HomeMy WebLinkAbout08092007 ZPC Agenda Item 3
Regulating Building Size and Bulk
May 27, 2007
In recent years West University Place's zoning ordinance has been updated several times
to cope with the economic pressure to build ever-larger homes on the city's small,
expensive lots. The members of the current Zoning & Planning Commission (ZPC) see a
continuing need for action. They are united in wanting to protect the friendly, single-
family-home character of our city by ensuring that new construction meets the test of
"good neighborliness".
Over the past few years the ZPC has spent much of its time attempting to improve West
U's rules controlling building size and bulk. Proposals have included changes to framed-
area rules (FA), building setbacks, building separation rules, building height, and open-
area requirements, among others. Some patches have been installed and some holes
plugged, often at the expense of complicating the ordinance and making its use and
administration more difficult.
Today we face a choice with FA. It is the key element in our control of size and bulk. It
is a sound tool, but not straightforward. We can continue to patch and plug a basically
sound ordinance and pay the price of increased complexity or we can move to replace FA
with a new approach that may be easier to understand, use and administer. In either case
the primary tool must be well integrated with other key limitations, such as height,
setbacks and open and pervious area requirements.
A good alternative is unlikely to be found in another survey of other cities' actions to
control size and bulk. Past surveys have helped the ZPC understand its options but have
provided no solutions anywhere near ready to use in West U. No more effort should be
spent in this area.
In the ZPC's discussions a building-envelope (BE) approach (sometimes called "daylight
plane" or "scale-based" zoning) has emerged as the most promising alternative to FA.
The next step is to develop a BE proposal to the point where it can be carefully evaluated
as a possible successor to FA. That will require the professional services of an architect
who is familiar with the concept and is willing to design a proposal that fits well with the
balance of West U's zoning ordinance.
The April 2005 statement of "Architectural services to assist Z&PC in evaluating new,
simplified regulations of building size, bulk, etc." (attached) lists overall and detailed
objectives that remain sound. However, the recommended next step should be restated to
make clear that the assignment is to prepare a full-fledged proposal with the blanks filled
in and with the necessary illustrative drawings completed. The proposal should also
address the growing problem of long, high walls near interior property lines and it should
be free to suggest changes in others areas of the ordinance, such as increasing the open-
area percentage requirement, to help control bulk.
When ready, the proposal must be tested and evaluated in comparison with FA. First it
must do the job of controlling size and bulk without killing architectural freedom.
Second it must be easy to understand and produce predictable, consistent results. In
short, it must be user friendly for architects, builders and the city. These tests will
probably require paid services from a second, independent architectural firm.
If the tested proposal passes review by the ZPC, it should be recommended to City
Council for a real-world trial (as an amendment to the zoning ordinance). During a trial
period of at least one, but no more than two, years the proposal would be available to
architects and builders as an authorized alternative to the FA provisions of the zoning
ordinance. City staff and the ZPC would monitor the trial and report to Council at six-
month intervals. At the close of the trial the ZPC would make a final recommendation to
Council, either to use the new approach exclusively or to abandon it and-return
exclusively to FA. The likelihood of recommending indefinite use of parallel approaches
to controlling size and bulk is remote because the key reason for this effort is to simplify
the zoning ordinance.
Structuring the trial legally may require some special effort but should be possible. The
right to rebuild in the event of severe loss should be provided to those who choose the
losing approach during the trial.
The opportunity to simplify, saving time effort and cost for city staff, architects and
builders, argues for requesting initial ideas and cost estimates for the proposal from
architects familiar with West U.
Steve Brown
• ~ Page 1 of 3
Sallye Clark
From: Steve Brown [sgbrown@hal-pc.org]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:55 PM
To: Sallye Clark
Subject: Fwd: Building Envelope
Sallye,
Here are the two emails for the June 14 packet.
Steve
Begin forwarded message:
From: "James L. Dougherty, Jr." <fdough8 -sbcglobal.net>
Date: May 29, 2007 11:24:09 AM CDT
To: "'Steve Brown"' <ss brown hal-.pc.org>, "'Debbie Scarcella"' <dscarcellaa westu.org>
Cc: Chris Peifer"' <c eifer westu.org>
Subject: RE: Building Envelope
TO: Steve Brown
FROM: James L. Dougherty, Jr.
Attorney at Law
5177 Richmond, Suite 740
Houston, Texas 77056-6709
Phone 713-880-8808, Fax 281-220-8984
E-Mail:jdough8@sbcglobal. net
Hello, Steve,
The mongraph is eloquent. Here are a couple of thoughts:
(1) An alterantive to hiring a second firm would be to hold a sort of
design competition. In this case, it would be more like a destruction
derby. We could publicize a new proposal generally within the design
community (including not only design professionals but also ciizens,
architecture students, builders, etc.) and ask anyone who is interested to
do some destructive testing, i.e., push the new rules to their limits to:
(i) see if they break, and (ii) determine the most extreme structures that
would be allowed. There could be prizes for the best (and the most
destructive) submissions.
