Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 2013-03-04 Special PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JOINT WORK SESSION 1. The JWS was called to order at 6:15pm with the following people in attendance: Chairman Mark McLean Commissioner Jim Gibson Commissioner Chris Brown Commissioner Arthur Triplette Mona Miller, Planner Steve Weathered, City Attorney Nick Haby, Planning Mgr/PIO City Council Morad Kabiri, Asst. City Manager Absent: Nye, O’Farrell, Tibbitts 2. Discussions with City Council regarding: A. Proposed amendments to Chapter 14 of the Code of Ordinances, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VII. – Substandard Buildings and Structures Kabiri explained that the International Property Maintenance Code was repealed by Council and Council asked P&Z to evaluate the IPMC and the Substandard Structures portion of Chapter 14 in the Friendswood Code of Ordinances and determine whether or not a hybrid form of the IPMC is necessary and to research current processes regarding substandard structures. P&Z created a subcommittee consisting of three members – Jim Nye, Chris Brown and Arthur Triplette. The subcommittee worked with city staff and the city attorney to craft the proposed ordinance. The recommendation from the Commission is based on changes in state law and current case law. Kabiri explained that the proposal is not a property maintenance code, but that it is an ordinance that can be used to address buildings in danger of falling down or that are determined to be a nuisance. He explained that the proposed ordinance designates ZBOA as the Building and Standards Commission as required by state law whereas the current ordinance designates City Council to hear cases regarding substandard structures. MINUTES OF A SPECIAL & REGULAR MEETING HELD MONDAY, MARCH 4, 2013 AT 6 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 910 S. FRIENDSWOOD DRIVE FRIENDSWOOD, TEXAS 2 March 4, 2013 P&Z Meeting Mclean stated that two of the subcommittee members are here, but that the proposed ordinance revision was written by legal counsel and staff to ensure that the proposed ordinance is consistent with state law. He explained that this proposal supplants the current section of the ordinance that addresses substandard structures. Weathered stated that the proposed ordinance is intended to provide efficiency and flexibility for staff. He explained that under the current ordinance if a hurricane or other catastrophe were to strike, City Council would be responsible for the public hearings regarding substandard structures and that the number of potential hearings that may be required is a concern as well as the time required to conduct the hearings; there is also the decision as to whether or not the structure could be repaired or if it must be demolished. Weathered explained that this proposal also retains flexibility for building codes that Council might adopt in the future. He stated that in accordance with Chapter 54 of the Local Government Code, the proposed ordinance designates the Zoning Board of Adjustments to also serve as the Building and Standards Commission and also allows the municipality to assess civil fines for non-compliance with an order issued by the Building and Standards Commission, if necessary. McGinnis asked how many cases ZBOA has now and if they can they handle the work load. Kabiri stated that ZBOA had 2-3 cases last year and that no substandard structures hearings have been held in the past few years. Rockey confirmed with Kabiri that the same process would still take place as far as the code official working with a property owner to resolve issues and only referred to the BSC/ZBOA for a substandard structures hearing if they cannot resolve the issue. Hill asked if the proposed ordinance gives the code official the ability to go into someone’s house. Weathered explained that there is a reference to Section 18.05 of the Criminal Code to allow a code official to obtain a search warrant based on probable cause, if it is necessary to go inside a structure. Hill stated that he does not care for language in the proposed ordinance that gives the city permission to tear down someone’s house. He stated that there is currently a property owner who is working with the code official to remedy an unsafe building. He also stated that in the case of a fire, it takes 6 months to get insurance money. He stated that he is happy with the way things are being handled currently and that this is not a rampant problem in Friendswood and he urged Council to be cautious of making substantial changes. Holland verified with the building official that he is not comfortable going inside a person’s home. Holland suggested that under Section 14-322, items 1-15 Frank request engineer’s report to confirm whether or not for structurally sound Morad if direction of City Council they could give direction to only do what you can do from outside Rockey verified that even if items 1-15 were left as is, the code official would still need owner’s permission or court order to go inside the structure. 