Planning Commission Meeting (Open in Google Chrome)

11/9/17 N 00000000000010/16/17 – 8:40 A.12/11/17m.000000000000000000000000000 Agenda Gallatin Architectural Advisory Committee to the Municipal-Regional Planning Commission Thursday, July 30, 2020 5:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting to be held remotely: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81224211831 or (470) 250 9358 Webinar ID: 812 2421 1831 Pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Orders #16, #34 and #51 regarding public meetings and social distancing and the need to limit the community spread of Covid-19, members of the Planning Commission may participate by electronic means and the meeting will be live streamed to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the members and citizens of Gallatin. To access this meeting online: www.gallatintn.gov, Boards & Commissions; Architectural Advisory Committee to the Municipal-Regional Planning Commission; Agenda  Call to Order  Roll Call and Introduction of Members and Staff  Approval of Minutes from the July 9, 2020 Meeting AGENDA 1. RECAP FROM THE JULY 9, 2020 MEETING 2. PREFEERED OPTION BY COMMITTEE FOR GALLATIN ZONING ORDINANCE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS (ART. 13, SEC 13.08) 3. COMMENTS AND CONCERNS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 4. SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING DATE 5. ADJOURN Page 1 of 1  MINUTES OF THE GALLATIN ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE MUICIPAL-REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION (In compliance with Governor Lee’s Executive Order #16, 34 and #51, this meeting was held remotely) July 9, 2020 Members Staff Matt Harris William McCord, Director of Planning Roger Matchett Josh King, Assistant Director of Planning Robert Montgomery Leticia Alexander, Staff Attorney Marianne Mudrak, Planning Assistant Absent Others Present None None Chair Harris called the meeting to order and read the following statement: Pursuant to the Governor’s executive order and the need to limit the community spread of Covid-19, members of the Architectural Advisory Committee will participate by electronic means and the meeting will be live streamed to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the members and citizens of Gallatin. Mr. Matchett motioned to hold the meeting remotely in accordance with the Governors Executive Order #16, 34 and #51. Mr. Harris seconded the motion and the motion passed by roll call vote of 2 ayes; 0 nays. Ms. Mudrak called roll. Mr. Matchett motioned to approve the minutes of the June 11, 2020 Architectural Advisory Committee meeting. Mr. Harris seconded the motion and the motion passed by roll call vote of 2 ayes; 0 nays. Item 1: Architectural Standard Options Mr. Harris said he is concerned that the Planning Commission may become the Architectural Review Board for the City. He asked Mr. McCord to review the options. Mr. William McCord, Director of Planning, said the Planning Commission asked for simple changes to the Architectural provisions in the zoning ordinance. Any proposed new language is indicated in red and underlined, Language removed is shown with a strike through pattern in red. He presented the three options. Option 1: Mr. McCord said this option clarifies that the materials used on buildings are for other than one family homes and would apply to accessory structures. Subsection A refers to materials excepted in certain zoning districts. This is a minor clarification to apply to accessory structures. Various zoning districts Architectural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes July 9, 2020 were excepted from having to meeting the rigid requirements of a Master Planned community. Subsection B is compatibility with adjacent structures. The language removed is “in most cases” to become “in all cases”. The phrase “in most cases” implied that there are some cases that are excepted from these standards. The excepted cases was interpreted as those in Subsection A. The phrase “other than those in Section 13.08,” above the architectural compatibility standards do not apply. An exception might be a church or fire hall, which is allowed in residential areas. (Mr. Montgomery joined the meeting.) Mr. McCord continued explaining the rest of the language changes in Option 1. He said an applicant may request approval of an alternative architecture if it is compatible as determined by the Planning Commission. Paragraph E, Subsection 2 provides for residential in-fill standards. Option 1 is a simple change. Mr. Harris said he likes that Option 1 is simple and asked what burden this places on the Planning Department. Mr. McCord said other than those described in Section A above this clarifies the section. The Municipal Board of Zoning Appeals decision focusing on compatibility wipes out paragraph A. This does not put limits on the size of the structure except that accessory structures may not be built larger than the primary structure or on a vacant lot. Option 2: Staff looked at accessory structures as well, and if restrictions on the size are needed regardless of the maximum lot coverage. This requires more