(2) Running two sets of regs in parallel is an interesting approach. Quite
possibly, the design community will immediately gravitate to the one that is
more permissive, i.e., the one that allows the biggest box to be built.
7/31/2007
• • Page 2 of 3
This tendency might leave few examples of the less-permissive approach for
comparision. Example: If a new BE approach allows 4,300 SF (typical) to be
built on a 5,000-SF-lot, few designers would bother to look at the existing
framed-area regs, because they would be less permissive. To mitigate this
tendency, the new approach could be deliberately calibrated to approximate
the effect of the existing framed area rules. That would probably mean that
the new approach would make no significant change. Another idea would be to
apply both sets of regs in series, so that each new house would have to
comply with both (at least for a temporary period). That, too, has some
disadvantages, but it would generate data to make a comparison.
/s/ Jim
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: THIS COMMUNICATION, INCLUDING ANY
ATTACHMENTS, IS
INTENDED ONLY FOR THE NAMED ADDRESSEE(S). IF YOU ARE NOT A
NAMED ADDRESSEE
(OR AN EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO A
NAMED
ADDRESSEE), YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISTRIBUTION OR
COPYING OF THIS
COMMUNICATION IS PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS
COMMUNICATION IN
ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY CALL THE SENDER AT 713-880-8808 AND
DESTROY THE
COMMUNICATION.
CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: Rules imposed by IRS Circular 230 require the sender
to inform you that, unless expressly stated above or in an attachment
hereto, this communication including any attachments, is not intended or
written to be used, and it cannot be used, by you or any person or entity
for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may or could be imposed under
the United States Internal Revenue Code, nor for the promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter(s).
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Brown [mailto:sgbrown a@_hal-pc.org]
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 5:36 PM
To: Debbie Scarcella
Cc: James L Dougherty Jr; Chris Peifer
Subject: Building Envelope
Debbie,
For our discussion on Tuesday morning, I have updated (and attached)
my memo suggesting serious work on a building-envelope alternative to
framed area for controlling building size and bulk in West U. The
new stuff is in the last three paragraphs but there are also a couple
minor changes earlier.
7/31/2007
• Page 3 of 3
1 suspect that the only practical approach to moving this forward
soon is to gain Michael Ross's support for including it in his
discussions with the new city council regarding their (and ZPC's)
work and funding priorities.
I look forward to our discussion. I also welcome thoughts and
suggestions from Jim and Chris.
Steve
If this email is spam, report it here:
http://www.OnlyMyEmaii.com/reportSpam?
Id=M jE_x_MTU6MzlwNzEwNzYxOmpkb3VnaDhAc2J
jZ2xvYmFsLm5ldA%3D%o3D
7/31/2007
• •
Architectural services
to assist Z&PC
in evaluating
new, simplified regulations
of building size, bulk, etc.
April 2005/Revised April 2007
Overall Objective
Balance the interests of property owners with the needs of the community in a new,
simplified set of rules regulating building size, bulk, etc.
Recommended Next Step (Immediate Action)
Obtain architectural services, by contract, to assist the Z&PC in evaluating rules
regulating building size, bulk, etc. (see objectives and possible approaches listed below).
Services would include sketches, analyses, advice, etc.
Objectives Of New Regulations
1. Architectural Freedom: Avoid undue interference with architectural freedom; allow
many styles.
2. Light & Air: Reduce the adverse impacts of new buildings on penetration of daylight,
circulation of air, etc.
3. Height: Control the height of buildings, especially in close proximity to other property.
4. Bulk & Size: Regulate the bulk and size of buildings; encourage reduction of bulk as
height increases.
5. Yards, Open Space: Help to preserve yards and open spaces.
6. Density: Reduce overcrowding of structures and population; avoid undue
concentration of population.
7. Emergency Access: Facilitate emergency access, especially to higher floors.
8. Neighbors: Encourage designs that respect privacy and quiet enjoyment of
neighboring property.
9. Administration. Provide simple rules that produce predictable, consistent results
(perhaps mathematical).
