Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10191979 ZPC Minutes0 ~~~ REGULAR MEETING ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 19. 1979 The Zoning. and Planning Commission of :the City of West University Place convened. in regular session at the City Hall, Thursday, October 18, 1979,. 7:30 p.m., with the following members .present: Chairman Casey, presiding; .Members Abell, Farrell, LaCook and Norton. 19 The Chairman ascertained from the secretary .that notice of meeting had been posted in the City Hall three days prior to the scheduled meeting, and that notice of public hearing had been published in The Suburbia-Reporter on September 26, Octo- ber 3, October 10 and October 17, 1979. Motion by Mr. Abell, seconded by P!~r. Farrell, that. public hearing to .hear the opinions. of citizens regarding the use of and problem related to garage apart- menu and accessory buildings in the city .and to discuss current restrictions on use of same, be opened. Voting Aye: All Voting No: Chairman Casey introduced himself and gave the address of his residence in the city followed by other members. In explaining the purpose of this public hearing, Mr. Casey advised that ealier this year the Zoning and Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Adjustment had received a letter from the City Commission asking.. the bodies to review several areas of Zoning Ordinance No. 111; that most of the areas pertained to revisions and definitions of types of structures and setbacks to bring the zoning ordinance into the "'80's", to rake it more clear and understandable to citizens and for the Building Inspector to enforce and understand. He also stated that another area of study included accessory buildings which include garage apartments and to what :extent garage apartments should be rebuilt or renovated.. Mr. Casey further stated that an accessory building is a building. or structure placed on a lot and quoted from a recommendation by a previous Zoning and Planning Commission "...that because of the. vague and confusing nature of the current law, it is being violated all the-time and more and more garage apartments are being illegally occupied and rented. In our opinion, economic, environmental and energy factors will bring growing pressure to increase the density within the City of West University Place. These violations. subvert the overall plan for the city, cause realtors to make. inaccurate statements of the law, sidestep the prescribed subdivision procedures, are unfair to citizens who try to ascertain and abide by the law and cause citi- zens, through their duly elected .officials to lose control. of the planned develop- ment of the city. In our opinion, these violations and this trend are .contrary to the desire of the majority of citizens and to the objectives stated in the preamble to Ordinance Number 111, which says, in pertinent part: 'Whereas, it is the desire of the residents of the City of West University Place and the Council thereof to preserve the present residential character of the city and the public improvements therein, to prevent congestion. and to promote and provide for the health, safety, convenience, comfort and general welfare of the citizens thereof."' Mr. Casey continued by stating that accessory buildings: include storage rooms, pools, green- houses, etc. and that in order to answer the portion of the .letter from the City Commission concerning accessory buildings the Zoning .and Planning Commission wanted input from citizens on the use of buildings primarily in the back yard area in our neighborhoods. ~o Chairman Casey administered an oath to all those desiring to speak at the public hearing. Mr. Casey: Would any .Zoning and Planning Commission member like to make an comments? What about buildings in rear twenty feet of yard? Mr. Norton: Because the lots are relatively small in the city, people want to do all sorts of things on them. We need to look at what can and cannot be done and how it affects the neighbors. Mary Ann Binig, 6634 Vanderbilt: How is this ordinance being enforced now? Mr. Casey: After the 1977 report quoted above, City Commission was made aware of the problem and no one knows how it really can be enforced because of the vague- ness of the ordinance. Building Inspector Perry: At present time, enforcement is very minor. We try to work with the people and advise it is an illegal situation. It was the feel- ing of the previous City Attorney and the present City Attorney that because of the wording of the ordinance and with it not being enforced over the years, it was unenforceable if it had to go to court. Mr. Casey: What is the basis of enforcement.? Mr. Perry: Occupancy of two families in a single-family zoned area.. Mr. Farrel Y-. Could a stiffer ordinance be enforced if it is the will of the people? Mr.