Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09091975 ZPC Minutes100 REGULAR MEETING ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 9, 1975 The .Zoning and Planning Commission of the City of West University Flace convened in regular session at the City. Hall, 7:30 p: m., Tuesday, September 9, 1975, with the following members present: O. C. Bartholomew, Chairman, presiding; Members Roland Dahlin and Jim Norton. Mr. LaCook and Mr. Weatherby were absent. The Chairman ascertained that proper notice of meeting had. been posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall three (3) days prior to the- scheduled ;meeting as required by HB3, Amending 625217, V.C.C. The following letter from City Attorney Charles F. Cockrell answering specific questions concerning Ordinance No. 1025 from the. Zoning and Planning Commission was presented for consideration: "September 8, 1975 Chairman and Members Zoning and Planning Commission City of West University Place, Texas Gentlemen: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 4, 1975, wherein you posed two questions in regard to Sub-Section F-2 Ordinance No. 1025. Your first question inquired as to whether the waiver should be in a form that could be recorded. A review of the waivers executed in the Fletcher matter, reflects that each of the waivers bears a statutory acknowledgement and in my opinion would .meet the necessary requirements for recording in the office of the County Clerk. This is not to say that such recordation would necessarily be desirable, but that is a matter to be decided by your Commission. I have lately been .furnished with a copy of the correspondence refereed to in your .letter of September 4th and also a copy of a plat showing the location of the lots in question..I am still of the opinion that the ordinance contemplated a waiver as between the different ownerships of the Kubala and Fletcher lots. I would question the applicability of .the waiver as to Lot 6 signed by Mr. James L. Fletcher, also the owner of Lot 7 which was to be presently developed. It is my recollection that one of the purposes of Sub-Section F-2 was to encourage the development of vacant property.. While it was hoped that owners would combine their properties in present development, it was thought that the waiver procedure would in a sense be a joint project. A further consideration of the joint ownership of Fletcher as to Lots 6 and 7 and the single development of Lot 7 leads me to believe that this would be an inappropriate use of the waiver procedure. If a similar situation should arise in the future, I doubt if it'would be proper to permit a waiver as to the setback on a common ownership line. 4r^~ t~ ~ .Si. If I can be of further service, please so advise me. Yours very truly, /s/ Charles F. Cockrell City Attorney" During discussion of the City Attorney's opinion concerning waivers. as set forth in Ordinance No. 1025, Sub-Section F-2, members were of the opinion that these waivers should be required to be recorded for the protection of subsequent property owners. Motion by Mr. Dahlin, seconded by Mr. Norton, that the Zoning and Planning Commission recommend to the City Commission that Ordinance No. 1025 be amended to require that the waivers specified in-Sub-Section F-2 be recorded in the office of the County Clerk. r Voting Aye: All Voting No: None Mr. Edward Chu, owner of Lot 7, Block 3, Bissonnet Place Addition, appeared at the meeting concerning waivers he had obtained from owners of Lots 6 and 9 adjoining his property on each side. Mr. Chu was advised that the Zoning and Planning Commission had no authority to accept or reject waivers, but that at the tune he presented plans for the devel©pment of his property, and such plans indicated construction on the adjoining property line, then waivers should be submitted at that time as required by Ordinance No. 1025. Correspondence in the files of the Zoning and Planning Commission between Mr. Fletcher, former owner of Lot 7, the City Attorney and the Zoning and Planning Commission, indicates that in the opinion of the City Attorney waiver forms as presented were acceptable. Mr. Chu Advised that these forms had been recorded. Mr."Chu left the meeting at this time. During a general discussion of certain questions which have arisen in the application of Ordinance No. 1025, it was decided that the Zoning and Planning Commission would begin a study of the problem areas and work on recommendations to be presented to the City Commission for amending the ordinance for a smoother implementation of same. The following letter from Mr. John Schmidt, 3302 Robinhood, owner of the South 119.2 ft. of Lot 1, Block 42, West University Place 1st Addition, tendering questions ..concerning development of this property and enclosing two suggested plans, was presented to the Commission for their consideration: "August 20, 1975 Zoning and Planning Commission West University Place 3800 