Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Codes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission considers exempting utility work from the city's 50% reconstruction threshold
Summary
Commissioners reviewed proposed amendments to Chapter 4 and Appendix A (Sections 9.06-9.08) to treat certain utility upgrades and small wall openings as remodel work rather than reconstruction that triggers the 50% threshold; no vote was taken and staff will prepare revised language and a required public hearing.
The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed draft changes on Nov. 26 to the city's reconstruction definition intended to exempt certain utility work from the 50% improvement threshold.
Public Works Director Elvin Hernandez presented revisions to Chapter 4 (Sec. 4-3-Definitions) and to Appendix A (Sections 9.06-9.08) recommending that re-piping, re-wiring and duct work be classified as remodel work rather than reconstruction that would count toward the 50% threshold. The suggestion responds to prior appeals to the Zoning Board of Adjustments and aims to allow homeowners to upgrade utilities without automatically triggering reconstruction requirements.
Commissioner Billy Murphy said he supported allowing property owners to "modernize" older homes by upgrading utilities and by reclassifying wallboard and ceiling changes as cosmetic, similar to painting or floor replacement. Vice-Chair John Gillette asked whether removing sheetrock would require insulation to be replaced to meet current R-value standards; Hernandez said insulation would still need to comply with code, and that the proposed definition changes may not fully address means and methods such as framing details.
Hernandez told the Commission the ZBOA had recommended creating an exception for small wall openings so that installing piping or duct work would not require treating an entire room as reconstructed. Administrator Gerardo Barrera confirmed that changes to Chapter 4 do not require a public hearing, but revisions to Appendix A would, so staff intends to schedule a public hearing as part of the process.
No action was taken. Staff will refine the redline language, clarify technical scope (insulation, framing), and bring the amendments back for Commission review and any required public hearing.