Possible Approaches (To Be Sketched and Analyzed)
1. Palo Alto "daylight plane" approach
2. Bill May's "scale-based zoning" approach
3. Sloped-height setback approach, 2-8-05 (new Note 10 for Table 7-4b)
4. Others that may meet the objectives of the new regulations
5.Open air tightening - 55%
6. Limit long high wall effect
7. Building Separation
8. Pervious area - no change, relate to BSC and trees
Les r r
1 I I
Soler ~"Pe h~ I I n e,
xl~cL~l~~ I f--,Sefi~CK I
I
1~r.E Lf I I I
FX:u`~. I I I
I I I
I I I
I
I I
dCtt~r~. Fr c n-t hu
r-----
I
bu ►d,ny ~r~Vrr ~c~~~ ~
1
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1
1 I
I I
1 I
I I
L 1
S Id'L V 1 -
I
1 I
I 1
I I
I 1
L I 1
I 1
I I
I I
I 1
I I
I 1
1 I
I
-J
I
I ~
I
I ♦
r-----~
-
I 1
I
I I
I I
I I
i I
I i I
I I
I
I
I 1
L------------I
Amendment to add
"sloped setback" height limits
with "penetrating volume"
3-5-07
Amend Table 7-4b (both pages) as follows:
I
Table 7-4b• Buildings General Rule: Every structure must conform to the applicable regulations shown, by District, in
this table.("N/A" means the rule does not apply.) Exceptions/Special Rules: (1) See special rules
noted in table. (2) See Article 9 regarding Planned Development Districts.
ltem Regulation SF-I SF-3 SF-3 TH GR-1 GR-3 C
Dwelling units Maximum number per One, plus one accessory quarters (AQ) 17.5 per Two 24 per See Uses
building site acre. See acre cable and
Note 8 Art. 9
Framed area, all Maximum area as a 80% 100% See Note 4. N/A
buildings on a building percentage of building
site site area
Length or width, any Maximum horizontal N/A 130 feet. See Note 3. N/A
building dimension
Exterior materials, any Type N/A Must be of equal grade and quality, all sides. See
building. Section 8-104.
Separation of DU's Fire-rated wall N/A A four-hour fire wall, or its equivalent, must separate
adjoining dwelling units. See Votes 3 and i.
SF privacy protection See Note 7. N/A Applies. N/A
Accessory buildings Maximum number per Three N/A
building site
See Article 10 regarding
garage space. Height, maximum 25 €f- Other than chimneys, no part of an accessory building may be higher than 35 ft. See
tither of the followine• (i) ten feet plus the horizontal distance from that part to the Note 2.
front street line. or (ii) 20 feet plus the horizontal distance from that part to and
to her t-Recess property line (not to exceed 25 feet total) See Figure HRD. This
is a "sloped" height limit See also Notes I and 10.
Principal buildings Stories, maximum Two and one-half. Three. See Note 6. N/A
See Article 10 regarding
garage space. Height, maximum 35 feet; 25 feet ^^a o,. Vote t No part of a principal building maY be 35 ft. or
. -
higher than either of the followin ; i t n. tit pl]rh~ horizontal Stan-(;._from less. See
that part L-the_fronl..st_rcel line _o11ji)-20 feet plus the horizontal distance from that Note
arP t to ain,,y other t4@-Heafes4 property line (not to exceed 35 feet total or 'S feet in
rear card) See Figure HRD This is a "sloped" height limit See also Notes I and
10.
Minimum gross floor 1,400 square feet, if used for residential 1,200 sq. 750 sq. ft, each DU 1,400 sq.
area purposes ft., each ft.
DU.
Width, minimum N/A 16 ft., N/A But see QMDS N/A
each DU. Schedule.
Note 1. Antennas and Chimneys. Roof-mounted radio or television antennas on a principal building in a residential district may project up to
four feet above the roof. The maximum height of chimneys attached to a principal building is the greater of 35 feet or four feet above the roof.
sa.
Note 10. Eat'es. Dormers and Gables. Eaves may exceed (or "penetrate") the sloped height limit not to exceed 24 inches (measure
horizontally) Ordinary dormers and gables in a residential district may exceed (or "penetrate") the sloped height limit if: (i) no part exceeds the
maximum height (35 feet or 25 feet in rear yard)' and (ii ) the total cubic feet of penetrating volume on the building site does not exceed i 1,
s
multiplied by the depth of the lot (measured in feet). In this note, "benetrating volume" means the volu f those parts of k}
=ablcsthc NJIdin-, that exceed (or "penetrate") a sloped height limit.
• •
Figure HRD
Sloped Height Limit in Residential Districts
I
I
i
I I
i i
Height limit (non-yard areas); see Table 7-4b
I I
--------------------i 35 feet (height)*
I i
I I I
~ I I
I I
I 45-degree angle t
20 feet (height)
~ I I
!I I I
I
Side property line Side property line
I I
i I I
I I
I I j
I I
Standard base level
Conceptual view from front street line. _*_Lower height limit applies in rear yard.
Not to scale.
Note: Many other regulations apply, in addition to those shown in this figure. Nothing in this figure allows structures to be
located in yards or "setbacks." See Tables 7-2 and 7-6.
Amend Schedule FA as follows.
SCHEDULE FA
(FRAMED AREA)
A. General rule: Framed area reflects the size of a building, in square footage. Framed area includes all floor
and ground areas under a solid, fixed roof, except the uncounted areas listed in this Schedule. Floor and ground
areas are measured, on each level, according to the measurement method set out below. For each building, the
measured areas for each level are totaled to produce the framed area of the building.