-Perry: It would probably have to be a city wide blanket ordinance. Susan Young, 3224 Nottingham: How do you interpret it now? Mr. Perry: The Zoning ordinance says that property in West University Place is single family residential property which would be interpreted as a buildable lot should be occupied by a single family. Mr. Casey read definition of "Family" from the zoning ordinance: "One or .more per- sons related by blood, adoption, or marriage, living and cooking together as a single housekeeping unit, exclusive of household servants. A number of persons but not exceeding thwo (2) living and cooking together as a single housekeeping unit though not related by blood, adoption, or marraige shall be deemed to con- stitute a family''. Susan Young: .Who can live in garage apartments? Mr. Casey: You could probably get as many different opinions as there are in this room. People in authority need definite interpretation as to usage of accessory buildings - what should it be and what do we want it to be now? Mr. Farrell: The intent is very clear in the original ordinance - there were to be no garage apartments occupied except as servants' quarters, but there were exceptions made to people who already had garage apartments and it was clean that the ordinance was taken advantage of. We have an ordinance with no teeth. ~~ f] ~i Mr. Casey; A lot of people are converting garages to playrooms, teen age rooms, hobby rooms, etc. We also want to look into this. This is putting a certain amount of living space outside the confines of the main dwelling. Is that good or bad? Clarence Kapp, 3104 Cason: Could this thing be cleared by the passage of another ordinance? Mr. Casey: It is our opinion that the City Commission can pass an ordinance that could enforce whatever it is the citizens want enforced. Mr. Kapp: One that could probably meet with a court test? Mr. Casey: It could. Mr. Kapp: How about the existing ordinance? Mr. Farrell: It would have to be enforceable. Q Mr. Perry: A court test is the only way we are going to find out. Mr. Casey: I think we need an attorney's opinion on that. Susan Young: If any of the zoning ordinance is enforceable, why isn't this enforceable? Mr. LaCook: One of the vague terms is allowing servant's quarters. This gets into someone letting a college student live on the premises and attend classes and be- cause he cuts the grass, is he classified as a servant? This is the type situation that should be addressed. Should we permit servant's quarters at all or permit any- one to live in an accessory building separate and apart. from the house. If a strong ordinance was drawn and passed, it would be put to the test. In conversation I have had with people .this is what concerns them most. Mr. Kapp: Your input would indicate-that most people would. like to have such an ordinance? Mr. LaCook: I have never talked to anyone who would not like it. Jewel Kelbaala: How many garage apartments do we have in the city? Mr. Perry: Approximately 40 to 500 Mr. Kapp: Are they mostly occupied? Nir. Perr: The majority are. Mrs. Kelbaala: Is there an ordinance to prevent garage apartments being built? Mr. Casey: Garage apartments built and existing prior to passage of the zoning ordinance were allowed to stay. Should we allow then to be repaired or rebuilt as termites and wear and tear take their toll? You cannot get a permit for building a'garage apartment. You can get a permit to enclose and-air condition 22 your garage which is another usage of an accessory building which have different standards of setback than the main dwelling. Ida Fuez, 6009 Lake: I see your point, but I know of one gentleman who is aged who lives in his garage apartment and his granddaughter and her family live in the main house and he takes his meals with them. Mr. Casey: This .would come under the family definition in the ordinance and I guess not technically a violation. b1rhere do you draw the line? Parents, but not college students? What is a violation of the spirit and intent. of the ordi- nance. Others just as important might be nurses, foreign exchange students, etc. Susan Youn: I believe that West University Place should be for single family dwellings.. I don't think 'it would be in the best interest of the city to pass a blanket. law we would not allow anyone to live in garage apartments. I feel members of a family should be allowed.. I feel as more women are going to work full time they should be used for servant's quarters. Mr. Farrell: If we found out from attorneys, all or nothing, would you feel any different about that? No garage apar-ments at all? .Susan Young: It would be nice if I said I was all for city and none for anyone, but I think aged parents should be allowed and I don't think it should be all or nothing. Mr. Farrell: The setback requirements of the zoning ordinance have been consis- tently enforced and you have the Zoning Board of Adjustment to go to for a variance and that is why that portion of the zoning ordinance is still en- forceable today. But. because there have been many exceptions to the garage.. apartment it is questionable. Mr. Casey: Should a citizen be given a permit to enclose their garage and put in a bath, cooking .and living facilities for parents o be taken care of. Susan Young: A person should be able to enclose his garage. Mary Ann Binig: Why not allowing where there is no financial gain? I think a person-has a right to put servants, parents, a child in an accessory building. It seems financial