HomeMy WebLinkAbout03081990 ZPC Minutes~ '
~
REGULAR MEETING
ZOIVING AND PI.ANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE
DATE: Ma~+ch 8y 1990
7.•30 P.M.
The Zoning and Planning Commission of the City of West University
Place, Texas convened in regular session in the City Council
Chambers, City Hall, 3800 University Boulevard, City of West
University Place, Texas, the second Thursday of March, 1990, being
March 8, 1990.
Members present were:
Reid C. Wilson Chairman and Secretary
George Ruhlen Vice Chairman
Ralph Stivison
Bonnie T. Holmes
Susan Rachlin
Others in attendance were:
• Wayne Perry Chief Building Official
Cecil Boles Assistant Building Official
James L. Dougherty City Attorney
Notice of ineeting was posted in the City Hall of West University
Place, Texas at least seventy-two (72) hours preceding the day of
the meeting as required by law.
A quorum was declared and the meeting convened.
1• Hearinq of Residents:
No residents wished to be heard.
2. Adoption of Minutes:
The Minutes from the March 1, 1990 Special Meeting were
adopted unanimously.
3. 8ubdivision Issues:
Docket No. 90-1 - Amending plat for Lots 9& 10, B1
30, Collegeview Addition (4001 Oberlin at Weslayan). The requ
of Mr. and Mrs. James C. Maxon was presented to reorient two
x 100' lots platted to Weslayan (at the intersection of Wesla;
and Oberlin) to face Oberlin, for the purpose of selling thef
, --
-1-
~~
RCW/WUP00019.thf ~'
,.~• ~' • •
• lots separately. The two lots currently have one single family
house which faces Oberlin.
The request was DENIED since no basis under the Zoning
Ordinance or Subdivision Ordinance could be found to allow the
creation of two new lots, neither which meet the 75' x 110' minimum
requirements of Section 5-101(c). The exception to that provision
was determined not to be applicable due to the 60' minimum width
requirement.
Upon motion by Commissioner Ruhlen, seconded by
Commissioner Rachlin, the request was denied, but the application
fee for the amending plat was refunded based on the applicant's
misunderstanding of the Commission's procedures and the applicable
rules.
The applicants were referred to the Zoning Board of
Adjustment to receive special exception under Section 16-102 so
that the two lots could be sold together and a new home constructed
facing Oberlin (as the existing house does).
Docket 90-2 - Amending plat of Lots 3 and 4, Block 15,
West University Place First (6330 Brompton). The applicants
requested that 30' of Lot 4 be added to Lot 3, resulting in a 130'
• x 200' Lot 3 and a 70' x 200' Lot 4. The lots are currently
platted as 100' x 200' each.
Upon motion by Commissioner Ruhlen, seconded by
Commissioner Rachlin, the amending plat was APPROVED, subject to
technical correction of the proposed replat to contain the name of
both owners and pending the decision of the City Building Official
regarding the need for an additional utility easement on the rear
of the replatted lots.
4. Zoning Matters:
Review of technical corrections:
Technical Correction No. 4- Corner Lots. The Commission
discussed extensively the two alternative provisions drafted by the
City Attorney distributed at the meeting. The Commission focused
on Alternative No. 1, which applies to all corner lots as opposed
to Alternative No. 2, which focuses only on previously subdivided
corner lots.
The Commission requested Mr. Dougherty to revise
Alternative No. i as follows:
Ten foot (10' ) side street setback for lots up to and
including 65' in width.
• ~
-2-
RCW/WUP00019.thf
:.~
•
. . •
One additional foot of side street setback for each
additional foot of width over 65' up to 75'.
Twenty foot (20') side street setback for lots with 75'
to 99' in width.
Lots with 100 or more feet in width must have a side
street setback equal to the front street setback if the
lot fronted the side street.
Air conditioning compressors will be allowed within the
side street setback and could be concealed by a screen
of not more than 4' in height and 600 total square feet
in surface area.
Whether or not to prohibit fences within the side street
setback produce several alternatives. Clearly, no fence should be
allowed within the distance equal to the side street setback back
from the front street setback. Within the remaining portion of the
side street setback whether or not to allow fencing is unsettled.
The various alternatives were:
a. Allow fencing under the current ordinances.
C~
b. Allow chain link or wrought iron fencing only under
the current ordinances.
c. Prohibit all fencing in the side street setback
area.
•
The arguments for restriction of location of side street
fencing or the type of side street fencing related to sight lines,
visibility at corners and maximization of light and air. The
concerns with prohibiting or restricting fencing related to
security and privacy.
The Commission agreed to again address these issues at
the next meeting.
Technical Correction No. 9- Lot Realiqnment. The
Commission reviewed a revised Lot Realignment Amendment prepared
by Mr. Dougherty. This provision allows for a fourth alternative
under Section 5-101(c) which would allow lots of any size
(exceeding 50' in width) to have the lot line between them
realigned, provided that no lot results with a width less than the
minimum width of one of the original lots. For example, a 52' lot
and a 62' lot could become 2- 57' lots, or flip flop and become
a 62' and 52' lot, or any variation in between, but could not
result in a 50' lot and a 64' lot.
-3-
RCW/WUP00019.thf
. . ~ •
.:~-
•
After much discussion regarding the predicament of the
owners of 4001 Oberlin, (the applicants of Docket No. 90-i), the
Commission determined that it would be prudent for the Commission
to have the right to allow "rotation" of lots, since the end result
would be two lots of the same dimensions facing a different street.
Taking the Oberlin example, were the two existing lots sold and new
houses built facing Weslayan, the negative result would be the
unsafe condition of houses dealing with the high traffic of
Weslayan and the negative impact on sight lines of the owners of
houses on Oberlin.
Much discussion was had as to whether the Zoning Board
of Adjustment and the Zoning and Planning Commission would have the
authority to make this decision. The primary concern was a
perceived lack of discretion of the Zoning and Planning Commission
and broader discretion of the Zoning Board of Adjustments. The
decision was made to grant the authority to the Zoning and Planning
Commission but to draft into the provision the maximum discretion
possible.
The City Attorney was requested to revise the Lot
Realignment Amendment to add language allowing rotation of lots,
provided that the resulting lots do not have dimensions different
• than that of the original lots. Further, the City Attorney was
directed to propose a revision to Section 20-82 of the Subdivision
Ordinance relating to fronting of lots.
5. Other Matters:
4ualified Trees. The City attorney distributed copies of
Section 6-3(f) "Street Trees" from the Code of Ordinances which
regulates the cutting down of large qualified trees in the front
or side street easement area. The Commission discussed the request
of the City Staff that the list of "qualified" trees be reduced and
that certain species such as green ash be deleted.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 o'clock p.m. The next meeting
of the Zoning and Planning Commission will be a Special Meeting
scheduled for 7:30 p.m., Thursday, March 22, 1990 to discuss the
Technical Corrections.
•
-4-
RCW/WUP00019.thf