Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04241979 ZPC Minutes SPECIAL MEETING ZONING AND PLANNING COD~IISSION APRIL 24, 1979 The Zoning. and Planning Commission of the City of West University Place con- vened in special session on Tuesday, April 24, 1979, 7:30 p.m., with the fol- . lowing members present: Chairman Norton, presiding; Members Berg, Casey and LaCook. The Chairman ascertained from .the secretary that proper. notice of meeting had been posted at the City Hall three days prior to the scheduled meeting. John Mitchell, Mitchell Carlson ~ Associates, Architects, representing owners, ~ Evergreen Associates, introduced George Cox, Kenneth Schnitzer and Doug Schnitzer ~ all partners in Evergreen. Associates and Steve Novikoff of his firm. ~~ Mr. Mitchell stated that he and George Cox are residents of West University Q and that Ken and Doug Schnitzer plan to occupy two units in .this project when completed, that his firm had worked for several months on the project conferring with the Inspection and Fire Departments and other city staff members, and that he felt they had been able. to exceed all requirements set out in the West Univer- sity ordinances. He further stated that West University offers a quality of life unmatched anywhere-and that he felt the project respects the qualitites of West University which are valued so highly, that. it will be compatible and a good neighbor to the surrounding single family neighborhood, will offer a real sense of community to those occupying the units and will provide a very much needed buffer between the traffic and commercial activity on Bissonnet and the single family area to the south. He stated that the project is composed of seventeen units with four plans - two of which are 22 stories and two. which are 12 stories, that anticipated sales prices. will range from $160,000 - $250,000, that the 22 story units are on either the Mercer or Bissonnet frontage, that except for Mercer Street units the project is ''introverted" with access off a common land- scaped motor court. Mr. Mitchel also stated that the site plan arrangement avoided the wall. to wall, rowhouse feeling and concerned itself with sound traffic planning principals, that there are no .curb cuts on Bissonnet and only one point of entrance and exit for traffic to and from the project and that all trees indicated on the site plan are existing and it is their hope to save most of them. Mr. Mitchell presented an elevation and plot plan of the project and at this time also exhibited the four basic unit designs and explained each one. Mr. Dieter Ufer, Bayshore Engineers, advised the Commission that the majority of the site drainage will be directly into Poor Farm Ditch by a storm sewer pipe and that the Harris County Flood Control District had already given preliminary approval of the storm sewer line and that the six townhouses adjacent to Mercer Street will drain towards the west gutter line of Mercer then flow in the direc- tion that the storm water is currently flowing. He stated .that sanitary sewer to service the development will utilize an entirely separate and new collection line which will discharge into the existing manhole located near the southeast corner of the project which is serviced by an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line. and that they will not utilize the existing 6-inch sanitary sewer line loca- ted on the south side of the property. Mr. Ufer further stated that a 2-inch water line will connect to the existing 6-inch water line located on the east side ~a~ of Mercer Street and will traverse through the project and connect to the existing water line on the south side of the project. Mr. Ufer exhibited a layout showing the proposed utilities a copy of which is in the permanent file on this application at the City Hall. Mr. Casey asked about fire hydrants and Mr. Ufer advised that the requirement was for afire hydrant to be within 600 ft. and that the fire hydrant located at the northeast corner of the project was 450 ft. from the fartherest corner and could adequately service the project. Mr. LaCook asked if Chief Wilcher had seen the proposal and Mr. .Mitchell advised that he had and that they had taken a pumper to test access on the proposed streets and. that ingress and egress to the property and all turnarounds would accomodate Fire Department equipment. Mr. Mitchell closed his presentation by stating that they felt the concept is compatible with the neighborhood and will establish a buffer, both acoustical and traffic wise on Bissonnet and that it will add to the fabric of West University Place and tie into the same kind of amenities we value so highly here. He added that they would very much like to begin construction the first part of the summer. Discussion of the project and questions from members of the Commission and audience included the following: It was determined that the height of the chimney would not exceed the thirty-five foot height. requirement, third floor coverage did not exceed the 75% required by ordinance, required number of parking spaces available (17), required fencing around project (eight foot masonry on Bissonnet and eight foot wooden on Poor Farm Ditch and south boundary), maintenance of fences would be responsibility of property owner's association, trash pickup would possibly be located on com- mon area on south end of project and accessible for pickup by city trucks off Mer- cer St. without going into the interior of the project, open space on each lot exceeds the requirements of the ordinance which is 40%, run off from rainfall is 1 C.F.S., all lots exceed the 2,000 sq. ft. requirement exclusive of common area. Chairman Norton complimented Mr. Mitchell on the presentation-and stated that it was in hisopinion the best project presented to the Zoning and Planning Commis- sion and in line with what was desired when the townhouse districts were: created. Motion by Mr. Casey, seconded by Mr. LaCook, that