookville Rd. – 1 story addition in rear; swimming pool

3701 Williams Ln. – front and back yard fence

Peter said a resident on Brookville Rd. has erected a fence with the unfinished side facing her neighbor and without a permit. The manager has contacted this resident but as yet she has not presented a permit for this fence. The manager will continue to contact her. Also, a resident has constructed a stone retaining wall without a permit. The manager has given her a permit application and the resident will apply for a permit.

Michael Cousins with Colonial Landscape Co. has installed a net covering on the hill on the north west corner of Thornapple St. and Brookville Rd. to prevent erosion. Also, he planted creeping liriope plants to help retain the soil.

The manager told the Council that it should consider adding a provision to the fence regulations which would specify the height of a fence which may be erected in the front yard of a resident because he/she lives on a corner lot or a State road.

It has been determined as a result of a land survey that the cherry tree which is leaning against the fence at the south east corner of Underwood St. and Dalkeith St. belongs to a resident rather than Section 5. The manager wrote a letter to the owner of the tree informing him that the town had a land survey conducted and it has been established that the tree is not on Section 5 property.

Andrew said that a resident on Thornapple St. had leaves piled in front of her for vacuuming; however, during the night someone raked all these leaves into this resident’s driveway so that she was unable to access her driveway. Andrew said that this petty act of harassment is one of several that have been aimed at this resident. He expressed his concern that such an act has been committed in Section 5.

A resident contacted the manager and asked the town to consider renting a portable paper shredder and allow residents to shred private documents. The Council asked the manager to determine the cost of such a shredder and report at the next meeting.

Several residents have contacted the town to express their concerns about the evergreen tree which is located on the property at 3600 Thornapple St. and leans precariously over Brookville Rd. The manager contacted the owner of the property and he had someone from a tree company inspect the tree. The person from the tree company said that he does not believe that the tree is in imminent danger of falling even though it leans over the street. The manager wrote a letter to the owner of the tree expressing Section 5’s concerns about the safety of the tree.

Margy said one of her neighbors has asked the Council if it would bear the expense of planting liriope in the public strip in front of his house. The Council decided to plant liriope in the public strip in front of this resident’s house next spring. The manager will contact this resident and tell him the Council’s decision.

Ira asked the manager to contact the town’s trash hauler and ask the collection crew to place the recycle bins on the strip rather than leave them in the street.

A Section 5 resident said that he was contacted by someone reporting a purse snatching in the Chevy Chase Supermarket’s parking lot one evening just before closing time. This Section 5 resident asked the Council if it would consider employing the police for additional protection in Section 5. Farooq said that he would contact the neighboring towns to determine if other municipalities are dealing with street safety differently than they did two years ago. Farooq said that the benefit which comes from employing extra police is not very great. It was suggested that the Section 5 Council could install cameras in Section 5 to deter crime. Threre was some discussion and the Council decided to wait for Farooq’s report before it took any action.

Andrew asked the Council if anyone had revisions for the proposed ordinance contained in Chapter 1. Peter asked why Sec. 1-7 in the 1999 Code company’s material was not incorporated in the proposed Chapter 1. There was some discussion. Peter moved that Sec. 1-7 from the 1999 Code Company material be added to Chapter 1 but to amend subsection (c) to substitute “municipal infraction” for “misdemeanor”. The revised subsection (c) now reads “: “Except as otherwise provided by law or ordinance, a person convicted of a violation of this Code shall be guilty of a municipal infraction and punished by a fine not exceeding $1,000. Except as otherwise provided by law or ordinance, with respect to violations of this Code that are continuous with respect to time, each day that the violation continues is a separate offense. As to other violations of this Code, each act is a separate offense.” The revised Section 1-7 will be titled Sec. 1-400 “General penalty; continuing violations.” and reads “

(a) In this section “violation of this Code” means any of the following:

(1) Doing an act that is prohibited or made or declared unlawful, an offense, a violation or a misdemeanor by ordinance or by rule or regulation authorized by ordinance.