3 March 4, 2013 P&Z Meeting Enochs verified that the complaint driven process would not change. City staff is not going to proactively seek out buildings that are substandard. Kabiri explained that it is current policy that code enforcement is done on a complaint- driven basis. Weathered explained that this ordinance would not be used very often, but when it is, it would most likely be a structure damaged from fire or a large storm, which in determining whether or not the structure is more than 50% destroyed, an owner may invite an inspector or code official inside the building. Scott verified that the ability to go inside a structure is not being prohibited, so in the case explained by Weathered, a code official could enter a building if invited by the owner. Rockey asked who makes decision to obtain a court order to go inside a structure. Kabiri stated that the code official would make the request but obtain approval from upper management. Rockey suggested adding to the proposed ordinance a statement that it is complaint driven, that the code official will not go inside, and add an explicit process to follow to obtain a court order. Holland stated that he is comfortable with current staff. McGinnis asked legal counsel if a property owner has the right to provide input when a court order is being obtained or if it is done without them knowing. Polanco stated that a court order is typically obtained without any advanced notice to the property owner. Weathered explained that this is the quasi-judicial process and that there is nothing that prohibits a citation being written and the owner having to go to municipal court for a trial. Manigold stated that typically code enforcement is only on violations that can be seen in a direct path from the street. He explained that when a complaint is received, staff makes every effort to give proper notification to the property owner either by talking to the person or leaving a red tag for them to contact the city and informing them of the complaint and giving them time to remedy the situation. Holland stated that he is in agreement with items 2, 7, 8 and 13. He stated that the code reference in item 3 is okay, but he is concerned with the word “within” as he does not want staff going inside of a structure. Hill stated that he is concerned that the ordinance allows the Fire Marshal to go inside a structure. He stated that if building officials and fire marshals are given authority to go inside, they should be peace officers. Scott stated that if signs of substandard structures are visible from street and there is reason to obtain a warrant to enter the premises, there is a procedure in place to obtain a warrant. Scott stated that he is concerned with neighbors complaining against neighbors and that 4 March 4, 2013 P&Z Meeting city staff does not need to be in the business of working out issues that are not actual violations. McLean stated that the only enforceable action by the city is to identify violations of public health, safety and welfare issues. Holland stated that staff people change and he would like to keep the ordinance simple. McLean stated that this proposal will accomplish property owner protection by bringing the city ordinance in compliance with current state law. He explained that the Supreme Court Case of Dallas vs. Stewart case ruled in favor of the property owner. 3. The JWS adjourned at 6:43pm. REGULAR MEETING (7:00 pm, 2nd floor conference room) 1. The regular meeting was called to order at 7pm with the following people in attendance: Chairman Mark McLean Commissioner Jim Gibson Commissioner Arthur Triplette Commissioner Chris Brown Mona Miller, Planner Absent: O’Farrell, Tibbitts (Nye entered late) 2. Communication from the public/committee liaisons (To comply with provisions of the Open Meetings Act, the Commission may not deliberate on subjects discussed under this agenda item. However, the Commission may direct such subjects be placed on a later regular Commission agenda for discussion and/or possible action.) Ruth Piper, stated that she has spoken previously in regards to the IPMC. She stated that although she is not familiar with the proposed changes to Chapter 14 that were presented tonight, she thinks there is a fine line between a real nuisance and a mad neighbor submitting complaints. She is concerned with property rights and individual rights and that she is not comfortable with city staff going inside buildings. She would like the regulations to be minimal. Regarding the issue of who is in charge here now and the fact that that will change in the future, she stated that when making rules, policies should be considered, not personalities. 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approval of minutes for the: 1) February 4, 2013 Motion to approve: Brown Second: Triplette Vote: 4 to 0 (unanimous) Motion Carried 4. Consideration and possible action regarding a request for a one time six month extension for the commercial site plan for King’s Kids Daycare at 209 S. Friendswood Drive 5 March 4, 2013 P&Z Meeting By unanimous consent, this item was postponed until later in the meeting. 5. Consideration and possible action regarding a commercial site plan for Masa Sushi Restaurant at 102 Hunters Lane Motion to approve with staff comments: Gibson Second: Brown Vote: 4 to 0 (unanimous) Motion Carried Miller explained staff comments on compliance memo. Staff comments: 1) The owner is requesting to pay into the sidewalk fund for the portion of sidewalk that is required along FM518. The 4-foot sidewalks along Hunters Creek are shown on the site plan and will be installed. 2) Pending approval of driveway on FM 518. 