work for Staff. A table, identifying accessory structures and restrictions and limiting the size according to zone district, would be inserted in the code. This option would apply compatibility standards to adjacent lots. If a lot has a brick home on either side, that new home and accessory structure must be brick. If a home has a brick home on one side and a wood home on the other, it becomes difficult to determine which standard to follow). All materials would have to match the neighborhood. Mr. Matchett asked if Option 2 would generate a lot of non-conforming uses. Mr. McCord said it would and many non-conforming conditions were created with the Board of Zoning Appeals decision. Mr. Harris said this option creates a lot of unnecessary work. Option 3: Mr. McCord said Option 3 says that “in most cases accessory buildings should be reviewed in isolation but rather in context to other buildings”. This restores Subsection A and reduces the impact of the compatibility provision that would apply to other zone districts and is the most liberal in all zones. Mr. Josh King, Assistant Director of Planning, said the added language takes it from required to a recommendation and removes the enforcement ability of the compatibility standards. 2 Architectural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes July 9, 2020 Mr. McCord said this is a simple way without making too many changes to the practice that has been in place for 20 years. Item 2: Comments and Concerns of Committee Members Mr. Harris said he prefers Option 1. Those who do want restrictions live in neighborhoods that have covenants. Clarifying the language is the best choice and what is in the zoning ordinance has worked for many years. Mr. Matchett agreed on Option 1. He said Option 2 would be very difficult to interpret. Mr. Montgomery said Option 2 is too restrictive and Option 3 removes all restrictions. He agreed with Option 1. Mr. Harris said he does not want a backlog created in the permit process. Mr. McCord said with Option 1 accessory structures will not have to comply with other buildings; however, other buildings, such as a church, would have to comply with compatibility standards. Mr. Harris said this type of project (i.e. a church) should come before the Planning Commission. Mr. McCord reminded the Committee that the recommendation is not consistent with the Municipal Board of Zoning Appeals interpretation. The Committee’s recommendation will go to the Planning Commission. Item 5: Schedule Next Meeting Date The Committee agreed to consider the action and come back to the scheduled July 30, 2020 meeting for a final decision and recommendation. Mr. McCord said other provisions of the code were provided in the meeting packet for the Committee to review. Mr. Matchett said neighborhoods may agree to form a district with guidelines such as the Historic Districts. Mr. King said there are infill development design standards in the zoning ordinance and a neighborhood can ask the Planning Commission to apply the standards to their neighborhood. Mr. McCord said this would be considered an overlay zone which provides higher standards similar to Historic Districts. The City has never been approached to establish neighborhood design standards and guidelines outside of the Historic Districts. 3 Architectural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes July 9, 2020 Item 6: Adjourn There being no further business to discuss, Chair Harris adjourned the meeting. Respectfully submitted: _____________________________ Marianne Mudrak Approve: _____________________________ Matt Harris, Chair 4 Article 13.00 Option #1 13.08 Architectural Character and Compatibility Standards 13.08.010 Basic Design Criteria A. Materials – To ensure a consistent and high quality design standards throughout the City in all districts, with the exception of A, R-40, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, IR and IG districts, any new or substantially expanded buildings shall be constructed with stone and/or brick materials as the predominant (minimum 70%) on exterior facades. Concrete block, split face block, other related concrete-masonry block materials, and/or manufactured/pre-cast panels are not considered stone or brick materials, but may be approved as an alternative material under Section 13.08.010.D. In the A, R-40, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8 districts, any use and building, other than one-family (single family) detached residential units and associated accessory structures, shall use brick and/or stone materials as the predominant (minimum 70%) exterior facade materials. One- family detached dwelling units shall be exempt from this requirement unless otherwise specified in Section 13.08.010.E. In the IR and IG districts all buildings shall be constructed with at least 50% brick or stone material on facades of the building used for offices and fronting on a public or private roadway. Buildings, or portions of buildings, not fronting on public or private roadways may be constructed with other materials including but not limited to concrete block, split face block, other related concrete-masonry block materials, and/or manufactured/pre-cast