HomeMy WebLinkAbout06112009 ZPC Agenda Item 4
Sallye Clark
From: Richard Yehle [reyehle@comcast.net]
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 6:14 PM
To: Debbie Scarcella
Cc: Sallye Clark
Subject: ZPC Issues for discussion
Debbie,
If the next ZPC meeting is held as scheduled on June 11th, I will not be able to attend due to a conflicting meeting. That
being the case, I want to offer my views on a few topics:
Fence-like hedges
The May draft of the ordinance is moving in an acceptable direction. It is good in that it:
• has a workable, conservative, yet flexible definition of the offending hedges
• offers grandfathering to existing hedges
• includes a standard measuring point
• separates Emergency Portals and Fence-like hedges to help the public and Council focus on the right
issues.
It is weak in that it:
• offers perpetual grandfathering
• may be too conservative in defining the minimum amount of vegetation making up a hedge to the point of
capturing unintended vegetation.
Two changes I suggest are:
1. Cap the grandfather period at 10 years. That is far enough in the future that it should not raise too
many eyebrows, yet will eventually cure the problem. Furthermore it is far enough in the future that the
small children being served by today's enclosed yards will be beyond the age of needing a play yard.
2. The 20% coverage parameter should be changed to 50%. That would be unlikely to inadvertently capture
unintended vegetation, yet would achieve the goal of limiting stockades formed by hedges. When
considering the fact that visibility triangles would force partial compliance for most yards, the two together
should be effective in limiting fence-like hedges.
Basements and other Subterranean Structures
I am most favorably disposed to the "Yellow Approach" with the following comments on certain Issues:
Issue Yellow Approach Comment
Definition of "below grade space" Floor more than 3 ft. below standard The Blue Approach is acceptable,
base level primarily because it appears to tie-in
with other considerations of the
building code that adequately address
the definitional issue.
Size limit No The size must be big enough to be
meaningful but could be restricted to
the equivalent of a single, reasonably
sized room. If a single room is the
most space that might be allowed, the
allowable space must contemplate a
12x12 room plus stairwell, access
space and possibly a small area for
HVAC/plumbing, etc. equipment.
100SF would significantly limit the size
1
Issue Yellow Approach Comment
of the useable areas and effectively
preclude the allowed subterranean
areas which may be the intent of
the Blue Approach.
Counts as framed area No Subterranean areas absolutely should
not count as Framed Area. Such
structures would not add to the visible
bulk of the building which is the
purpose for considering and regulating
Framed Area. It would be an abuse of
that term to use it in this case and like
the Size Limit in the Blue Approach
would effectively preclude such
structures which again, may be the
intent.
Counts as a story No The same logic that applies to Framed
Area bodes against counting the
subterranean area as a "story".
Height limit No limit There is no reason to limit the height.
It is another backdoor way to limit the
use. Without plumbing and windows,
such areas cannot realistically be used
as living space, so why make them all
but unusable. Even mechanical rooms
are better with full height ceilings. A
minimum height of 7' could be
considered.
Plumbing fixtures (does not apply Not allowed Agree
to lines)
Use restriction Storage or mechanical only, unless Too many issues seem to bode
there are two EEP's? against using the subterranean space
as living area in West U. Hence,
consideration of an extra EEP
becomes less important. If the
allowed area is to be materially
restricted in size, all consideration of
an extra EEP can be dropped.
Number of emergency egress Two if >200SF See Use Restriction
paths (EEP's)
EEP directly to outdoors ? See Use Restriction
Indoor swimming pool in below Allowed? No, restricting plumbing fixtures would
grade space logically preclude a swimming pool.
Excavation limits (ratio of distance 1.5 : 1 A decision on the "angle of repose"
from property line to depth of hole) (greater setback; shallower angle of should be guided by the BSC but
should not be so restrictive as to
repose) preclude the construction of
subterranean area anywhere beneath
the footprint of the surface structure.
Consideration should be given to
2
Issue Yellow Approach Comment
invalidating the 3/7 rule when
considering a subterranean structure
or at least demanding a minimum 5-
foot side yard setback.
Excavations limited Deeper than 12 inches, wider or longer Yield to BSC rules and considerations.
than inches?
Location in "footprint" of principal Required, except for EEP directly to Anywhere beneath the "footprint" of
building (below other building outdoors? the principal building or accessory
space) building. The rules must be such to
allow the subterranean area to be
directly under any room and not be
forced to the middle of the building.
Regards,
Dick Yehle
3
IRPB MEMORANDUM
JOHNSON RADCLIFFE
PETROV a BOBBITT PLI C
TO: Zoning and Planning Commission
City of West University Place, Texas
CC: Michael G. Ross, City Manager
City of West University Place, Texas
Alan P. Petrov, City Attorney
City of West University Place, Texas
FROM: Joshua W. Golden, JRPB
City of West University Place, Texas
DATE: May 8, 2009
RE: Proposal related to fences, visibility, and emergency access
1. Emergency Portals. For purposes of facilitating future discussions, I have
separated the proposed amendments to Sections 18-208 and 18-210 from the
fence-like hedge ordinance.