University Blvd. Houston, Texas 77005 Gentlemen: I wish to express my appreciationfor your kindattention extended to me at your regularly scheduled meeting of August 12th. - - , Per your request I am submitting, in writing, certain questionscthat I-raised concerning Ordinance Number 1025, pertaining to my preliminary plans for the construction of four .,, townhouses. Attached are two copies of a drawing showing alternate site arrangements, on which I have indicated my first and second choices. My first choice questions are as follows: 1. Can I build four townhouses facing Rutgers and consider Rutgers the front of my lot? 2. What is the minimum distance the .front of the garages have to be set back from the property line? 3. Would this arrangement allow me to construct either an 6' or 8' brick wall on the Bellaire Blvd. and north property lines (side lot lines) as long as no (living space) room windows face these walls? My second choice questions are as follows: 1. Can I build four townhouses facing Bellaire Blvd. beginning on, or a inches -off of, my west property line? 2. Will this arrangement require adjoining property owners approval? 3. With this arrangement would the driveway have to be made available to the adjoining property owner when and if he develops his property. 4. Would this driveway become deeded access? At the time I appeared before you, I indicated my first choice would be to face Bellaire Blvd. Upon further study and planning I feel that the arrangement facing Rutgers can bemade more attractive as to privacy and accessibility, and be just as attractive architectually, without detracting from the homes to the north and east of me. Thank you. Yours truly, /s/ John Schmidt 3302 Robinhood Houston, Texas 77005" The following letter was drafted in answer to Mr. Schmidt's: "September 12, 1975 Mr. John Schmidt 3302 Robinhood Houston, Texas 77005 Dear Mr. Schmidt: Your letter dated August 20, 1975 to the Zoning and Planning Commission was presented and studied at its regular meeting on September 9, 1975. The following are answers to your questions as outlined in your letter: roe 1 ~" !1'~ 1 L~ First Choice: 1. Yes, you can build four. (4) townhouses facing Rutgers, but the front of the property, for the purpose of establishing setbacks, is Bellaire` Boulevard. 2. The minimum distance the front of garages would be required setback from the property line is five (5') ft., under Sub-Section F-1, Bellaire Blvd., Side Road, Category C, which we interpret to me u e a garage.' 3. Ordinance No. 1025 does not speak to this question concerning con- - struction of fences as set forth in your query. It is our opinion, there- fore, that Ordinance No. 896, amended by Ordinance No. 1000 and No. 1012, which regulates the location,. construction and height of fences in the City of West University Place, would control. This Fence Ordinance' would. not permit that which you have requested, and your only recourse would be to ask for an exception from the City .Commission. Second Choice: 1 & 2. Yes, you can construct four (4) townhouses facing Bellaire Blvd. on the property line by obtaining a waiver from the adjacent property owner.. 3. Yes, with the arrangement as outlined, the driveway would .have to be made available to the adjoining property owner when and if he develops his property. Reference: Sub-Section N-3. " 4. Reference: Sub-Section N-3. We are not familiar with the term "deeded access", but according to the above reference "Residents of each property shall be granted right-of-way privileges over the entire driveway system." ~" We hope these answers will help you in planning your development, and we will be happy to talk to you concerning any further questions you might have. Our regularly scheduled meetings are held on the second Tuesday of each month at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall. Yours very truly, /s/ O. C. Bartholomew, Chairman Zoning and Planning Commission" The following letter from the City Attorney was presented to the Commission for their information: "July 18, 1975 Mr. O. C. Bartholomew, Chairman Members of the Zoning & Planning Commission Re: Myers vs. Zoning and Planning Commission and City of West University Place, et al. B- 5279, Supreme Court, State of Texas. o Gentlemen: I am pleased to advise you that on July 17, 1975, I was notified by ,the Clerk of the Supreme Court that the Court had refused the application for write of error filed in the above shown case by Doy D. Myers. The only recourse now open to Mr. Myers is to file a motion :for rehearing. and under the circumstances, I see little chance of such motion`being granted. Yours very truly, /s/ Charles F. Cockrell City Attorney" Minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission on August 12, 1975 were approved as submitted. With no further business to come before the Commission at this time, upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. airman 1 ~JJ ~~J ~l