Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07151981 ZBA MinutesREGULAR. P~fEETING ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 15, 1981 The Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of West University Place convened in regular session at the City Hall, July 15, 1981, 7:30 p.m., with the following members present: Vice-Chairman Fougerat, presiding; Member Loftice and Alternate members Frahm and Kendrick. Motion by Mr. Loftice,'seconded by Mr. Kendrick that public hearing to consider REHEARING application docketed #81-2 from Andrew Violat to enclose a porch, or entry, extending approximately three (3') feet into the front setback on `~' E.35ft. of Lot 22 ~ b'V. 25 ft. of Lot 23 Block 1 Rice Court Addition 3110 Lafayette be opened. Voting Aye: Fougerat Voting No: None Frahm Kendrick Loftice Vice-Chairman Fougerat introduced hereself and gave her address in the city fol- lowed by other members, ascertained that notice of meeting had been posted in the City Hall on July 10, 1981, and administered an oath. to those in attendance desiring to speak. Mr. Viola stated they had asked for the rehearing in order to present additional evidence to the Board that in keeping with that he had brought his architect, Mike Smith, who he though was more capable of discussing it. 9,! Mr. Smith presented plans of the complete remodeling of the house and pointed out the entryway in question is at this time enclosed on two sides and partially enclosed on the front side with an arched opening;.that this entry has been aban- doned and the sidewalk and railing approaching it removed; that the entry has been moved to the other side of the building. He state it was their intent to partiall- brick, up to sill height, approximately 22 ft. and install fixed glass to match other enclosed arches on the front of the house. He stated they were left with nothing but a nook and it was proposed to place window seats here for a small reading room and .that at this point they had found nothing else to do with the space except leave it there open, if the request denied. Mr. Fromen came to the meeting during this presentation. Mr. Jim Hammond, 3035 Lafayette, presented the following petition: "We, the undersigned residents of the 3000 - 3100 block of Lafayette hereby peti- tion the Honorable Zoning Board of Adjustment to grant the variance from section 24 (1) of the Zoning Ordinance regarding frontage requirements. The proposed improve- ments to the existing structure at 3110 LAfayette will serve to enhance the neighbor- g~ hood in value and appearance. Simple abandonment of the existing. entry would re- sult in an unsightly appearance. James Hammond 3036 Lafayette Leonard M. Townley 3103 Lafayette Ruth Townley 3103 Lafayette Mary Hammond 30306 Lafayette Harold Newton 3108 Lafayette Joe Williams 3112 Lafayette C. C. Lutrick 3120 Lafayette Mrs. C. C. Lurtirck 3120 Lafayette Evelyn Heinze 3123 Lafayette Becky Williams 3112 Lafayette Mr. $ Mrs. N. Hogan 3119 Lafayette. Mr. $ Mrs. R. Heinse3104 LAfayette Mossy Ligon Mr. ~ Mrs. Ed Reh Mrs. L.H,Harrington H. H. Robl Mrs. J, Kroning Don$Rosemary Cook Estell DeAlcala Thetis Reese Rodriguez,Rodriguez Mr.F~Mrs. D.Heymann Oscar Ebner 3128 Lafayette 3030 Lafayette 3028 Lafayette 3024 LAfayette 3105 Lafayette 3115 Lafayette 3034 LAfayette 3027 Lafayette 3008,12 Lafayette 3009 Lafayette 3015 Lafayette" He state3 he personally took the petition around for signature and noone he talked to objected to the enclosure. Later in the meeting Mr. Hammond again spoke and stated that he felt the neighbor's opinions should carry some weight as they were the ones who have to live with it. Mrs. Viola stated they were very happy to be living in West University Place; that they had looked for 32 years for a home and that they were trying to restone the character of the neighborhood, not change it or make something different and that is what their plans called for. At a leter time during the meeting Mr. Viola noted that leaving the existing entry offerred a poor traffic flow and pre- sented difficulties in decorating and placing furniture. During discussion and questioning with Mr. Viola and Mr.Smith members oriented themselves with the plans and details of the proposed enclosure; discussed other houses on the block which extends further or at least even with this structure, either legally or illegally,. and ascertained from the Violas that their plans are to make this their home and not for resale. Upon questioning concerning hardship which might be encountered if ordinance is enforced, Mr. Viola and Mr. Smith stated that the unsightliness of the structure just extending out in the front, open, would detract from the property as well as the neighborhood; it would be very costly to tear off as it runs the entire length of the west side of the house and the roof is tied into the main house roog; and that it would destroy the character of the residence in terms of maintaining the neighborhood look. Motion by Mr. Frahm, seconded by Mr. Fromen, that public hearing be closed. Voting Aye: Fougerat Voting No: None Frahm Fromen Kendrick Loftice i~ 1 Members of the Board reviewed the plans