B. Measurement method: For each level of a building, the framed area is the area of an imaginary, horizontal,
unbroken plane immediately atop the structure supporting the floor (or irrmediately atop the ground, where
there is no floor). Each plane extends horizontally to the outer main wall surfaces of the building, or to the outer
perimeter of the structure above (whichever is outermost). For this purpose:
1. steps, landings, sunken areas, floor openings and similar features are not considered separate levels, so
there is no plane on those levels;
2. each plane extends to the outer wall surfaces of bay windows, cantilevered space and similar space on
the same floor, regardless of the height of the floor,
3. if there is a "split level" or similar irregular floor level, the building official may designate either one
level to define the imaginary plane for that floor, or separate planes for the separate levels; and
4. if area (all or part) within a one-story building has an interior height exceeding 19 feet, the area is
doubled to calculate framed area (and if it has a interior height exceeding 31 feet, the area is tripled).
C. Uncounted areas: The following areas are not counted as framed area:
1. attic area that cannot be reached through a fixed accesswa;
2. third floor area bencarh a rzular roof surface! _
i~tet~e e. a plane, a con at: r-ncve- .t c i.t re+rlt,y~ Un -
(i)has hq~-a itch neither lovver '.es than "4-in-12" nor eater than &12-in-12. 45 ees
ii t~~~ir►s 1X-_ sat a lower a e. . in raW at a hei t below 25 fbeL 11 J „jil hos
.~~rnt~-rs an fables 11tow_ ed b_ rrrble ; -fit ce r.g?. Note 1O • and
in) either rises to a eak oint or rises to meet ther such roof surface at a
ridge-line (or weak point); see Figure
dim saves -feed
3. those non-attic parts of an imaginary plane on a second or third floor level, above which there is less
than seven feet of interior height;
4. area beneath eaves, cornices, roof extensions, "greenhouse" or bay windows, cantilevered space and
similar parts of buildings that project outward from the main wall of a building no more than 24 inches,
if the area is on a lower floor level (or at ground level) and is otherwise completely open to the
outdoors;
5. unenclosed porch area of a principal building, if the longest side of the porch directly faces the front
street line or side street line of the building site, and the area is neither designed nor usable for motor
vehicles;
6. the area of "crawl space" at ground level;
7. unenclosed walkway or "breezeway" area if. (A) the area directly connects a principal building to an
accessory building containing garage space located behind the principal building; (B) the total covered
width of the area does not exceed eight feet; and (C) no part of the roof is higher than 14 feet;
8. area of recessed entries (garage or home) or windows that is completely open to the outdoors on at least
one side, if (A) each area faces the front street line or side street line of the building site, (B) each area
is not larger than 100 square feet, and (C) the total of all such uncounted recessed area is less than 200
square feet; and
9. basement area if. (A) the floor is at least five feet lower than the standard base level of the site, and (B)
the interior height does not exceed eight feet
(The rules for uncounted areas shall be strictly construed and applied to the defined areas only.)
[Drawings may be added.]
Amendment regarding
a formula for framed area
11-5-06
Amend Table 7-4b (both pages) as follows:
Table 7-4b: Buildings General Rule: Every structure must conform to the applicable regulations shown, by District, in
this table.("N/A" means the rule does not apply.) Exceptions/Special Rules: ( I ) See special rules
noted in table. (2) See Article 9 re ardin Planned Develo ment Districts.
Item Regulation SF-I SF-2 SF-3 TH GR-I GR-2 C
Dwelling units Maximum number per One, plus one accessory quarters (AQ) 17.5 per Two 24 per acre. See Uses
building site acre. See table and
Note 8 Art. 9
Framed area, all buildings Maximum area as a 8&% 4,000 sq. ft. plus 50% of the area 100% See Note 4. N/A
on a building site percentage of building of the building site in excess of 5,000
site area s . ft.
Length or width, any Maximum horizontal N/A 130 feet. See Note 3. N/A
building dimension
Exterior materials, any Type N/A Must be of equal grade and quality, all sides. See
building. Section 8-104.
Separation of DU's Fire-rated wall N/A A four-hour fire wall, or its equivalent, must separate
adjoining dwelling units. See Notes 3 and 5.
SF privacy protection See Note 7. N/A Applies. N/A
Accessory buildings Maximum number per Three N/A
building site
See Article l0 regarding
garage space. Height, maximum 25 ft. . 35 ft. See
Note 2.
Principal buildings Stories, maximum Two and one-half. Three. See Note 6. N/A
See Article 10 regarding
garage space. Height, maximum 35 feet; 25 feet in rear yard. See Note 1 35 ft. or
less. See
Note 2.
Minimum gross floor 1,400 square feet, if used for residential 1,200 sq. 750 sq. ft, each DU 1,400 sq.
area purposes ft., each ft.