2. Visibility areas; trees, hedges, etc. Based on my understanding Commission's
consensus of April 10, I have revised the proposed fence-like hedge ordinance to:
(i) regulate front yard plant growth that obstructs visibility across "through" lots,
(ii) address PNC status for presently conforming lots, (iii) identify a standard point of
reference for purposes of determining height limits, (iv) identify a workable and
quantifiable measurement for minimum open area requirements so as to distribute the
burden of the proposed ordinance restrictions equally between large and small lots.
I recognize there may be certain changes in these revision not supported by every
Commissioner. However, I do believe the revision reflect the general comments received from the
Commission. At a minimum, I think the revisions are a solid basis for further comment and review.
1001 McKinney, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas „002 6424 • www.publiclaw.com • Phone -13.23?.1221 /80Q.890.3058 Fix ? 13.237.13 t 3
Proposal regulating
visibility for emergency access
Revised 3-31-09 (after joint public hearin_-a
Amend Sections 18-208 and 18-210 of the Code of Ordinances, as follows:
Sec. 18-208. Emergency portals; visibility areas
(a) Generally; location. The primary purpose of this subsection is to provide access to
all sides of each building, so that firefighters and emergency personnel can enter the building,
place ladders, fight fires, etc. If such access is blocked by fences, walls or other obstructions,
there must at least two emergency portals, each with a minimum width of 30 inches, and they
must be located to allow access to the sides and rear of the building, as follows:
(1) Usually there must be one portal on each side of the building facing the
front street line, but on corner sites, one may face the side street line.
(2) If there is a fully or partially-enclosed utility easement that intersects a
street area adjacent to the site, there must be an emergency portal to allow
emergency access to the easement area from the street area.
(b) Allowed types of portals. An emergency portal may be either: (i) a gate or door with
a key box complying with the International Fire Code (see §506.1), or (ii) a breachable fence
segment or gate. A segment or gate is "breachable" if it is primarily made of wood or wood
substitute (not thicker than one inch, in either cas or wro iT&J ( ,
- U- 14
(c) Certain existing obstructions. Until ay 201 , it is an affirmative defense to
prosecution for lack of emerge portals : (i g fences, walls or other obstructions
blocked the required access o bUr.1, 2009 and (ii) they were not replaced or structurally
altered thereafter.
(d) Visibility areas. Fences, walls and other things are forbidden in certain visibility
areas. See Chapter 82 of this Code.
Sec. 18-210. Masonry construction.
Masonry fences must be made of brick, vitrified clay tile, concrete tile, or monolithic reinforced
concrete, and must be built according to the following specifications:
(1) At least eight inches thick for double-wall construction, which shall be either brick, vitrified
clay tile, or concrete tile; at least six inches thick for single-wall construction, which shall be
only of brick or monolithic reinforced concrete construction.
(2) Pilasters shall be placed on not more than 12-foot centers, or adequate steel reinforcing shall
be placed in the whole fence.
(3) Expansion joints shall be placed on not more than 24-foot centers.
(4) The fence shall have a foundation which shall rest on drilled footings sunk to approved
bearing soil. Such footings shall be not less than 12 inches in diameter, and each footing shall
have not less than four one-half-inch ties on three-foot centers. Foundation beams shall be not
less than 12 inches wide and not less than 18 inches deep with not less than four five-eighths-
inch reinforcing rods and three-eighths-inch ties, on not less than 30-inch centers.
(5) Emergency portals may be required; see above.
Amend Note 8 of Table 7-6 of the Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Note 8. Fences. Fences may project into front and side yards to the extent expressly required or
authorized by City ordinance (e.g., provisions in Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances requiring
front fences for temporary construction purposes and to screen nonresidential uses; provisions in
PDD schedules for front fences). Also in the Code of Ordinances, there are: (i) requirements for
emergency portals in fences (Chapter 18) and (ii) restrictions on fences, "fence-like hedges" and
other things in visibility areas (Chapter 82). In a QMDS low fences (3.5 feet or lower) may be
located anywhere, if made of ornamental metal or white pickets.
Proposal regulating
fence-like hedges
Revised ' J 9 ' of r - itt
Amend Section 82-7 of the Code of Ordinances as follows.
Sec. 82-7. Visibility areas; trees, hedges, etc-
(a) Obstructions prohibited. Obstructions are prohibited in visibility areas as indicated in
the following table:
Area Obstructions prohibited Point for vertical
measurement
Driveway visibility Any part of a fence, wall, Ground level at the
triangles plant or other thing above base of the
three feet. obstruction
Front yard visibility Any fence-like hedge that-is: _ rvvA-peint-off-a
areas (i) runs parallel (or roughly ;)a,,idewal
parallel) to the front street `p of eurb if there
slE1o. , i>>> Xr l., and GD exatle late
exceeds 5 0 feet in-hei; . in aver e~St"n and
base level as._def ned
in_Appmdix A3
Section 2-102_of this
Code.
Street visibility Tree branches or foliage 'nearest
triangles below eight feet and any part -dg{ Standard base
of any other plant above three Ileve-l-as defined in
feet. :appendix} - -Section
-102 of I± -w v
-wi,etthis Code.
