Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garland committee scopes ordinance change to limit visible building materials in residential areas
Summary
The Development Services Committee on April 7 scoped changes to Section 32.50 of the Code of Ordinances to close a 6-inch exception that allows some building materials to be stored visibly on residential properties; staff will draft language and return with options.
The Development Services Committee on April 7 scoped potential amendments to Section 32.50 of the Garland Code of Ordinances to reduce visible outdoor storage of building materials on residential properties and asked staff to draft ordinance language with the city attorney.
The chair framed the item as scoping and said the committee should treat residential visibility the same as commercial properties. “I would like to eliminate building materials from that definition,” the chair said. Staff read the posted definition for improper storage aloud: “Improper storage shall mean the outdoor storage for a period greater than 24 hours in a residential district ... any cut wood, firewood, lumber, or other building material except masonry, which is not stored a minimum of 6 inches above the ground.” That 6-inch exception, staff said, can leave enforcement authority limited if materials remain visible to neighbors while technically meeting the ordinance.
Committee members and staff discussed possible remedies. Staff summarized options including imposing a time limit for materials even when a permit is active, requiring evidence of an active permit for extended storage, or defining what counts as an “active project.” A staff member noted that the technical compliance window for improper storage differs from the 24-hour language in the definition; for enforcement the department uses a nine-day compliance period in practice. Staff also described permit and inspection practice, saying permits generally remain valid while a project is active and inspections can extend timelines (inspection continuations of roughly 180 days were cited during the discussion).
The committee emphasized the need to preserve reasonable short-term uses—for example, a roofer delivering shingles to use the next day—while preventing long-term storage by home-based contractors who keep supplies at a residence. Members raised concerns about preserving yard art and other decorative items and asked that inspectors retain reasonable discretion to distinguish art from refuse.
No formal ordinance change or vote was taken. Staff told the committee they will draft proposed language, work with the city attorney on definitions (including what constitutes an active project), and return to the committee with recommendations.