gain could be a legal point to investigate. Twenty to twenty- one years ago you could not put cooking facilities in an accessory building. Mr. Perry: Still cannot put in cooking facilities but can put in a limited bath. Mr. Farrell: There are more and more people defying city to file charges. Mary Ann Binig: Then there are others would would not do it under any circum- stances if there is n ordinance against it. Mr. Perry: When we issue a permit for use other than a garage, we require people to sign affidavit as to the use. Mr. Casey: I was under the impression two people related, plus one other person could live in a house and that would be legal or a family of five in the house and one unrelated person in the garage apartment. e) Mr. Perry: No violation, except for living in the garage apartment. Paul Young, 3224 Nottingham: What does.. ordinance now permit? Mr. Perry: Games rooms, study, play rooms are permitted with bath facilities. We try to hold it down. No cooking facilities. If a two story garage applied for, applicant must sign affidavit it will notbe living .quarters, rental pro- . perty or for commercial use. Jean Zudz. 3126 Nottingham: Would it be easier to enforce single family con- cept or rental? Mr. Casey: I think it would be very difficult to enforce rental aspect. Jean Zudz: We have to have something enforceable that is problem I see. Mr. Norton: Some believe those already rented when sold could still be able ~( to do so. The idea came about that it was rentable under the "grandfather" Q clause even if sold. Mr. Farrell: Lot of interpretations of what is legal. or not legal are made by realtors. .Jean Zudz: Bad precedent to set. People will begin to think we are not en- forcing other zoning law. If we have zoning we should enforce it. Mr. Norton: The previous recommendation was a flat prohibition of building in rear space - non-living space and cut off in ordinance to do away with all. after a certain time. Another thinkg which has a wider concern is what is the total goal for space plans and usage. What about the rear of your lot relative to someone else's lot? The idea that was being looked into earliest is what is wanted to do is leave-enough space between you and your neighbors., i.e., the rear 20 ft. Do you want a neighbor to build a two story garage in his rear twenty feet overlooking your rear yard space. If living space com- pletely covers will we eventially come to townhouse concept where all of lot is covered. George Shaw, 3607 Georgetown: It seems it comes to three points: (1) is some- one in this for financial gain (2) are we trying to keep down population and (3) do we .want to keeep out undesirables. Answer to (3) what is undesirable? It is a very ambiguous term. (2) It might be a financial necessity and (1) if that concerned, city could stop building on vacant lots. Is this not true? Mr. Farrell: I do not agree. Mr. Casey: From what. we have heard so far, it seems we want accessory buildings that could be lived in by people outside family to a point. How can you come: to that point, define it and make it enforceable? Mr. Farrell:. I don't think we can enforce those points. George Shaw: I keep my house nice and I would like to see an ordinance whereby everyone kept theirs nice - but you can't do that.. So I don't really care-about garage apartments or not. 24 Mr. Casey: I live adjacent to a garage apartment which is rented and the tenants are very nice. and we have a nice relationship, but I might have a different viewpoint if someone was not so nice. George Shar: These situations are very personal between neighbors in any community. If someone di .something offensive to their neighbors then they should petition the neighbors. Mr. Casey: That is unrealistic, but interesting. Mr. Farrell: The zoning ordinance works very well. Maybe we have given the wrong impression. I don't think we whould turn over reins neighbor to neigh- bor. Susan Young: Will you try to make up-and ordinance? Mr. Casey: We will take citizen input and made a recommendation to the City Commission pertaining to garage apartments and accessory buildings. Paul Young: Will there be a city wide vote? Mr. Casey: Not necessarily. Other considerations would be if old garage apart- ment town down:, can it be replaced? How about the issuing of permits for nre garage apartments for living space? Mr. Farrell:. One of the things we have already recommended to the City Commis- sion is a height limitation on accessory buildings. Susan Young: I disagree with that. I feel we should be realistic in looking to the future. Property has gone up so much in value. I don;t think the purpose is to legislate something like that. Mr. Farrell: How far do you go before you are over the line as to what a per- son can do with his property? Jim Davis, 2721 Arbuckle: I have a garage apartment which is not rented at this time. I do feel a special responsibility for renters. If I did. not have a garage apartment, I would be on the other side of the fence. I like zoning. Mr. LaCook: I believe that what we have to look at is that these lots have been zoned as single family dwelling. That was .the intent of the ordinance. Other than that you are misusing the ordinance. I believe to have an enforceable ordi- nance you have to go back to the single family and except. the extraordinary and specific. Any other thing, I think, woul be in violation of the ordinance.. May Ann Binig: I would like to say that the definition of a family which was adopted was the first definition the City Attorney felt he could hang his hat. on. Not necessarily for garage apartments, because there could be multiple occupancy in a house.