DU.
Width, minimum N/A 16 ft., each N/A But see QMDS N/A
DU. Schedule.
Note 1. Antennas and Chimneys. Roof-mounted radio or television antennas on a principal building in a residential district may project up to tour feet
above the roof. The maximum height of chimneys attached to a principal building is the greater of 35 feet or four feet above the roof.
Lot Area vs. Framed Area
18000
16000
80%
14000 4000+.5(lot area-5000)
70% •
3811 Riley
12000 2729 Albans
9 - 3710 Sunset
-i - 2731 Barbara
a 10000 3717 Sunset
a~i . 3303 Sunset
E
T 8000 _ 3019 Sunset
LL
2621 Cason
3777 Sunset
6000
3424 Robinhoad
+ 6402 Vanderbilt
4000 • 2607 Pemberton
3220 Plumb •
6411 Vanderbilt
2000
0
app ~hpp ~
~ppp h~~o ~pp~ fo~ry0 1 0 ~~pp pp opp0 ~pco~ pppp 040
h~p0 `Lp0 0 ppp0
Lot Area
Lot Area 80% 4000+.5(lot area-5000) 70% 3811 Rileyi2729 Albans 3710 Sunset 12731 Barbara 3717 Sunset 3303 Sunset '3019 Sunset
500011 4000 4000 3500
5720 4576 4360 4004 4.523 A
6000 4800 4500 4200
6720 5376 4860 4704 5_30_7
7440 5952 5220 5208 4144 5920
7500 6000 - - - - -5250 _ ..5250 - - - - - - - - 5843
7700 6160 5350 5390 5033
7875 ~ 6300 ---5438 - - 5513 - - - - - - - - 6291
-
9000 7200 6000 6300
9066 7253 6033 6346 -
10000 8000 6500 7000
12500 10000 7750 8750
13500 10800 8250 9450
15000 12000 9000 10500
16200 12960 9600 11340
17500 14000 - - 10250 - 12250 - - - -
20000 16000 11500 14000,
2621 Cason 3777 Sunset 3424 Robinhood 6402 Vanderbilt 2607 Pemberton 3220 Plumb 6411 Vanderbilt
7137
7191
- -
- - - - -
8736 -
7889 9517
- 9011 - -
- - - 10125
•
Amendment relating to U ° d FT
garages in side yards
(Table 7-6)
Revised 6-9-07 (base version, percentage separation)
Amend Note 5 of Table 7-6 as follows:
]Vote 5. Garages In Side Yards. z!U t
.t : ,
(a) A -x may 1L>e -it three feet the
side property line, irz:rr l~ 5 .Y,.~ e .5 'c i
(b) It must be a detached accessory building containing only
only eentain garage space and space above the garage (plus stairway) with a horizontal
separation from the principal building of
. This does not prohibit "breezeway" structures not
wider than eight feet and not higher than 14 feet
(c) Any projecting part must be at least seventy feet from the front street line.
(d) Within ten feet of another building site in an SF District (whether on the side, rear or
otherwise), may have no window, door or other opening above the ground floor
(and facing the property line of the other building site) P.
i non-operable openings or skylights.
Clean version (markings removed):
Note 5. Garages In Side Yards. A building may project toward an interior side property line (not a side
street line) if it meets all the following criteria: (a) No part of the building may be closer than three feet to
the side property line. Exception: Eaves may be as close as inches. (b) It must be a detached
accessory building containing only garage space and space above the garage (plus stairway) with a
horizontal separation from the principal building of at least seven percent of the building site depth
(measured from main wall to main wall). This does not prohibit "breezeway" structures not wider than
eight feet and not higher than 14 feet (if there is otherwise the same minimum separation from main wall
to main wall). (c) Any projecting part must be at least seventy feet from the front street line. (d) Within
ten feet of another building site in an SF District (whether on the side, rear or otherwise), the building
may have no window, door or other opening above the ground floor (and facing the property line of the
other building site). Exception: 'There may be translucent (but not transparent), non-operable openings or
skylights.
Amendment relating to D ° ° ~
garages in side yards
(Table 7-6)
Revised 6-9-07 (alternate version, transitional structure as separation)
Amend Note 5 of Table 7-6 as follows:
Note S. Garages In Side Yards. x !;E`e ,
ta,
(a) k ~,e ~~,±,.l > , {y' e Li 7c~ _`~Jti it three feet the
side property line a s r u y {.e Iose_ 1s
(b) The projecting part may only contain-garage space and space above the garage plus
stairwa .
(c) Any projecting part must be at least seventy feet from the front street line.