3) Pending GCCDD approval. McLean verified that the property is located in the COD and that the façade complies with the requirements. Miller confirmed that the roof is a metal seam roof and the exterior façade is exterior grade, sealed wood planks. McLean explained that the current façade changes to the Zoning Ordinance that are being discussed with Council would not allow this material to be used. 6. Consideration and possible action regarding proposed amendments to Chapter 14 of the Code of Ordinances, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VII. – Substandard Buildings and Structures Brown stated that understood in the meeting downstairs that Councilman Rockey wanted more detail, and that obtaining a court order should require city manager approval. Intent was to leave the ordinance as flexible as possible, and adding the step for obtaining city manager approval to get a court order adds another step, but that these instances do not happen very often so probably not a big deal. He stated that he understands the concern about staff going inside structures, but that he is concerned with taking everything allowing inside enforcement out of the ordinance. He stated that unsafe living conditions are inside the structure and that we need to find the balance to still allow for safety of residents and not violate property rights. Brown stated that he would like some input from legal counsel regarding a scenario brought up by a councilmember about an angry neighbor launching a complaint against another neighbor. Weathered stated that an angry neighbor launching a complaint would probably not sign an affidavit which is required to obtain the court order. Nye entered the meeting at 7:12pm. McLean stated that due to the limited time that Council can spend studying a detailed ordinance such as this, he feels that maybe Council does not comprehend the ordinance as a whole. He suggested that providing them hypothetical scenarios with explanations. 6 March 4, 2013 P&Z Meeting McLean stated that he would like to turn this back over to subcommittee to tweak the ordinance as they suggested and give some hypothetical examples and explain how the process would work including duties of the building official and city manager. Gibson asked if this is already in ordinance, what is actually being changed. Weathered stated that the proposed ordinance is adding a quasi-judicial board to the process, adding the ability to asses fines for non-compliance with the ordinance and to allow staff flexibility to determine when to bring a case before the board as opposed to the way it is written now. Gibson asked if there is any advantage of ignoring emotional issues and focusing on those few issues and let them know that this is already in the ordinance. Weathered stated that he was afraid that if Council was unfamiliar with this ordinance that they may have repealed it and it is the only safety net that is in place for now, even though it is outdated. He also stated that there is a misconception about what is in the existing code. He explained that state law does not require administrative warrants to search property, so adding that option in our local ordinance is an added protection. There was an overall consensus that Council does not understand that this ordinance is adding more protection than what state law requires and that the Commission needs to provide examples and explanation to Council. Weathered restated that what is in the ordinance now is outdated and requires Council approval rather than a quasi-judicial body to make a determination to demolish a building and the ability to assess civil fines. Nye asked Manigold if he has encountered a situation where he could not tell it was substandard from outside. Manigold stated that only on one occasion has that happened. Weathered explained that one of the first cases he worked was a teacher reporting rat bites on children. As a result, state agencies got involved and investigated the home that the children lived in and they discovered holes inside the building that could not be seen from the outside where the rats were getting inside the house at night. Triplette stated that we should consider both the city’s responsibility and the property owner’s responsibility and not just one point of view. Brown stated that he is concerned with striking all of the items that the mayor requested to be stricken simply because electrical deficiencies could exist on the outside of a structure but it still needs to be in the ordinance. He stated that he understands nobody wants to go inside, but if it is necessary we may need some provisions in the ordinance. He stated that he is also concerned about future staff changes and how they will enforce this ordinance. McLean stated that providing hypotheticals and an explanation of how many people have to look at a structure and how long the process actually takes may help explain how the ordinance will work. 7 March 4, 2013 P&Z Meeting Brown recused himself from the meeting at 7:27pm. 4. Consideration and possible action regarding a request for a one time six month extension for the commercial site plan for King’s Kids Daycare at 209 S. Friendswood Drive Motion to approve: Gibson Second: McLean Vote: 4 to 0 (unanimous) Motion Carried Brown re-entered the meeting at 7:30pm. 7. Consideration and possible action regarding future Planning and Zoning Commission meeting dates Miller explained that the next regular meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 21 but several staff members and commissioners will be at the UT Land Conference. She explained that other optional dates to hold a meeting are March 18 or March 25. The Commission unanimously agreed to hold a special meeting on March 25th, if there are items that need action. Next regular meeting after that is scheduled for April 4, but we also have Joint Work Session and Joint Public Hearings with Council on April 1. The Commission unanimously agreed to move the April 4 meeting to April 1. 8. Communications from the Commission None 9. Reports A. Council Liaison - None B. Staff - None 10. The regular meeting adjourned at 7:35pm. These minutes respectfully submitted by: Aubrey Harbin Aubrey Harbin Development Specialist/P&Z Secretary