My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-29-2012 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
03-29-2012 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2012 1:54:10 PM
Creation date
4/12/2012 1:53:49 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 29, 2012 <br />Roberto again pointed out that the Fire Code is applicable to a Variance <br />request. He indicated that the Fire Code would prohibit the use of the <br />Anderson driveway at any time that a fire is lit. Roberto also pointed out <br />that the Little Canada Public Works Department would not be able to <br />access the City's manhole when Anderson had a fire lit in the present <br />location of the fire pit. Roberto stated that he was concerned about fire <br />safety given the present location of Anderson's fire pit. Boss noted that <br />Anderson is a member of the Little Canada Fire Department. Roberto felt <br />that the City's code should establish setbacks for fire pits. He also noted <br />the email he received from the State Fire Marshal which indicates "if a <br />person tending a fire is not in control of when vehicles are driven or <br />parked on the driveway, the recreational fire should not be within 25' of <br />the driveway ". McGraw noted that the same email from the State Fire <br />Marshal indicates "I would not be too concerned to see a recreational fire <br />ring within a few feet of a driveway provided the fire is not ignited when <br />vehicles are parked within 25 feet ". McGraw acknowledged Roberto's <br />concern about Little Canada's ability to access its manhole when a fire is <br />burning. McGraw pointed out that Anderson could take a hose and <br />extinguish the fire in that situation. Roberto pointed out that Anderson <br />would not be in control of vehicles using the right -of -way. McGraw <br />questioned that there would be a lot of traffic in this location. Roberto <br />indicated that there are multiple cars in and out of the Anderson property. <br />He pointed out that the State Fire Marshal indicated that vehicles burn <br />"easily and spectacularly ". Roberto stated that it appears the Council does <br />not want to enforce its own Code. He stated that he does not believe the <br />fire pit should be used in its present location. <br />Montour asked about the height of the pine trees that Anderson would <br />propose to use for screening. Anderson stated that he is proposing trees at <br />least 4 feet in height. It was estimated that these trees would grow <br />approximately 1 foot in height per year. Anderson stated that he would <br />like to store fire wood higher than 4 feet. The consensus of the Council <br />was that the fire wood could be stored at the same height as the screening <br />to a maximum of 6 feet in height. Keis asked the distance between trees. <br />The City Planner indicated that 6 to 8 feet in separation would be the <br />minimum. Anderson indicated that he would have a line of screening <br />approximately 21 feet in length. <br />There was no one else present wishing to comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by Boss, seconded by McGraw, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />The Public Works Superintendent recommended that any approval of the <br />Variance require that trees planted for screening do not interfere with the <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.