and discussion held with the applicant concerning hardships, aesthetics, consideration of neighbors opinions, granting the request subject to certain restrictions, uselessness of the space and alter- nates, if any, and visual concept looking down the block is already obstructed with existing structure which will be left intact. Motion by Mr. Kendrick, seconded by Mr. Loftice, that the decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 17, 1981 on application docketed #81-2 from ~~ Andrew A. Viola to enclose a porch, or entry, extending approximately three (3') ft, into the front setback on E.35ft. of Lot 22 F~ W.25 ft, of Lot 23 Block 1 Rice Court Addition 3110 Lafayette be reversed, and that the application be approved based on the particular drawings presented at this rehearing whereby the archway will be treated in such away there would be fixed glass installed with a very mininal piece of molding around it and with a brick wall built up to normal sill height, as shown on the drawings, and it be noted and filed in the records of this property that approval is given spe- cifically to be done in the above manner and that nothing else can be done in the future to this area without returning to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for con- sideration. Voting Aye: Fougerat Voting No: None Frahm Fromen Kendrick Loftice A draft of a letter to answer to correspondence received from Joe M. Kirkham, Kirkham and Roberts, Attorneys at Law, dated June 24, 1981, concerning suit of Paul S. McDonald vs. City of West University Place, from Chairman Billings was presented to the Board for consideration. Motion by Mr. Fromen, seconded by Mr. Loftice, that answer as drafted by Chair- man Billings, be accepted and forwarded. Voting Aye: Fougerat Voting No: None Frahm Fromen Kendrick Loftice r~ Copies of both of the above letters are attached and made apart of these minutes. Suggestions for a written information sheet to be presented to those persons contemplating an application to the Board were reviewed and approved with the addition. of item no. 5 to sheet containing exhibts to be presented: "Architectural scale drawings, to help clarify your presentation, if available. Minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 17, 1981 and special meeting on June 24, 1981 were approved as presented. With no further business to come before the Board, upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. 9G ATTEST: Secretary ~_ ~. _ r-~~ G- >_. " Chairman rl ~~ 0 KIRKI~AM & ROf3F_RTS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 4702 CAPITAL BANK PLAZA ' 333 CLhY STREET HOUSTO N. TEXA577002 JOE M. IRKHAM - ~ 1713) 658-8811 June 24, 1981- Zoning Board of Adjustment CIty of West University Place 3800 University Boulevard Houston, Texas 77005 Re: -5426 Buffalo Speedway Paul S. McDonald and - Mar~ McDonald, Owners Dear Members of th Board: This firm represents Paul and Mary McDonald,' the owners of the referenced property. As you may be aware, Mr.. and Ms. McDonald are plaintiffs in a suit previously filed against the City. The litigation concerns certain improvements made by the IfcDonalds, and the reaction of your predecessors. The Board is currently reviewing the City's zoning ordinance and, as part of that review, it is accepting suggestions and recommendations from property owners. - The purpose of this letter is to submit to you Mr. and ~'~ Ms. McDonald's proposed changes to the ordinance or, alternatively,. to request that you reconsider the actions'taken by your prede- cessors in this regard. Briefly, the factual__situation is as follows: - In the .summer of 17-8; the McDonalds desired to erect an automatic door opener on their. property. The reason for their desire was that, as the property existed, parking their car neces- sitated that they stop the ca-r on Sunset Boulevard, manually open a gate, get back in the car, and pull it into the driveway. This created both a traffic hazard and an inconvenience. The McDonalds'". contractor, Dan Parker, disucssed the situation with Wayne Perry, the building inspector. Mr. Perry informed the contractor that, since the opener is over 6 feet tall, it could not be placed on the fence line (due, apparently, to the ordinance stating that fences shall not be over 6 feet in height)_ Therefore, the opener was ~i June 24, 1981 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page Two set back off the fence line, approximately 7~ feet from the side street line (the McDonalds' property is on a corner lot). Sub- sequently, Mr. Perry returned and informed the McDonalds that the opener is a "garage," and therefore must be 2~ feet further from the property line. The McDonalds then appealed to the Zoning Board, which said that if the opener is a fence, it is too tall; and if it is a garage, it is too close to the property. line. ', The most relevant portions of the zoning ordinance are as follows: Section 3. Uses and buildings in _single-fami~ dwelli~ districts.. In a single family dwelling district, no buildings or premises shall be used and no building shall be~erected or structure al- tered which is arranged