Council minutes, Feb. 2009

SECTION 5 OF THE VILLAGE OF CHEVY CHASE

MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION

Date: February 10, 2009

Time: 6:30 PM

Place: 5906 Connecticut Avenue, Chevy Chase Village Hall

Present: Peter Gray; Frances L. Higgins; Chris Richardson; Ira Rosenbaum; Andrew Smith; Alan Beal; John Higgins; Kevin Bromberg

The purpose of this meeting was to discuss whether Section 5 will continue to use the County’s house height, its front, back, and side setbacks, or adopt ones more stringent than the County’s. Andrew said that Kevin had expressed some concern that a house which has been built a considerable distance from the front property line would be limited in the size of a rear addition it could accomodate. It was suggested that in such an instance a resident could ask for a variance.

There was some discussion about the definition of an established building line. Alan said that under the County's EBL there are three options used to compute an EBL: 1) the EBL is the average of the front building line of the houses within 350ft in both directions of the house; 2) the EBL is determined by computing the average distance from the front property line of the properties on either side of the house; and 3) the EBL is the same as the one of the house which has been torn down. At the next work session the Council will discuss the possibility of enacting an EBL ordinance which will be different from the County's.

There was some discussion about adopting a side setback ordinance which would require a total of 18 ft. for the side sideback. This would allow a resident to have a combination of side setbacks which total 18 ft. The Council will discuss this side setback proposal at the next meeting.

There was some discussion of limiting the height of a house to 33 feet to the highest point of roof surface regardless of roof type or 28 feet to the mean height level between the eaves and ridge of a gable, hip, mansard, or gambrel roof. The Council will discuss at the next work session if it will enact a height of house ordinance which will be more stringent than the County's. There was some discussion of precluding the erection of flat roofs on the front of a building which are a part of the main structure. There was discussion of limiting horseshoe driveways to Brookville Road and Connecticut Avenue. Flat roofs and horseshoe driveways will be discussed at the next work session. Limiting the length of a house was discussed and will be discussed at the next work session.

John asked Alan Beal what would be the difference between additions and new houses if they were built according to the County's building code rather than a more stringent Section 5 building ordinance which Section 5 is presently considering. Alan said that there would be differences and some people believe that these differences are considerable and would change the character of Section 5 whereas others believe that the differences would not be considerable.

Kevin said the Berliner bill would exempt some residents. The residents whose building projects would be exempted are those that add 50% or less than the total square footage of their present house.

Alan said that Martin's Additions' Council will soon have a work session concerning its proposed building ordinance. The manager will attend this session and report to the Council.

The Council agreed that it will meet for another work session at 6:30 PM before the March 10, 2009, Council meeting. The manager will provide dinner.

SECTION 5 OF THE VILLAGE OF CHEVY CHASE

MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING

Date: February 10, 2009

Time: 7:30 PM

Place: 5906 Connecticut Avenue, Chevy Chase Village Hall

Present: Peter Gray; Frances L. Higgins; Chris Richardson; Ira Rosenbaum; Andrew Smith; John Higgins; Kevin Bromberg

Andrew moved that the January 13, 2009, Council Work Session and Council Meeting minutes be approved as amended; Chris seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

Chief Gordon will give a police report at the March 10, 2009, Council meeting. Section 5 has paid for the first month's police patrols provided by the Village Police.

Margy provided the Council with figures for the new budget 2009-10. Peter said that some of the proposed expenditure figures were too large. There was some discussion. The following are the Council's proposed expenditure figures for 2009-10: trash & recycling $75,000; trees $60,000; leaf collection & disposal $12,000; streets $30,000; lighting $11,000; snow removal $10,000; personnel & admin. $60,000; professional fees $15,000; miscellaneous $3,000; insurance $2,500; office & printing $15,000; community activities $30,000; dues, mtgs., memberships $5,000; cable TV $3,000; police patrols $12,000. The expenditures total is: $343,500. The Council revised the proposed revenue figures for 2009-10. The following are the Council's proposed revenue figures for 2009-10 are: MD income taxes $400,000; highway user fee $25,000; interest income $42,000; miscellaneous $3,000; cable TV $5,000; permit fees $2,500. The manager will send these new figures to Margy and ask her to review them and get back to the other Council members with her comments. The manager will also add an expenditure item of $12,000 for the new police patrols.

Section 5's accountant has notified the manager that he will no longer conduct an audit for the town. The manager is in the process of locating a new accountant.

The manager suggested that the Council consider enacting an ordinance stating the distance an electronic dog fence may be located in relation to the edge of the public sidewalk. Some electronic fences are located at the resident's edge of a public sidewalk which allows a dog to run up to the edge of the public sidewalk before being stopped by the fence; This aggressive behavior could frighten a pedestrian who did not know about the fence. The manager will write an ordinance concerning electronic dog fences and present it to the Council at the next meeting.

Section 5 has an option in the present trash contract to extend for another year. The manager will contact the company and determine if it is interested in renewing this one year extension. If the company is interested, she will write a letter for Section 5's chairman to sign stating Section 5's desire to extend this one year extension.

The curbs along the north end of Dalkeith St. have been damaged by the construction project at 3800 Underwood St. Section 5 has collected a $1,000 building deposit from this resident and she will use a portion of it to repair the curbs on Dalkeith St. She will use the remaining portion of this deposit to repair the damage to the public strips on Dalkeith St. The manager has some concerns about being able to prove to residents that the workers at these building projects actually damaged Section 5 property. She has asked Alan to photograph the building site before the construction project and after it to determine the extent of damage to Section 5 property.

Chris asked the manager to contact Alan and ask him about the specific differences which would occur in new house construction and additions if Section 5 used the County's building code or used a more stringent building code which it is in the process of considering.

Andrew moved that the meeting adjourn; there was a second and the motion passed unanimously.