preliminary plans and final plans for the construction o_f townhouses on Lots 1 and 2, Block 93 West University Place 2nd Addition Southwest corner of Mercer and Bissonnet be approved as submitted, subject to compliance with all building setback re- quirements, building code, or other governing ordinances, whether or not herein specified, for any subsequent construction. Voting Aye: All Voting No: None Mr. Casey briefly reviewed for the benefit of the audience discussion of the Zoning and Planning Commission during Workshop Session on April 17, 1979 concern- ing rezoning of Lot 1, Block l Collegeview 3rd Addition and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, F 6, Block 2 Collegeview 3rd Addition. as originally dedicated 3800 block of Sunset which included possibilities of limiting Lot 1, Block l to two uniis either for ~ townhouses with common wall, two lots allowing two units separated by setback, ~ three units, rezoning for townhouses of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, S ~ 6, Block 2, leaving "3 all properties single family. ~ Members of the Commission went into an in-depth discussion of the ways and means by which each of the above alternatives might be accomplished, with some.. input from developers and citizens present concerning economic feasibility of two units as opposed to three units on Lot 1, Block 1, compatibility with single family resi- dences on south side of 3800 block of Sunset if only Lot 1, Block 1 rezoned, re- quirements of minimum lots, zero-lot line. development, allowance. of ten foot fence on Bissonnet Street side, uniqueness of location and physical dimensions of Lot 1, Block 1. Motion by Mr. LaCook that the Zoning and Planning Commission recommend to the City Commission that Ordinance No. 111 be amended to rezone Lot 1, Block 1 Collegeview 3rd Addition 3800 block of Sunset as a townhouse/clusterhouse, patio District and that it recommend. that a maxi- mum of two units be constructed in this District with setbacks, curb cuts, height, ppen space, minimum building site, minimum size dwelling units to be determined in the wording of the ordinance. Mr. LaCook withdrew the motion for further discussion The discussion included setting the precedent of smaller construction sites for detached units as opposed to units with common walls .(townhouses) and extent of recommendations to the City Commission.. - Motion by Mr. Casey, seconded by Mr. LaCook, that the Zoning and Planning Commis- sion recommend to the .City Commission that Ordinance No. 111 be amended to rezone Lot 1, Block 1 Collegeview 3rd Addition as a townhouse/clusterhouse/patio home Dwelling District; or a single family Dwelling District with variances granted for minimum lot size and setbacks; ~~ and that it recommend that a maximum of two units be constructed in this District with setbacks, curb cuts, height, open space, minimum building sites, minimum dwelling units, wall openings, and toher criteria to be determined in the wording of the ordinance and that the Zoning and Planning Commission meet in Workshop Session to determine these recommendations. Voting-Aye: Berg Casey LaCook Voting No: Norton Workshop Meeting was scheduled for Tueasday, May 1, 1979, 7:30 p.m., for con- sideration of recommendations to the City Commission concerning above action. Mr. Norton advised that in explanation of his "No" vote, he agreed. that the lot is unique and Woolco across the street a negative impact, but that he had watched several .areas over the city and in Southside Place developed for single family which were questionable at one time and he felt the urgency to develop is not that great. Motion by Mr. Berg, seconded by Mr. LaCook, that the Zoning and Planning Commis- sion recommend to the City Commission that Lots 1,2,.3,4,5 $ 6, Block:2 Collegeview 3rd Addition Southside of 3800 block of Sunset not be rezoned for townhouses. Mr. Casey stated that he would like not to make a recommendation on these lots until Lot 1,Block 1, Collegeview 3rd Addition, had been resolved. Mr. LaCook concurred in this opinion and stated he thought i needed more study and that in his opinion it meets the criterian of peripheral area and not that pressing at this time. With Mr. LaCook's permission, Mr. Berg withdrew his motion. Motion by Mr. Berg, seconded by Mr. Casey, that the Zoning and Planning Commis- sion delay a decision on the rezoning of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ~ 6, Block 2 Collegeview 3rd Addition until such time as a final decision is made on Lot 1, Block 1, Collegeview 3rd Addition. Voting Aye: Berg Casey LaCook Norton The Commission members discussed the legality and effectiveness of requiring West University Church of Christ to sign an affidavit requiring the removal of the existing improvements on the East 75 ft. of Lot 5, Block 91, West Voting No: None 1 1 `Jai, ~_ 1 University Place 2nd Addition a provision of the subdivision. It was decided that official action of the Commission requiring this provision would be more effective. Motion by Mr. Berg, seconded by Mr. LaCook, that action of the Zoning and Planning Commission on the subdivision of East 75 ft. of Lot 5, Block 91 West University Place 2nd Addition 3504 Albans C?" Lf~ '~ ,~ Q 1 1 be amended to contain a provision whereby the subdivision of such lot is sub- ject to the removal of the existing improvements located on such lot. Voting Aye: Berg LaCook Casey Voting No: None Mr. Casey abstained from voting as he had not voted in the previous subdivi- sion decision because of a previous business association with one of the develop- ers. Motion_by Mr. Casey, seconded by Mr. Berg, that minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission be approved as .corrected. Voting Aye: All Voting No: None With no further business to come before. .the Commission, upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 11:'15 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary / w~ l Chairman