(b) Conduct unlawful. It shall be unlawful for any person to: (i) plant, grow, construct,
install or maintain any obstruction prohibited by this section, or (ii) allow any such obstruction
on property the person owns or controls.
(c) Certain trees. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution for a tree in a driveway
visibility area that the tree was planted before July 1, 1992 and has no limbs or foliage below six
feet.
(d) Certain fence-like hedges. I ii `1.0, _ ? It is an affirmative defense to
prosecution related to a fence-like hedge that: (i) the hedge was in existence and not in
compliance with this section .~it:e=:>~,ose, <;,ft Ft ikJuly 13 2009, ~i)
the hedge has never been pruned or changed to conform tothis section for a period exceeding
180 days in any given one-year period beginning on the date such hedge is made to_conform wi=th
this section} and (iiiythe hedge did not become more non-compliant on or after hat-efeot~ve
ate-July 1, 2009,
(d) Eyfarcement The city may enter a-visibility area and remove any_growth prohibited
by this section, and there shall be no liability to others for taking or not. taking such action.
In Section 82-1 of the Code of Ordinances, delete the
existing definition of "visibility triangle"
and insert the following new definitions
(to be inserted in alphabetical order with the others):
Driveway visibility triangle means the area within a triangle beginning at the intersection
of the edge of a driveway and the inside edge of a sidewalk (i.e., the edge farthest from the
roadway). From the intersection point, the first side of the triangle extends five feet inward
(away from the roadway) along the edge of the driveway, the second side of the triangle extends
five feet along the edge of the sidewalk away from the driveway, and the third side is a straight
line connecting the extended ends of the first two sides. If there is no sidewalk, the building
official shall designate the probable location of a future sidewalk, which shall then be used as if
it were an existing sidewalk. A typical driveway will have two such triangles, one on each side.
The visibility triangle may include both public and private property. The building official may
prepare example diagrams showing drivewa visibility triangles.
Fence-like hedge means a t.nera+any angement of vegetation, ncludinn utnot_limited
to, trees, shrubs or other plants with trunks, branches or foliage- ping OF to tetring within
11t feet-i-)t' 1,1e I`RY A t-e-siAc1--ax-e--terit-t iia--they--4~a yt~t-visual- ier OF ble-0%. fief
bly
-et s tarry-Theaff-a ~gen~e n be a ng' ultiple line sti night er- eup~,eedL whether
in straight or czurved lines} or in multiple partth_aI Vii) fQrm~a cntgu4ulne real
-r
th- an-
_0_ o - f the width of the lot and _ ii touches or extends below ei htfeet ahov~tandard-~e
-
level = r purFoses of determinin whether_an_arrangement of yegelation ctu_a ifes_as_a fence-like
hedge, - vegetation is deemed to form a contiguousline if it visibly appears to over-lap
another
~Q vegetation-or tvPe of stricture when viewed at -any point aLo_n the front street line perp-endicitlar
to the front-yard visibility area.
Front yard visibility area includes the front yard of each building site, except for the part
within ten feet of the inside edge of the front yard (the inside edge is sometimes referred to as the
"building line"). Normally, the front-yard visibility area is a rectangle. Example: If a front yard
is twenty feet deep, the front yard visibility area is ten feet deep. The building official may
prepare example diagrams showing front yard visibility areas.
Street visibility triangle means the area at a street corner lying within a triangular area
beginning at the intersection point of the curbs of the two streets forming the corner (which will
normally be a tangent point on a curved curbline). Sides of the triangle extend 20 feet along
each curb line (away from the intersection point, following any curves in the curb). The third
side is a straight line connecting the extended ends of such 20-foot curb-line sides. If there is no
curb on such a street, the central flow line of the gutter or ditch is used instead. The triangle may
include both public and private property. The building official may prepare example diagrams
showing street visibility triangles.
Visibility area includes a street visibility triangle, a driveway visibility triangle and front-
yard visibility area.
Visibility triangle includes a street visibility triangle and a driveway visibility triangle.
Amend Article 2 of the Zoning Ordinance by deleting the definition of "driveway
visibility triangle" and amending the definition of "visibility triangle," as follows:
Visibility triangle. This term includes both "driveway visibility triangle" and "street
visibility triangle" as defined in Chapter 82 of the Code of Ordinances.
Amend both pages of Table 7-5a of the Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Visibility Forbidden structures, plants and See Chapter 82 of the Code of
triangles other things Ordinances.
Amend Note 8 of Table 7-6 of the Zoning Ordinance as follows:
Note 8. Fences. Fences may project into front and side yards to the extent expressly required or
authorized by City ordinance (e.g., provisions in Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinances requiring
front fences for temporary construction purposes and to screen nonresidential uses; provisions in
PDD schedules for front fences). Also in the Code of Ordinances, there are: (i) requirements for
emergency portals in fences (Chapter 18) and (ii) restrictions on fences, "fence-like hedges" and
other things in visibility areas (Chapter 82). In a QMDS low fences (3.5 feet or lower) may be
located anywhere, if made of ornamental metal or white pickets.