panels. Non-industrial uses and activities in the IR and IG districts shall use brick and/or stone materials as the predominant (minimum 70%) exterior facade materials. Building additions representing less than a 50% increase in the size of the primary existing structure, in other than the A, R-40, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8 and all commercial districts, may be constructed with materials compatible with the existing building to match the existing façade/building materials and color. However, any building addition may be constructed of brick or stone regardless of the construction materials used on an existing primary structure. B. Compatibility with Adjacent Buildings - In most all cases, other than those described in Section 13.08.010 A. above, buildings are not viewed in isolation, but rather in the context of other buildings. To this end, the following criteria are required for all non-residential buildings in residential districts: 1. Building forms shall be tailored to fit within the existing topography and site features as much as possible. 2. While architectural styles may vary, buildings of a proposed development shall be compatible with surrounding buildings (within the site and with adjacent properties) with regard to massing, scale, proportion of openings, roof types, types of glazed openings, and degree of detail. 3. The use of materials and colors compatible with buildings adjacent to a site is required. 1 Draft Article 13.00, Section 13.08.010 –Draft 2-24-2020 However, the applicant may request approval of structures and modifications to structures not strictly in-compliance with the compatibility provisions as an alternative plan as described in Section 13.08.010 D. C. Adapting Prototypical Designs to Particular Sites: National standard designs shall be adapted to reflect the specific site context within the City by careful siting, use of compatible materials, and landscaping of the site so that it blends with its surroundings. D. Alternative Plan Approval: Upon the request of any owner of property to which this Section applies, the Planning Commission may approve an alternative plan which is not in strict compliance with the requirements of this Section, if the Commission finds that such alternative plan meets the purpose and intent of the requirements of this section and the alternative architectural plan and materials are clearly superior to a plan that would be in strict compliance with this Section. In making the determination, the Commission may consider the materials, design, color, and other natural or man-made elements which could impact a proposal’s conformance to these standards. E. Residential Infill Development Design Standards: To ensure the conservation and protection of established housing and residential neighborhoods in the City of Gallatin, the Planning Commission may establish architectural character and compatibility standards as a prerequisite of approval of any sketch, preliminary, or final plat for residential developments containing one-family detached dwelling units that are determined by the Planning Commission to be classified as an infill development. For the purposes of this section, an infill development shall be defined as follows: 1. Any proposed residential development involving the re-subdivision of an existing lot or lots of record, which are also a lot or lots in a subdivision recorded in the office of the County Register of Deeds, into a major subdivision containing five (5) or more lots as defined by the Gallatin Municipal-Regional Planning Commission. 2. Any proposed residential development that is located adjacent to, or across a local or collector street from, existing residential neighborhoods. For the purposes of this section, a residential neighborhood shall be deemed “existing” if it has been platted and recorded for a period of ten years or more and is more than sixty (60) percent built out. Architectural character and compatibility standards established by the Planning Commission may more restrictive than district and/or supplementary regulations and may include, standards regulating building materials, size, scale, proportion of openings, roof types, and degree of architectural detail to which new buildings or structures shall be constructed in order to ensure that the new construction will be compatible with the established character of existing residential neighborhoods. In addition, the Planning Commission may apply building size and architectural restrictions as described in Section 12.03 and Tennessee Coed Annotated, Title 13, Chapter 5, Sections 501-504. The establishment of architectural character and compatibility standards shall be based on a determination by the Planning Commission that a proposed development is classified as an infill development and it has been determined that establishment of such standards is necessary to promote and protect the health, safety, morals, general welfare and character of existing residential neighborhoods in the City of Gallatin. The decision of the Planning Commission to establish architectural character and compatibility standards may be appealed to the City Council upon the request of any owner of property to which this Section applies. 