(d) Within ten feet of another building site in an SF District (whether on the side, rear or
otherwise), may have no window, door or other opening above the ground floor
(and facing the property line of the other building site),
ttsti# non-operable openings or skylights.
iti1
't_3L1:
t. M 'r"il S~ (?:E++1 p'!1't "A +lie
)J
:i3~~I! f Ali .,tij LT1!•_; tn1.~'_'rt_' "Ill +y ..CI1;. a `'i ~ C~~_,, 1 ~l`I_i;ll _ 1__t>tI t C ~')Ul'c.lll?'r~' I)lt:e~~'t,lt:~_I?
;g all 11l1.xst ic-e It i ast ~c 11 )ll +1C +~C ~_~~L 'ellt~ll _:1te jgpiti, MlJ ii ilo art of illestr-10(l_•;
_l 'lsl! ( 1 " ,t ~S' . "1. "1 Il C': "Al t it i .it° tc !J0
y-
Clean version (markings removed):
Note S. Garages In Side Yards. A building may project toward an interior side property line (not
a side street line) if it meets all the following criteria: (a) No part of the building may be closer
than three feet to the side property line. Exception: Eaves may be as close as inches. (b)
The projecting part may only contain garage space and space above the garage (plus stairway).
(c) Any projecting part must be at least seventy feet from the front street line. (d) Within ten feet
of another building site in an SF District (whether on the side, rear or otherwise), the building
may have no window, door or other opening above the ground floor (and facing the property line
of the other building site). Exception: There may be translucent (but not transparent), non-
operable openings or skylights. (e) The building may not be a principal building, unless there is
a transitional structure between the main part of the principal building and the part in the rear
yard (or SF Bufferyard). A transitional structure may be an arcade, a "bridge," a porch or other
building space, but: (i) its length must be at least seven percent of the building site depth, and (ii)
no part of the structure may have a height greater than the horizontal distance from that part to
the nearest property line
0 0
Amendment relating to DRAFT
open area and
pervious area
6-9-07
Amend Tables 7-3 and 7-6 as follows:
General Rule: Every building site must have the minimum open and pervious
Table 7-3: areas shown, by District, in this table. ("N/A" means the rule does not apply.)
Open & Pervious Exceptions/Special Rules: (1) See PDD Schedules for planned development
Areas districts. (2) See special rules noted in table. (3) See the Projections Schedule for
details about calculating open and pervious areas.
Item Measureme SF-1 SF-2 SF-3 TH GR 1 GR-2 C
nt
Front yard,
minimum N/A 40% N/A
percentage.
ear yard,
pen area minimum 60%. See Note 1. N/A N/A N/A
percentage.
See Note 6.
Entire building
site, minimum 25% 25% 15%
percentage.
Front yard,
minimum 0% 50% See Note 2. 50% See Note 2. N/A
Pervious area percentage
Entire building
V1minimum e, ' 15% 15% 15%
e1rcentage.
Landscaping strips Required, except for SFD uses on building sites with 5,000 sq. ft. or more. See
Note 3.
For SFD uses on building sites with 5,000 sq. ft. or more, Chapter 82 of the Code
Qualified trees of Ordinance must be located within a contiguous and reasonably compact
pervious area containing at least 25 sq. ft. However, additional or better pervious
area may be required to comply with Chapter 82.
Pervious pavement In a QMDS only, pervious pavement is allowed to be used for all vehicular areas,
and part of it may count as pervious area. See Note 4.
Each parking area containing 21 or more parking spaces must contain interior
Parking areas, interior pervious areas in "island" or "peninsula" configurations aggregating in area at
least two square feet for each parking space.
[Similar changes apply to the second page of Table 7-3, for PDD-SF1 and PDD-SF2]
General Rule: This schedule describes certain structures which
Table 7-6• are allowed to "project" into yards (or setbacks). It also provides
special rules for calculating open and pervious areas affected by
Projections Schedule such structures. See the "Yards (or 'setbacks')" and the "Open &
Pervious Areas" tables.
Maximum Allowed Projection (In
Inches), Measured From The Inside Special Rules For
Type of Structure Edge Of The Yard Calculating Open
Front Rear SF & Pervious Areas
Yard Yard Side Yard Bufferyard
24" except The area Ji
15" that no
Items above ground level: Eaves, 15"
cornices, roof extensions, item .f 1 as `
"greenhouse" and bay windows below the 15" open area i '
(no floor space), window sills, - cave may
be closer
cantilevered building space, 36" See Notes
window boxes, belt courses, See See than 1.1 and 13.
window air conditioners and Note Notes to the
similar parts of buildings. 1.1. 1.1 and SPL. See
13 Notes 1.1
and 13.
12" except
that no
item
Items at and above ground level: 15" below the
cave 15"
may
Chimneys fireplaces (with cross- See 13C 15" The area does not
Buildings sectional areas of 8 square feet or 15" Notes closer See Notes count as either open
'end less) and similar parts of 1.1 and than 36" or pervious area.
buildings. 13 1.1 and 13.
Attached to the
Structures SPL See
Notes 1.1
and 13.
