HomeMy WebLinkAbout12171980 ZBA Minutesi7
REGULAR MEETING
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DECEMBER 17 ,1980
The Zoning Board. of Adjustment of the City of West University Place convened in
regular session at the City Ha11, December 17, 1980, 7:30 p.m., with the following.
members present: Chairman Doughty, presiding; Members Cummings, Fougerat and Mc-
Candless.
The Chairman explained that the first agenda item was a rehearing on the applica-
tion of H. J. Foster, 6505 Mercer, docketed #80-8, to remove a 30" section of non-'
oad bearing interior wall between the second floor study and an adjacent hallway.
The Chairman ascertained from the secretary that notice of meeting had. been posted
in the City Hall on December 12, 1980 and notice to property owners mailed on
December 1, 1980 and an oath given to those desiring to speak on the application
who ha- not previously received same.
Motion by Mr. McCandless, seconded by Mr. Cummings, that the rehearing on appli-
cation docketed #80-8 on
W.96' of Lot 7,
West University
6505 Mercer
be opened.
Voting Aye
Cummings
Doughty
Fougerat
McCandless
Block 34
Place 1st Addition
Voting No: None
J
1
Mr. Foster introduced Joe Brand, the architect who planned their residence at
6505 Mercer.
Mr. Brand outlined the steps in the development of the plan for the house from the
time contract was awarded in July, 1979 to the approval of plans-for construction
stating that the first plan presented for approval was turned down by the Inspection
Department because of a front setback violation being planned for 20 ft. instead of
30 ft. He stated that when this was turned down, over the weekend, a new plan was
drawn and presented, in which the structure was moved back the required 10 ft. and
footage taken from interior and this located a bedroom and bath approximately 6 ft.
into the rear yard area (rear 20 ft.) and a closet from .the bedroom extending com-
pletely to the rear building line over the garage; that the Inspection Department
would not issue a permit because ofiving area over the garage in the rear 20 ft.
and required that a wall be installed separating the bedroom, bath and closet
over the garage from the remainder of the house; that this was included in the plans
Mr.: Foster signed an affidavit to the effect that the bedroom would be used only
for servants' quarters; .that the market conditions causing interest rates to rise
was the reason for the rush and quick action needed so that the Fosters-:could take
advantage of lower interest rates; that this bedroon is needed for guests as there
is only one other bedroom in the residence; that the Fosters have no children nor
plan to have any.
During disucssion with the Fosters and Mr. Bran the following information was
r.
elicited; that the Fosters and architect were aware at the time of construction
that the area could be used only for servants' quarters. and that an affidavit was
signed to that effect; that they never intended to use it for servants' quarters
but were planning to make an application for a variance after construction con-
pleted; that. the air conditioning and burglar alarms systems problems seem to be
soluable; that the Fosters and r1r. Branc felt that the removal of the wall would
not hurt the neighborhodd and retain the spirit of the .ordinance; that. the dimensions
of the lot (95 ft. deep on the Pittsburg side and ,100 ft. deep on Mercer) made it
difficult for the architect to be creative in the planning of the residence; that
information the architect worked with in the planning of the house was derived from
Mr. Foster or other sources; that the architect had not visited with the personnel
of the city nor obtained any information from the city concerning requirements for...
building; that the replatting of the lot to face Pittsburg was considered but on
~, advise from others (not city hall personnel) this could not be done, they returned
to the platting with Mercer St. as the front.
Members reviewed the plan of the second story area and it was pointed out that
the actual encroachment, includingthe closer area was the complete 20 ft, over the
garage; that the storage or hobby room was wired with ane ceiling fixture and one
outlet and used at this time by the Fosters for their hobby of stain glass. Mem-
bers explored various possibilities for a solution to the problem without violation
of the zoning ordinance but no conclusions were reached.
Mrs. Foster asked to be given an oath so that she might speak and it was administered
by the Chairman.
She stated that she could not understand why they felt people would not live in
.there and that could not the wall have been removed with the city having no know-
ledge of it, and that were not servants' people who lived in the delegated area.
The Chairman advised that what she said was probably true that the wall could be
removed without immediate detection and that they agreed with the statement about
servants, but that the ordinance specifically allowed servants' quarters in the
rear yard.
Other discussion revealed that the Fosters had moved here from the Montrose area
to be in a neighborhood which had rules and regulations, but they could not see
that they would be violating the spirit of the ordinance; that it was unlikely
they would be transferred from Houston.
Mrs. Fougerat specifically summed up information by inquiring if it was not true
that both- the Fosters and Mr, Brand were aware of the conditions of the area over
the garage, that the affidavit was signed with the knoialedge that they never in-
tended to use the area for servants' quarters, and they intended from the beginning
to ask for a variance for the use of the area?
She received an affirmative answer.
Motion by Ms. Fougerat, seconded by Mr. McCandless, that public hearing be closed.
Voting Aye: All .Voting No: None
The meeting recessed for five minutes.
Members of the Board discussed the various ramifications of the use of living space
in the rear yard and. the long rangeeffect of allowing any variances, again re-
~o
viewed the plans of the residence, expresse d concern for the Fosters, but felt .they
had acted hastily and created their own problems, and the responsibility of the
architect to ascertain requirements before beginning plans.
Motion by Mr. McCandless, seconded by Mrs. Fougerat, that rehearing on applica-
tion docketed #80-8 from H. J. Foster to remove a 30" section of non-load bear-
ing interior wall between second floor study and an adjacent hallway on
W. 96' of Lot 7, Block 34
West University Place 1st Addition
6505 Mercer
produced no new evidence on which to reverse the previous decision on the applica-
tion on November 19, 1980.
Voting Aye: Cummings Voting No: None
Doughty
Fougerat
McCandless
Item no. 2 on the agenda concerning amending of the Rules of Procedure was tabled
until the next scheduled meeting of the Board.
MInutes of the regular meeting on November 19, 1980 and special meeting on November
26, 1980 were approved as submitted.
With no further business to come before the Board, upon motion duly made, seconded
and carried,. the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
(/ 1 (~ ,
Chairman
ATTEST:
~ ~~
Secretary
I~