02-08-06 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 8, 2006 10 foot high fence which is needed for safety purposes, as well as screening. Kimmel questioned the ability Co screen a 10-foot high fence, and asked why a fence of that height in a front yard would be acceptable. Kimmes noted that a basketball hoop is 13 feet in height, and pointed out the difficulty of screening that. Kimmes also noted the impact of lights and noise from sports courts. Kimmes reported that people take a lot of pride in their homes and noted the importance of curb appeal. Kimmes also pointed out the City's efforts in improving its curb appeal by reconstructing streets with curb and gutter, as well as the Little Canada Road amenities. Kimmes noted that Edgerton Street is one of the most traveled streets in Little Canada. Kimmes asked if the sports court in the Galba front yard is how we want Little Canada to look. Kimmes asked that the Council not pass the Text Amendment and that it require the sports court to come down. Kimmel questioned how the sports court got constructed without a permit in the front yard of a property on a busy street. Kimmes noted the comments that Galba asked inspectors of other cities if a permit was necessary for the sports court and was told no. Kimmes questioned why the Galba's who live two blocks from City Hall would ask inspectors in other cities rather than Little Canada's inspector. Kimmel noted that much of the construction of the sports court occurred on the weekends. Kimmel also pointed out that the Galba's have two trailers stored on their property in a manner that he assumed was against the City Code. If not, Kimmes suggested that the Code should be reviewed. Kimmel felt that the text amendment before the Council could be one of the most important that it has considered. Kimmes suggested a vote against the text amendment would raise the standard in the City, or vote for it would move the City backwards. Blesener noted that the City asked the Galba's to stop construction on the sports court until the matter was evaluated by the Council. However, they chose to proceed at their own risk. Blesener noted a letter received in opposition to the sports court from Russ SundquisC, Edgerton Street property owner. Mark Pechman, 2566 Edgerton Street, felt it would be very difficult to screen the sport court from view. Pechman noted that at the Planning Commission meeting one of the Commissioners commented that the sports court would not bring down property values in the area. Pechman indicated that he talked to realCOrs who have indicated that the sports court would impacC property values. 9