or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following uses; except as otherwise specifically provided in this ordinance: ,_ (3) Accessory buildings, including one pri- vate garage when located _ not less than ten ~ - (10) feet back from any street line _ _ - (4) Uses customarily incident to any of the above uses when located upon the same lot and not involving the conduct of a business; including customary home occupani-ons engaged in by the office of a physician, surgeon,, dentist, musician, or artist when situated in the same dwelling used by such phy- sician, surgeon, dentist, musician or artist as his or her private dwelling; provided no name place exce- eding one square foot in area, containing the name and occupation of the occupant of the premises, and no sign exceed eight (8) square feet in area appertaining to the lease, hire or sale of a building or premises; and no commercial advertising sign of any other char- acter shall be permitted in such a dwelling district_ June 24, 1981 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page Three Section 2. (1) Accessory: A subordinate use or building customarily incident to and located on the lot occupied by the main use or building; Section 24(3) Distance from property lines. " _ on corner lots no buildings or other structure of any kind shall be constructed or erected within five (5) feet from any street lot line . In as much as the apparatus constructed by the McDonalds is not a fence, and certainly not a garage, the I~;cDonalds are not in violation of the zoning ordinance as presently written. The allowable use most clearly appli-cable to the i~eDonalds' situation is that outlined in Section 3(4). Certainly the ten foot limitation applicable to garages does not apply. Moreover, Section 24(3) clearly states that on corner lots the limit for structures is five feet from the street lot line .(the McDonalds' opener is"7~ feet from the line). If the ten foot limit is to apply here, Section 24(3) _ has literally no meaning or application. The McDonalds therefore request that you take the following action: (1~) clarify t-hat Section 24 (3) , .when applicable, allows "_ "other._structures",." such as this one, to be built within five feet of the street lot line; or (2) clarify that. Section 3(3)`s ten foot requirement applies to garages, and that unless a structure houses cars, it is not a garage; or (3) specify that "uses customarily indicent to" other " - allowable uses [as defined in Section 3(4)] in- _ - dudes uses such as an automatic door opener, " -especially when such use enhances the safety of all residents of the City; or (4} reconsider whether this use actually violates any~~ provisions as written. u June 24, 1981 Zoning Board of Adjustment Page Four We sincerely hope that you wild give this request your attention. In that regard, we urge you 'to. view .the door opener in question. We believe that you will concur that~(~) there is no violation of the code as written; (2) the present use is reasonable and sightly, and enhances safety; (3) there-. is no possible purpose to be served in moving the McDonalds' . apparatus 22 feet (which, be the way, would .render it uriusable, due to reasons outlined previously); and (4) if clarification. of the ordinance is necessary to enable the McDonalds to con- _ time their use of the opener, such clarification would be in order. Thank you for your attention to this matter.. If the McDonalds or I can be of any assistance, please let us know. ' Sincerely, ' KIRKHAM & ROBERTS _ _. __ _ _ ___ __ ~oe_ M. Kirkham ,7MK.lje cc: Mr_ David Allums _ ' City Attorney ' 911 Walker, ;;665 Houston, Texas 77002 Mr_ Win Campbell Wood, Campbell, Moody_ & Gibbs 1980 S_ Post Oak Suite 2200- Houston, Texas 77056 Paul and Mary N,cDonald 5426 Buffalo Speedway Houston, Texas 77005• r~ HINDS ~3 MEYER AT70RNEY5 AT LAW 200 PLAZA LEVEL-LNG TOWER OAN H. HINDS JOHN K. MEYER 2919 ALLEN PARKWAY F. E. BILLINGS - HOUSTON. TEXAS 77019 c. L. soLOMON 1713) 523-6717 - July 13, 1981 Re: 5426.Buffalo Speedway Paul S. McDonald and Mary McDonald, Owners Mr. Joe M. Kirkham Kirkham & Roberts 4702 Capital Bank Plaza ~. Houston, Texas 77002 Dear Mr. Kirkham: JAMES M. LOBER ALAN B. FOLGER MONA L. LYMAN Your letter of June 24, 1981 addressed to the Zoning Board of Adjustment City of West University Place has been referred to me as the chairman of the .zoning board of adjustment. As you are aware, the .Zoning Board of Adjustment is limited by statute and ordinance as to what it can do. It is our opinion that we have no power to modify any decision of the Board after ten (10) days following the filing of the decision in the .office of the Board. It seems absolutely clear that- once suit is filed, during-the pending of that suit, the Board would be without jurisdiction to act and it would not be in order"for us to comment on matters before. - the court. - _. __ _ __ __ _ Your letter will~be forwarded to~the Zoning and Planning Commission and the City Secre-terry so that your comments may be considered when the City Commission continues its work on amendments to the zoning ordinance. ~_ Yours truly, cc: Zoning and ~ _ _ Planning .Commission - City Secretary ~ ..