The area does not
0, but 0 0 count as either open
see 0 or pervious area. The
Porches/platforms/decks higher Vote See area beneath a deck
than 14 inches, and similar See Notes
structures attached to a building. 1.2. See Notes 1.1 and See NotesY count Note 1.1 and 1.1 and 13_ pervious area if rain
1. L 13. 13. is allowed to pass
through the deck.
0 0
120" 0
The area does not
Steps not higher than the first See See
floor level. Vote Votes See Notes See Notes count as either open
1.1 and or pervious area.
1.1. 1.1 and 13 1.1 and 13.
13.
[remainder of Table 7-6 remains unchanged]
0 0
Amendment relating to
buildings in rear yard
(Table 7-6)
4-10-07
Amend Note 3 of Table 7-6 as follows:
Note 3. Buildings In Rear Yard or SF Bit ryard. Ado-h
building may be
,ffe located in a rear yard or SF Bufferyard if it meets all of the following criteria: (a)
No part of 4-the building may be closer than five feet to the rear property line (or
to any SF District, if in a SF Bufferyard). (b) The minimum horizontal
separations between the building and all other buildings on the building site (other
than those located completely within the rear yard or SF Bufferyard) are 7% of
the building site depth (measured from main wall to main wall) and 5% of the
building site depth (measured between the closest parts of the buildings) except
for transitional structures specifically allowed below. Example: If the depth is
100 feet, the minimum separations are seven and five feet, respectively. (b)- (c)
Within ten feet of another building site in an SF District (whether on the side, rear
or otherwise), 4- the building may have no window, door or other opening above
the ground floor (and facing the property line of the other building site), except
for opaque-translucent (but not transparent), non-operable openings or skylights.
(e+ Space in the building may only be used for single-family
(detached) use. (e) The building may not be a principal building, unless there
is a transitional structure between the main part of the principal building and the
part in the rear yard (or SF Bufferyard). A transitional structure may be an
arcade, a "bridge," a porch or other building space but
f (ii) no part of the structure may
have a height greater than the horizontal distance from that part to the nearest
property line. 4f the-vp JS _Q the bktijdjm~a
"
vazzazzzl~-zc uzcIar-tfo-1vrrE19s
GOOF of he pre en at least 5 1 % gar--age spaee, and Mf [T]here is
no more than 600 square feet of building space, other than garage space, in the
part of the building in the rear yard or SF Bufferyard . See garage
restrictions in Article 10.
14W MW
Hding;
Beyond Curb Appeal:
Designing from Four Angles
By Caroline Hoyt
Curb appeal has traditionally been what homes with four-sided architecture. open space and trails to surround clustered
we considered to be the first and often most Around 1945, however, people began to housing. With people using the trails, the
important impression of a home. The term move away from cities and into suburbia, backs and sides of houses once again became
became so hot it was a buzz word for many seeking larger homes on larger lots. Alleys visible and some builders began to pay atten-
years- alluding to the overall attractiveness were eliminated from site design with the tion to all angles.
of a home at first glance. But, as so often hap- intention of making the quickly growing sub- More recently, successful city planners
pens, the situation has changed and people no urban neighborhoods look more spacious and Andres Duany and Peter Calthorpe have in-
longer rely only on how a home looks from retain some sense of a rural feel. This encour- creasingly reintroduced ideas used pre-World
the curb when shopping for a home. aged focus on the front of a home, elevating War 11 back into our neighborhoods. As a
Communities across the U.S. are now curb appeal to paramount importance. cofounder of new urbanism, Duany creates
being designed and developed so that access As costs went up during the ensuing years, dense communities offering walkable neigh-
to and views of the homes come at us from lot sizes got smaller and municipalities devel- borhoods with retail and traditional housing,
all angles. This has led to an exterior design oped new zoning codes. Smaller lots resulted located near mass transit. Calthorpe, one of
trend that places equal importance on every in shorter driveways, homes lined up parallel the most influential urban designers of our
side of the home. with one another and front yards became time, strives to improve the balance between
shallow. In some areas regulations laid out land development and preservation, creating
DESIGN DIRECTION minimal requirements for use of certain neighborhoods that are easily negotiated by
Before World War 11, the typical neighbor- materials, such as brick or stone, on the front either car or foot. These neighborhoods are
hood was densely filled with single-family of the home. The result was often superficial, essentially the definition of new urbanism.
homes on a walkable grid near city centers. but uniform in design. However, we lost the Citing development and design missteps
Often, blocks of homes were split through bucolic look of homes set back from the street since World War 11, Duany and Calthorpe
the middle with alleyways, and the homes on tree-shaded lots. are helping to establish new allowances that
were designed from every angle. With people The growth of Planned Unit Developments encourage four-sided architecture.
spending more time walking around their in the '70s and '80s made way for wrapping
neighborhoods and driving through alleys architectural detail around all sides of a home FOUR-SIDED THINKING
behind the homes, it made sense to design by creating regulations requiring plenty of In the last four to five years, planned
urbanist communities have begun to ask for
the same amount of masonry or other exte-
C C C C CONGRATULATIONS LACON rior materials on all sides. Some cities, like
HOMES, WE ARE PROUD
TO RE A PART OF YOUR Marietta, GA, have even added four-sided
1 HOMEBUILDING TEAM! architectural requirements to their reslden-
1 1 1 1
Texas tial building codes.
