Loading...
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.