(2) Failure to perform an act that is required to be performed by ordinance or by rule or regulation authorized by ordinance.

(3) Failure to perform an act if the failure is prohibited or is made or declared unlawful, an offense, a violation or a misdemeanor by ordinance or by rule or regulation authorized by ordinance.

(b) In this section “violation of this Code” does not include the failure of a municipal officer or municipal employee to perform an official duty unless it is specifically provided that the failure to perform the duty is to be punished as provided in this section.

(d) The imposition of a penalty does not prevent suspension or revocation of a license, permit or franchise or other administrative sanctions.

(e) Violations of this Code that are continuous with respect to time are a public nuisance and may be abated by injunctive or other equitable relief. The imposition of a penalty does not prevent injunctive relief. State law reference – Penalties authorized for ordinance violations, Ann. Code of Md. art. 23A, S 3.”

Andrew seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

Andrew asked the Council if it had any comments concerning proposed Chapter 5 Health and Sanitation. The Council did not have any comments or questions. Andrew asked the Council if it had any questions or comments concerning proposed Chapter 6 Animals. The Council had none. Andrew asked the Council if it had any questions or comments concerning Chapter 11 Offenses and Miscellaneous Provisions. A Section 5 resident asked about Sec. 11-600 which states it shall be unlawful to discharge a firearm. He asked what would happen to him if he discharged a firearm in his house in a situation where an intruder was threatening him. It was explained that this ordinance is modeled on a State statute. There were no further comments or questions concerning proposed Chapter 11.

Andrew asked if the Council had any comments or questions concerning the proposed Chapter 9 Buildings and Building Regulations. Peter said that Sec. 9-200 (d) had been omitted and asked that it be added. This Sec. 9-200 (d) reads: “The building inspector shall have the authority to require reasonable compliance with the building and sanitary regulations enacted by the Council and Montgomery County.” The Council agreed to add this provision. Peter moved that the word misdemeanor be deleted from Sec. 9-300 (b) Dangerous Structures and the following language be substituted: “It shall be unlawful for the owner, agent, or parties interested or responsible to refuse or neglect to make such building or part thereof safe and secure or to remove the same within such time as said building inspector may direct. A stop order for violation of this provision may be issued by the building inspector or the section manager.” Ira seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

Andrew suggested that the Council consider adding a fee for Sec. 9-400 Building Permit (e). This section would be included under (h) Fees (1) (d) and read: “For a permit issued to tear up the streets, pavements, gutters, sidewalks, parkings, or other public works, or property, or to seriously obstruct same without any building operations being involved, $100.” Andrew suggested that the Council consider adding a deposit for Sec. 9-700 Deposit (f). This section would read: “Any person intending to tear up the streets, pavements, gutters, sidewalks, parkings, or other public works, or property, or to seriously obstruct same without any building operations being involved for which a deposit is required shall make a deposit in cash or by certified check payable to Section 5 of the Village of Chevy Chase of $500.00.

Andrew asked Kevin to explain why he made changes to the proposed Appeals ordinance contained in Chapter 9 Buildings and Building Regulations Sec. 9-1000 Appeals. Kevin said that he and his committee had added language to strengthen the ordinance. There was some discussion. Andrew moved to replace the currently proposed Sec. 9-1000 Appeals with the amended version 9-1000 Appeals submitted by the Building Committee. Farooq seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

Andrew said that these proposed ordinances should be reviewed by legal Counsel. There was some discussion. It was suggested that the Council not send these proposed ordinances to the residents for their consideration until after the December meeting. It was also suggested that the Council send these proposed ordinances to a lawyer for a review. There was some discussion but the Council decided to wait until the December meeting to do anything definitive.

Andrew made a motion that the meeting be adjourned. The next meeting will be December 11, 2007, at 7:30pm at the Chevy Chase Village Hall, 5906 Connecticut Avenue.