The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05201981 ZBA Minutes83 REGULAR MEETING ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 20, 1981 The Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of West University Place convened in regular session at .the City Hall, P<4ay 20, 1.981, 7:30 p.m., with the following members present: Chairman~Billings, presiding; Members Fougerat, Fromen, Loftice and McCandldss. Alternate P~embers Frahm and Kendrick and Building Inspector Perry were also present. T`he Chairman ascertained from the acting secretary that notice of meeting was posted in the City Hall on May 15, 1981 and notice of public hearing published in ~.. The Houston Chronicle on May 1, 1981 and letters to property owners mailed on May 4, 1981 and requested the reading of the Notice of Public Hearing. °~ Mr. Billings introduced himself and gave his address in the city followed by other Board members. Chairman Billings administered an oath to those in the audience desiring to speak on application docketed #81-1 from Gregory Crouch to consider enclosing a front porch extending approximately 5 ft. 3 in, into the front setback on N? of Lot 11, Block 16 West University Place 1st .Addition 6327 Vanderbilt Mr. Crouch stated there were basically two reasons for the request to enclose the porch; first, space utilization, as porches are not used much anymore, and the space could be used year 'round with heat and air conditioning; secondly, the front of the porch is designed with three arches with the entry centered and they felt that by enclosing the entryway and moving the entrance to the side of the porch structure it would have more continuity and be more pleasing to the eye from the street. Mr. Crouch submitted pictures of the house and other houses in the neighborhood who had done something similar to what he proposed to do. He also stated that about one-half of the porch would not be in violation, and that an adjacent house had enclosed a portion of the porch, but in his opion it was not very attractive. During discussion it was ascertained that the Crouchs have removed windows from the bedroom adjoining the porch and put in fixed glass doors and also removed a single doorway from the living area and replaced it with double doors giving more continuity to the entire front area in their opinion. A4rs. Crouch was given an oath at this time. Mrs. Crouch stated that the two smaller windows. in the-bedroom side were fixed but in a manner, if the variance is granted, they could be made operable and open into the bedroom making the traffic flow from the sunroom, bedroom and living room and back to the sunroom and that the front bedroom would probably be used for a den or study. Further discussion concerned fluctuation of setbacks and porches in the block, large area in back to expand and the Crounch stated that if the variance was denied they would install a ceiling fan on the porch and pur porch furniture thereon. 84 The following correspondence was read into the minutes: "Mrs. Opal McKelvey Zoning Board of Adjustment City of West University Place 3800 University Boulevard Houston, Texas 77005 Re: Appeal No. 81-1 dated 4-28-81 Gregory Crouch, 6327 Vanderbilt Dear Ms. McKelvey: Thank you for your notice concerning the above-referenced appeal.. By this letter please convey to the Board our position on Mr. Crouch's request for a variance as follows: We support Mr. Crouch's efforts 100 percent. .The enforcement of the setback requirement on that block in the only two previous cases that we are aware of has resulted in a much less pleasing appearance than could have been achieved. If I am not mistaken, some years ago the Johns (two houses north of Mr. Crouch) sought a setback variance which was denied. The result there was that the otherwise ex- cellent workmanship and beauty of the Johns' remodeling effort was marred by a porch that looks incomplete. The compromise enclosure (still in strict compliance with the setback requirement) on the house immediately to the north of Mr. Crouch is like an unfinished sentence. On our side of the street there are only four houses that have roofed over porches, including the Crouch house. Enforcement of the setback requirement has .detracted esthetically from the appearance of the block. Now with regard to Mr. Crouch's specific plans, we have reviewed them and believe they are of good quality. If a variance is granted, the appearance of the improvement will be substantially enhanced. Finally, lest anyone discout our remarks because we have our house on the mar- ket, we ill make two comments.. First, the house has not sold and from the looks of the marker, it may not sell for quite awhile. Second, our history with this community would not allow us to do or sany something inconsisten with maintaining its beauty. Very truly yours, /s/ Andy A. Horne Sylvia Horne 6331 Vanderbilt" Building Inspector Perry stated that the permit was denied as the propose enclo- sure intruded into the front setback. He stated that he found a survey stake and measurements showed the house is 29 ft, from front property line; 6331 Vanderbilt is 28'10" and 6321 Vanderbilt is 25'3". He also stated that 6321 Vanderbilt es- tablishes the setback for the block. ~' Motion by Mrs. Fougerat, seconded by Mr. McCandless, that public hearing be closed. 85 Voting Aye: Billings Voting No: None Fougerat Fromen Loftice McCandless Members reviewed the application docketed #81-1 from Mr. Gregory Crouch discussing purpose of setback requirements, purpose of allowing porches beyond the front wall, which allowed seeing through a porch structure all the way down the block and aesthetics. Motion by Mr. Loftice, seconded by Mr. McCandless, that application docketed #81-1 ~, from Gregory Crouch, to enclose a front porch which extends approximately 5 ft. 5" into the front setback on ,~ NZ of Lot 11, Block 16 West University Place 1st Addition 6327 Vanderbilt be denied, inasmuch as literal enforcement of the ordinance would not cause un- necessary hardship. Voting Aye: Billings Voting No: None Fougerat Fromen Loftice McCandless Minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment on December 17, 1981 and special meeting on April 22, 1981 were approved as submitted. Members reviewed Rules of Procedure for the Zoning Board of Adjustment and agreed to continue temporarily operating under the current Rules... Discussion will con- tinue at the next meeting of the Board. The secretary was instructed to request information from the City Attorney concerning statutory requirements of pub- lishing Notice of Public Hearings, definition of "public notice" and publication as it regards rehearings. Other suggested amenments included: Article VI. Section 1. No .rehearing of any decision by the Board of Adjustment shall be had exvept on Motion by a member of the Board to reconsider the vote, and acted upon within ten (10) days after the filing of its decision in the Board's office and carried by not less than four (4) concurring votes. (Under- lined portion added. EXISTING: Article VI. Section 3. If a rehearing is granted, the case shall be put on the calendar for rehearing and new notices issued in accordance with the notice pro- visions of these rules. PROPOSED: If a rehearing is granted, the case shall be put on the calendar for a rehearing and new notices sent to ptoperty owners in accordance with provisions of thes rules and notice of meeting posted in the City Hall. Members discussed proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance which will be con- sidered at a Public Hearing on Wednesday, May 27th at the Community Building at 7:30 p.m. 86 With no further business to come before the Board, upon motion duly ade, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned. Chairman ATTEST: ~e Secretary C