2 Draft Article 13.00, Section 13.08.010 –Draft 2-24-2020 F. Screening - To ensure that roof mounted equipment is not visible from any public right-of- way the following criteria is required: 1. Roofs shall not be visually cluttered. All roof level electrical transformers, heat and air conditioning equipment and similar facilities shall be screened from public view, along all building elevations, with materials compatible with and well integrated into the overall design. 2. If no roof top equipment exists on a flat roof, a parapet may still be required to be installed on all elevations of the building. 3 Draft Article 13.00, Section 13.08.010 –Draft 2-24-2020  ORDINANCE NO. O2009-xx AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALLATIN, SUMNER COUNTY, TENNESSEE, AMENDING ARTICLE 13, SECTION 13.08, GALLATIN ZONING ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the Gallatin Municipal-Regional Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 15.07.040 of the Gallatin Zoning Ordinance has reviewed and recommended approval in GMRPC Resolution No. 2020-XX ; and WHEREAS, notice and public hearing before the Gallatin City Council has or will occur before final passage pursuant to Section 15.07.060 of the Gallatin Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF GALLATIN, TENNESSEE as follows: 1. The Gallatin City Council hereby concurs with the recommendations of the Gallatin Municipal-Regional Planning Commission and hereby approves amending Article 13, Section 13.08, Gallatin Zoning Ordinance as described in Exhibit ‘A’; and 2. Based upon the recommendation of approval by the Gallatin Municipal-Regional Planning Commission and after public notice and public hearing in compliance with Section 15.07.060 of the Gallatin Zoning Ordinance, the architectural design requirements are hereby amended and established as described in Exhibit ‘A’; and 3. The Gallatin City Council does hereby approve, authorize and direct the revision of the Gallatin Zoning Ordinance in accordance with Section 15.07.080 of the Gallatin Zoning Ordinance of the City of Gallatin, Tennessee, shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, be amended to reflect the amended text; and 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict; and 5. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provision or applications of this ordinance which can be given without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are declared severable. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF GALLATIN, TENNESSEE, that this Ordinance shall take effect upon final passage, the public welfare requiring such.  PASSED FIRST READING: PASSED SECOND READING: ___________________________________ MAYOR PAIGE BROWN ATTEST: ________________________________ CONNIE KITTRELL CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ SUSAN HIGH-MCAULEY CITY ATTORNEY I: Activities and Projects\Zoning Code Amendments\Architectural Standards\Draft Ordinance O2009-xx –Article 13, Section 13.08  Exhibit ‘A’ 13.08 Architectural Character and Compatibility Standards 13.08.010 Basic Design Criteria A. Materials – To ensure a consistent and high quality design standards throughout the City in all districts, with the exception of A, R-40, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, IR and IG districts, any new or substantially expanded buildings shall be constructed with stone and/or brick materials as the predominant (minimum 70%) on exterior facades. Concrete block, split face block, other related concrete-masonry block materials, and/or manufactured/pre-cast panels are not considered stone or brick materials, but may be approved as an alternative material under Section 13.08.010.D. In the A, R-40, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8 districts, any use and building, other than one-family (single family) detached residential units and associated accessory structures, shall use brick and/or stone materials as the predominant (minimum 70%) exterior facade materials. One- family detached dwelling units shall be exempt from this requirement unless otherwise specified in Section 13.08.010.E. In the IR and IG districts all buildings shall be constructed with at least 50% brick or stone material on facades of the building used for offices and fronting on a public or private roadway. Buildings, or portions of buildings, not fronting on public or private roadways may be constructed with other materials including but not limited to concrete block, split face block, other related concrete-masonry block materials, and/or manufactured/pre-cast panels. Non-industrial uses and activities in the IR and IG districts shall use brick and/or stone materials as the predominant (minimum 70%) exterior facade materials. Building additions representing less than a 50% increase in the size of the primary existing structure, in other than the A, R-40, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8 and all commercial districts, may be constructed with materials compatible with the existing building to match the existing façade/building materials and color. However, any building addition may be constructed of brick or stone regardless of the construction materials used on an existing primary structure. B. Compatibility with Adjacent Buildings - In most all cases, other than those described in Section 13.08.010 A. above, buildings are not viewed in isolation, but rather in the context of other buildings. To this end, the following criteria are required for all non-residential buildings in residential districts: 1. Building forms shall be tailored to fit within the existing topography and site features as much as possible. 