HomeMy WebLinkAbout08181982 ZBA Minutes0
`~.
C
[:
REGULAR MEETING
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
August 18, 1982
The Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of West University Place
convened in regular session at the City Hall August 18, 1982, 7:30
p.m. with the following members present.. Vice Chairman Mrs. Fougerat
presiding; Members, McCandless, Loftice, Fromen and Kendrick.
Motion by Mr. McCandless, seconded by Mr. Loftice that Public Hearing
to consider application docketed #82-3 from Mrs. John Bennett for a
bariance to utilize the space as originally planned, including the 98
aquare feet at the front of the house.
be opened.
Lot E 50ft. Lot
W 25 ft. Lot 3
Block 71
West University
Voting Aye: All
2
Place 2nd.
Voting No: None
The Chairman ascertained from the secretary that notice of meeting had
been posted in the City Hall on August 13, 1982, that notice of Public
Hearing had been published in the Houston Chronicle on August 3, 1982
and letters to interested property owners mailed August 5, 1982.
Mrs. Fougerat introduced herself and gave her address in the city followed
by other members of the Board and administered an oath to those desiring
to speak on the application.
Mrs. John Bennett
3411 Robinhood
Application N0. #82-3
Stated that she had been a resident of West University Place since June
1936. Site plans were shown to the members of the Board. Mrs. Bennett
presented a petition signed by adjoining neighbors stating they were
in favor of the variance. Mrs. Bennett presented pictures recently
taken of her home. Also pictures of the porch in question. A blueprint
was shown that the Contractor had given to the Building Inspection
Department for a building permit.
Members reviewed maps, plans and pictures of said application. Ms.
Bennett read the following addendum of her application.
Addendum #1
Construct an addition attached to the existing house, consisting of four
rooms: Living room, solarium, bedroom and bath. In 1981, plans and
drawings for a new structure to be built on this property matching the
existing structure were approved by the City of West University Flace
Building Dept.
111
112
Addendum #2
The entry of my existing house, that was completed and occupied on June
19, 1936, before the Zoning Ordinance was enacted June 12, 1937, is the
front building line of my existing structure and is approximately 25 feet
6 inches from the four property line.
Our builder took the same plans to the City of tNest University Place
Building Department and was given a permit on June 16, 1981. My
architect on the set of drawings. submitted for approval, used the term
"porch" in describing the entry way of my existing house. The Building
Department denied the completion of the addition by preventing the
builder from installing permanent windows and security guards on
approximately 6 feet of the proposed living room and insisted on the
building of a sheetrock wall with a door approximately six feet back
from the front of the new addition.
Addendum #3
1. Security of my home.
2. Utilization of space as originally planned, including the 98 sq. ft.
at the front of the house.
3. Making the exterior of the addition look completed, so as to enhance
the look of the neighborhood.
hors. Fougerat asked if anyone wished to speak out on behalf of the
application.
Mrs. De Laveaga
3317 Robinhood
Stated she appreciated the architectural integrity of the addition
and was in favor of the request.
Audrey Schoenfield
3418 Robinhood
Stated she was in favor and thought it was an addition to the neighborhood.
James Cole
3523 Robinhood
Stated he did not understand why the addition was not allowed to be
completed.
Elizabeth Bryan
3410 Robinhood
She was impressed by the addition made to the existing house made by
Mrs. Bennett and her daughter, Mrs. Hilderbrandt. Unfortunately, they
were unable to finish the job. She stated that it would be great for
the neighborhood and shw would be pleased if the Board would let Mrs.
Bennett follow through with her plans for the house.
Martha Davis
3414 Robinhood
Stated she was in favor of the application.
113
Mr. McCandless discussed the plans with Mrs. Hilderbrandt. Mr,
McCandless .stated the City has some Ordinances that state that we
have to adhere to the City setback and. that it seems that this is
encroaching upon that, Mr, PcCandless recommended a compliance.
Mrs. Hilderbrandt stated that their architect had some preliminary
drawings approved and that they were under the impression for several
months that there was no problem. It was not until the contractor
came into the Building Inspection Department for permits that they
were told otherwise,
~. Mrs. Fougerat asked if there was an original set of drawings submitted
to the City and were they stamped approved.
Mr. Kendrick stated that all the drawings submitted did not show
dimensions as to where the house is located on the lot, They also
did not show setback lines,
Mrs. Schoenfield stated that if the addition was set back from the
front of the house it would ruin the whole concept.
Mrs. Bryan .stated that she felt like Mrs. Bennett and her daughter were
victims of circumstances and had gone to a great deal of expense.
Mrs, Fougerat asked how the set back of Mrs. Bennett's house lined
up with the rest of the houses on the block. Mrs. Bennett stated
that they were all different, Her house was four feet closer than
any other house.
Mrs. Fougerat asked when the porch was enclosed had they obtained a
permit. Mrs. Bennett stated she had no record, it was done 25 years ago.
Mr. Kendrick stated, since you have been disallowed the enclosure of
the room has there been anything done. Mrs. Bennett stated that they
had installed a temporary wall.
Motion by Mr. Kendrick that the Public Hearing on application #82-3
be closed. Seconded by Mr. Formen,
Voting Aye: All Voting No: None
Discussion by members:
It was agreed upon to write a letter to the City Commission requesting
the Building Department to consider a procedure for marking submitted
plans and drawings as to their disposal.
Members discussed the application from Mrs. Bennett docketed #82-3
concerning the existing porch. It was agreed that there were alternatives.
i~~
Mr. Kendrick moved to deny the application because-the applicant
failed to present evidence of unnecessary hardship or other reasons
under which the Board can grant a variance. Mr. McCandless seconded
the motion.
Voting Aye: Three Voting No: Two
Minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment on
February 17, 1982 were approved as presented. Minutes of the June 16, 1982
meeting were approved.
With no further business to come before the Board, upon motion duly
made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
~~> ~- ~ ~ f~ j~
,~
i~ -~
~. ~ ~ _ ,~L
Chairman
ATTEST
~ ~ -~~~
retary
r