Operations One specific influence on this trend is the
renaissance of alleys, creating open space and
. I - trails surrounding homes, and the popularity
1 \ e"e- of outdoor rooms and yards. All of these ele-
ments have increased the need for planners
and developers to recognize four-sided archi-
t6o as a necessity in home design.
Metal, Tile & Interestingly enough, it is often not the
Slate Roofing homeowners themselves who notice the all-
• around design of their own homes because
1 1 1 41 34 PINEMONT
H O U s T o N TX 77018 they are viewing the world from the inside
OFFICE 71 3.686.9007 looking out, leaving their neighbors and
1 1 • 1 1 I 1 1
F A x 713.686.4488 friends to be more aware of exterior details
16 GREATER HOUSTON BUILDER/ARCHITECT JULY 2007
on a daily basis. One homeowner in Atlanta FHA PROPOSES TIGHTER DOWN quo between the home buyer's purchase of
excitedly shared with friends her delight PAYMENT RULES the property and the seller's `contribution,'
with the beautiful suburban brick home she The Federal Housing Administration an- or payment, to the charitable organization,"
had bought. She even spent time creating a nounced that it will no longer allow charities the Department of Housing and Urban
magnificent backyard. However, it wasn't or groups that accept payments from builders Development said in announcing rule
until a friend came to visit and commented and sellers to provide down payment help to changes.
that the "brick" home only had brick on the buyers. The rule changes would still allow for down
w'- payment assistance from family members,
front of the home that she realized three sides
governmental and public agencies, employers
of her home were not truly up to par.
Greater value is added when the major- F; and labor unions as well as IRS-approved, tax-
ity of homes in a neighborhood have good ®o exempt charitable and educational groups.
four-sided architecture. Everyone's property The IRS announced last year that it would
value goes up if a community is visually ap- no longer consider groups that accept money
pealing on all sides, whether that overall look a from sellers for down-payment assistance as
GF' O
tax-exempt.
60
is seen from a distance or up close. These z well-designed, four-sided homes increase W w HUD said the proposed rule changes are
the long-term value and charm of any com- Certain down payment aids are under fire not intended to prevent builders and other
munitY, from the FHA. sellers from offering cash incentives to home
The most important elements to consider buyers, provided those incentives are equal to
when creating four-sided design are massing, The FHA rules would stop the practice of a reduction in mortgage amounts.
proportion and color. High-quality materials a home's seller providing money to a charity
like brick and stone can add to the attractive- to encourage the sale of a particular home. HOUSING OUTLOOK DEPENDS
The FHA said it is doing so because the as- ON FORECASTING SOURCE
ness of a home, as do roof materials, windows
and shutters, doors and porches, but they are sistance is usually tacked onto the sales price Although they've revised their figures down-
and
elements in four-sided design. The of the home. The FHA said its main concern ward somewhat, the National Association of
secondary
of the n homes in on their lots, and the is situations in which reimbursements are Realtors is still upbeat in its forecasts for the
street's trees and landscaping are other con- made after loan closings by sellers, who then housing market. Other forecasters, however,
tributing factors when making those homes provide charitable donations on behalf of the are not so optimistic.
transactions and often pay service charges. NAR revised down slightly an earlier fore-
look good from all angles.
"In these cases, there is a clear quid pro cast for this year because it said the effects of
With more detailed requirements from
municipalities, many of which now ask for
elevation drawings upfront in the permit-
approval process, home design on a cocktail
napkin is no longer acceptable. Software
programs now make it possible for users
to see what their houses will look like in
3-D before they are built. Because of these HOUSTON
heightened design requirements, as well as
the heightened awareness of home buyers,
four-sided architecture is a requirement in
most of today's home building industry, and
it will create better looking communities
for all of us.
Caroline Hoyt is a cofounder of NlcStain Ready Mixed Concrete Delivered
Neighborhoods, a Colorado-based developer and Houston/ Ft. Bend/ Katy/ Jersey Village
home builder recognized regionally and nationally p_
for environmentally responsible community design Residential & Commercial
and building practices. Hoyt serves as concept and
product advisor and is a member of the board of Please Visit Our Website
directors. Reach her at (303) 494-5900. ■ www.houstonreadymix.com 713-723-8444
GREATER HOUSTON BUILDER/ARCHITECT JULY 2007 17