2. While architectural styles may vary, buildings of a proposed development shall be compatible with surrounding buildings (within the site and with adjacent properties) with  regard to massing, scale, proportion of openings, roof types, types of glazed openings, and degree of detail. 3. The use of materials and colors compatible with buildings adjacent to a site is required. However, the applicant may request approval of structures and modifications to structures not strictly in-compliance with the compatibility provisions as an alternative plan as described in Section 13.08.010 D. C. Adapting Prototypical Designs to Particular Sites: National standard designs shall be adapted to reflect the specific site context within the City by careful siting, use of compatible materials, and landscaping of the site so that it blends with its surroundings. D. Alternative Plan Approval: Upon the request of any owner of property to which this Section applies, the Planning Commission may approve an alternative plan which is not in strict compliance with the requirements of this Section, if the Commission finds that such alternative plan meets the purpose and intent of the requirements of this section and the alternative architectural plan and materials are clearly superior to a plan that would be in strict compliance with this Section. In making the determination, the Commission may consider the materials, design, color, and other natural or man-made elements which could impact a proposal’s conformance to these standards. E. Residential Infill Development Design Standards: To ensure the conservation and protection of established housing and residential neighborhoods in the City of Gallatin, the Planning Commission may establish architectural character and compatibility standards as a prerequisite of approval of any sketch, preliminary, or final plat for residential developments containing one-family detached dwelling units that are determined by the Planning Commission to be classified as an infill development. For the purposes of this section, an infill development shall be defined as follows: 1. Any proposed residential development involving the re-subdivision of an existing lot or lots of record, which are also a lot or lots in a subdivision recorded in the office of the County Register of Deeds, into a major subdivision containing five (5) or more lots as defined by the Gallatin Municipal-Regional Planning Commission. 2. Any proposed residential development that is located adjacent to, or across a local or collector street from, existing residential neighborhoods. For the purposes of this section, a residential neighborhood shall be deemed “existing” if it has been platted and recorded for a period of ten years or more and is more than sixty (60) percent built out. Architectural character and compatibility standards established by the Planning Commission may more restrictive than district and/or supplementary regulations and may include, standards regulating building materials, size, scale, proportion of openings, roof types, and degree of architectural detail to which new buildings or structures shall be constructed in order to ensure that the new construction will be compatible with the established character of existing residential neighborhoods. In addition, the Planning Commission may apply building size and architectural restrictions as described in Section 12.03 and Tennessee Coed Annotated, Title 13, Chapter 5, Sections 501-504.  The establishment of architectural character and compatibility standards shall be based on a determination by the Planning Commission that a proposed development is classified as an infill development and it has been determined that establishment of such standards is necessary to promote and protect the health, safety, morals, general welfare and character of existing residential neighborhoods in the City of Gallatin. The decision of the Planning Commission to establish architectural character and compatibility standards may be appealed to the City Council upon the request of any owner of property to which this Section applies. F. Screening - To ensure that roof mounted equipment is not visible from any public right-of- way the following criteria is required: 1. Roofs shall not be visually cluttered. All roof level electrical transformers, heat and air conditioning equipment and similar facilities shall be screened from public view, along all building elevations, with materials compatible with and well integrated into the overall design. 2. If no roof top equipment exists on a flat roof, a parapet may still be required to be installed on all elevations of the building.