06 Minutes City Council Task Force on Code Enforcement Minutes 02-05-08CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM BRIEFING SHEET
Submittal Date: Originating Department: Presented By: Agenda Item No.:
2-22-2008 City Clerk Janice Ellis
Council Date: 6
3-10-2008
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Motion to approve as presented.
POLICY ISSUE(S~:
BACKGROUND:
City Council Task Force on Code Enforcement Minutes from the meeting on February 5, 2008.
~
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
EXHIBITS:
The attached minutes has been approved by the Board.
ACTION: BUDGET INFO:
❑ Financial Report ❑ Minute Order Expense $
❑ Department Report ❑ Resolution Budgeted Amt. $
❑ Presentation ❑ Ordinance yTD Actual $
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Other Acct. Name
Acct. Number
Fisc~. NoTES:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:
~ Administration ~ Ciry Clerk ❑ Communiry Development ❑ EMS/IT ❑ Finance ❑ Fire
❑ Municipal Court ❑ Legal ❑ Library ❑ Police ❑ Eng./Public Works ❑ Utilities
City of Paris Revised 2/04/08
MINUTES
WORK SESSION
CITY COUNCIL TASK FORCE ON CODE ENFORCEMENT
107 E. KAUFMAN STREET
PARIS, TEXAS
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2008
Call meeting to order and roll call.
The City Council Task Force on Code Enforcement was called to order by Chairman
Wilson at 5:03 p.m.
A. The following members were present:
Don Wilson, Chairman
Will Biard
Steve Brown
Jim Lassiter
Charles Richards
John S. House
Pete Kampfer
Bee Garmon
Cheryt Moore
Don B. Taylor
Bruce Frazier
Jerry Rose
John Fuston
B. The following members were absent:
Marilyn Bellevance
Jerome Pipkins
Oscar Johnson
Chris Brown
Zachary Saffle
C. Also present were Lisa Wright, Director of Community Development; Kent
McIlyar, City Attorney; Nicki Brown, Deputy City Clerk; Robert Talley, Code
Enforcement Officer; John Lestock, Assistant City Attorney/Municipal Court
Prosecutor; Vance Woodard, Fire Marshal; and Matt Birch, Police Department.
2. Approval of minutes from previous meetings (January 22, 2008).
Chairman Wilson asked if there were any corrections. A Motion to approve the minutes
was made by Bee Garmon, seconded by Don Taylor. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Discussion of and possible action on recommending the adoption of fencing regulations.
John Fuston questioned the two options on page 3 of 8. Chairman Wilson suggested that
the committee get through the document then revisit any issues that need to be addressed.
Chairman Wilson said that the committee needed to start on page 7 of 8.
A. Construction and maintenance of fences.
Don Taylor asked who would the City send a notice to if a fence falls into despair. Steve
Brown said when he puts up fences, the fence line is on the property line between the two
houses, so would the fence be the property of the person who had the fence built or
would each property owner maintain and be responsible for the fence side on their
property? Lisa Wright said that Code Enforcement would have to use their judgment on
things like this. If the fence along a side property line matches the fence of one house
and not the other, you can presume the fence goes with that house. Where they
legitimately can't tell the difference, they would probably send the letter to both property
owners and let them tell us which one owns it.
A motion was made by John House, seconded by Don Taylor, to change the wording of
subsection (b) as follows: "If the fence is located along a boundary between two
properties, both sides shall be maintained by the owner s of the fence." Motion camed.
Opposing were Will Biard and Bee Garmon.
B. Nonconforming fences.
A motion was made by Steve Brown, seconded by Cheryt Moore, to change subsection
(e) Damage or Destruction, as follows: "Any non-conforming fence, or any non-
conforming element of a fence capable of change or discontinuance separate from other
elements of the fence, damaged, destroyed, or deteriorated by any means to the extent of
thirty-five percent (35%) or more shall be removed or brought into conformity with the
provisions of this article"; subsection (f)(2) Dilapidated Fences or Walls, as follows:
"Each non-conforming fence that is dilapidated or_ deteriorated to the extent that the
replacement of more than thirty-five percent (35%) of the fence is required." Motion
carried unanimously.
C. General Standards for fencing, page 3 of 8
Chairman Wilson asked the Committee if they wanted to give one or two options. Will
Biard said he suggested giving two options because the Council might kick it back if the
only option is no fences. Pete Kampfer said the purpose of the Committee was to make a
recommendation. Everyone was in agreement.
A motion was made by Pete Kampfer, seconded by Jim Lassiter, to change subsection (b)
Fence heights, (1) Front yard fence requirements, as follows:. (a) No fence shall be
permitted in the front yard, except in the Historic Districts, on lots of two acres or more,
and in LI and HI districts"; subsection (b) as follows: adding "decorated metal" as an
approved material; subsection (c) as follows: changing "36" to "42"; and by deleting
subsection (e). Motion carried unanimously.
The Task Force also removed "landscape timbers" from (7)(f) on page 3 because that is a
standard fencing material, and corrected the spelling of pallets.
D. Fencing Ordinance Supplement to Draft #3,
A motion was made by Pete Kampfer, seconded by Bee Garmon, to amend subsection (c)
Screening Materials, (1), as follows: "A screening device shall not be less than eight (8)
feet in height, be constructed of wood, stone masonry, brick, decorated concrete block, or
other permanent material, have a completely solid area with no openings, and be
permanently maintained"; subsection (3) as follows: change "60" to "80," require a
minimum planting height of 6 feet, and provide a minimum height of 8 feet for a
combination of planting and fencing; subsection (d) Standards for Screening, (1), as
follows: add "decorated" to concrete block"; and subsection (d)(3) as follows: provide
that the stacked materials cannot be next to the inside of the fence. Motion carried
unanimously.
4. Discussion of and possible action on recommending the adoption of a comprehensive
parking ordinance.
No action was taken.
5. Request items for future agendas.
Chairman Wilson asked that on the next City Council Task Force on Code Enforcement
agenda that they discuss Parking and Animals.
Chairman Wilson scheduled the next meeting for Tuesday, February 19, 2008, at 5:00
p.m.
6. Adjournment.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:13 p.m.
APPROVED THIS 19t1i DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2008.
Don Wilson, Chairman