- Legally we hoped it would be something we could fall back on. It was taken from a Supreme Court decision. I guess we will not know until we go to court. 25 Mr. Perry: We have in many instances enforced this by having people move or preventing multiple persons moving into houses on the basis of the defini- tion of "family°'. Mr. Casey: I think you are right. The ultimate decision is going to be made, from some judge and we need to be sure that the majority of citizens are for what we will be enforcing. From this point at certain times Chairman Casey asked .for a show if hand on various questions; There were twelve persons in attendance voting. How many would be in favor. of allowing someone unrelated to members of the main dwelling occupying an accessory building? One vote. Mr. Hatfield, 2640 Pemberton: I have lived here over 25 years and I have a garage apartment which I have never rented and don't intend to. Therefore I am strongly opposed to anyone renting to non family. I understand that the E( previous owner had a maid. living .here. A few years after I moved here, my Q mother was widowed and lived there until about two years ago. I have had a hundred requests to rent it. I don;t want to rent it and don't really approve of those around me who are and have not been challenged. I feel they are in violation. How many would be in favor of someone related to the family living in the main dwelling occupying an accessory building? Eight votes. How many would be in favor of allowing servants in accessory buildings.? Three votes. How many would be in favor of someone occupying an accessory building, not renting, who is responsible for taking care of someone in the main house? -One vote. How many would be in favor of renting a garage or accessory building for pur- poses other than living? None. How many would be in favor of outlawing all acces-sort' buildings for anyone to live in? None. Mr. Perry: Is it conceivable that the definition of a family is enough to bring about the enforcement of limiting use for members of a family only? bar. Norton: How could you prove who were members of the family? Mr. Casey: This seems logical, but I am not an attorney. Ida Fuez: Could you limit non members living in main dwelling unit? Mr. Casey :_ Does that mean for example that the .property owner might ..live. in the .garage apartment and a single person in the house? How many would be in favor ofallowing permits to be issued for ..construction of new garage apartments? Three votes. - 26 Paul Young: How about a referendum at the polls? Clarence Kapp: That would bring up the question of who could vote - only property owners or all residents? Mr. Abe11: When considering 400 to 500 units, owners and renters voting. Would you get a fair percentage? Mr. Casey: I believe everyone who is a legal resident must be allowed to vote. Mr. Norton: What happens now as far as enforcing single family requirement? Mr. Perry:.. As a general rule, it is followed up on a complaint of someone. Mr. Norton: Who enforces? Mr. Perry: The Building Inspector is the enforcing authority. Bill Nettles, 3928 Arnold: Of .the 400 to 500 garage apartments, how many are at least 25 years old? Mr. Perry: Approximately 90% of them. Mr. Nettles: iNhat if you did not issue permits for repairs? Mr. Perry: You would possibly be violating someone's rights if did not issue permits to repair... The question arises what is normal repair and what is rebuild. What about health and safety hazards? Motion by Mr. Norton, seconded by Mr. Abell, that public hearing be closed. The meeting recessed for tcn minutes. The Final Report of the Zoning and Planning Commission to the City Commission concerning rezoning of Lot 1, Block 1, Collegeview 3rd Addition, affirming re- commendations dated June 13, 1979 was presented for consideration. Motion by Mr. LaCook, seconded by Mr. Farrell, that Final REport to City Commis- sion concerning rezoning of Lot 1, BLock 1, Collegeview 3rd Addition, be appro- ved as submitted. Voting Aye: Casey Voting No: None LaCook Farrell Norton Mr. Abell abstained from voting. Minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission on September 13, 1979, special meeting on September 20, 1979 .and special meeting. on October 4, 1979 were approved as .submitted. Members reviewed recommendations to City Commission concerning amendments to ~I zoning ordinance no. ill with the following change: The phrase "except as provided below: eliminated from Section 24(1), Paragraph (a). Further .discussion of use of accessory buildings was tabled until the next regular meeting. Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Q [1 0 ~~.... n f, d Chairman