Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0910811 Zoning and Planning Commission MeetingQ ~ REGULAR MEETING ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 1981 The Zoning and Planning Commission of the City of Nlest University Place convened in regular session at the City Hall, Thursday, September 10,-1981, 7:30 p.m., with the following mbmers present: Chairman Casey, presiding; Members Abell, Allen and Norton. Notice of the meeting was posted in the City Hall, Friday, September 4, 1981. Mr. and Mrs. Robert Williamson and Mr. Charles Porter and Rick Hopwood, Unicenter Properties, .Inc..:, with. one other member of their company, were present at the meet- ing. The following correspondence concerning townhouse construction plans submitted by Robert C. Williamson was read into the minutes: "August 14, 1981 Mr. David Allums 911 Walker Street 665 San Jacinto Bldg. Houston, Texas 77002 Dear Mr. Allums: The Zoning and Planning Commission has authorized me to request your review of certain sections of the zoning ordinance and give us a written opinion as to whether or not the ordinance requires adjoining properties to develop townhouses jointly with common access and driveways. Your .attention is particularly brought to the following: "Section 24, Sub-Section F (2): Joint Project:. A building site may be comprised of two or more adjoining properties in.different ownerships, provided that such owners of adjoining properties agree to design and develop the building site all at one time.. as a joint project, or said owners may waive .the side setback require- ments by submitting a written waiver thereof to the Zoning and Planning Commission signed by said adjoining owners. Within such a joint project, walls of dwelling units may be constructed on property lines separating adjoining properties. A joint project shall satisfy all other provisions of this. Ordinance as though it were a single development.' "Section 24, Sub-Section N (3): Driveways and Access Roads. If owners of two or more adjoining properties develop their.properties either jointly or separately, then they shall coordinate the design and layout of access driveways in such a way that the driveways on all properties act as a single on-site access and cir- culation system, Residents of each property shall be granted right-of-way pri- vileges over. the entire driveway system. In case of a single development, the design. of access roads, pedestrian and bicycle ways and designated parking spaces shall allow for future coordination with adjoining townhouse or~clusterhouse development.' I will be happy to discuss this with you, if further information is required. ~~ Yours very truly, /s/Michael E..Casey, Chairman Zoning and Planning Commission' "September 3, 1981 Mr. Michael E. Casey Zoning and Planning Commission City of West University Place 3800 University Houston, Texas 77005 In re: Opinion -.Joint Development of Townhouse Projects, Section 24, F(2) and Section 24, N(3). Dear Nir. Casey: Q Q The question presented is as follows: `, Does the zoning ordinances of the City. require owners of -contiguous property to develop their properties jointly with common: access and driveways: My opinion is that the ordinance does not require joint development or common access and driveways. When the above sections are read together with the entire,Section 24, the above sections allow (and perhaps encourage)- owners of contiguous properties an oppor- tunity to develop their properties for their common benefit, if they can "agree" and "coordinate" the project.. It is apparent that. the language in these sections would work to the economic and asthic benefit of all parties and therefore their agreement is encouraged by these sections of the ordinance. The owners.must,'for instance, reach agreement regarding the following: 1. Allocation of the cost of construction on the area. '~':;~ey deem beneficial to their joint interest. 2. .Design of a coordinated plan of development for the benefit of both. parties as to the physical location of. the units and parking. 3. Location of 'common driveway' areas for their mutual benefit of their pro- perty. 4. Right of way terms across each of their properties. 5. Allocate tax. payments on the driveway area to be used by the joint project. These considerations involve solely the owners' property rights that affect them individually. and not the City. L will point out that%the City is concerned about its. utility easement. If a joint project affects the~{ity's easement and a satisfactory agreement of the owners and the City regarding a utility easement dedication is not reached, the utility easement 84 in place will prevail over any other consideration of the owners. Therefore, if an agreement of the owners to proceed jointly is made, and all other considerations comply with the ordinance,: then the sections above stated are straigt forward and clear, If the owners do not 'agree'-and '-coordinate;, what then? Each proposed develop- ment plan must stand alone and be considered on its own merits for approval and issuance of building permits. Each owner should be encouraged to submit a de- sign that would allow for future accomodations with adjoining property owners, if they, the owners, can reach an agreement as above noted. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours, /s/ David Allums DGA:dmc cc: Mayor City Manager Building Inspector" "September 1, 1981 Mr. .Rick Hopwood Project Manager Unicenter Properties, Inca 1502 Augusta Drive, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77057 Dear Mr. Hopwood: Pursuant to our meeting Monday afternoon, August 17, I am requesting that your comments for coordinating our two projects be submitted to me in advance. of the September 10 meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission, Any refinements to make our "Planned Unit Development" more successful are appreciated. You and your associates are welcome to attend the September 10 meeting at which I shall be requesting preliminary approval of my project. Very truly yours, s/s Robert C. Williamson RCW:ln cc: Zoning and Planning Commission City of West University Place" Above correspondence on letterhead "Belmont Oaks Townhouses, 6714 Belmont, Houston, Texas 77005'.'. "Certfied Mail Return Receipt Requested September 3, 1981 Mr. Robert C. Williamson 6714 Belmont Houston, Texas 77005. 85 Dear Mr. Williamson: We are rather surprised by your letter in reference to a coordination of the Bel- mont Oaks townhouse development owned by Unicenter Properties Inc., which. has been approved by West University Place for twelve townhouses at Belmont and Holcombe. You infer that we are discussing a co-ordination. of the development of .our proper- ty with yours. We wish to make one thing: emphatically clear to you by this. letter, that being we have no intention whatsoever to develop our property jointly with yours. We do not agree to plans you have submitted to Rick Hopwood on August 17, 1981 and are convinced that your plans will subject our property to massive and grievious harm. Your plans to destroy a 36-inch. oak tree on our property are completely and thorough- ly unacceptable to us. Your plans severely damage the economic feasibility of the (~ development of the property we own. We wish you. the best of luck in developing your property as it stands on its own Q merit. However, we have no obligation to you to allow you to invade the rights we Q have as property owners. Sincerely, UNICENTER PROPERTIES INC. /c/.Charles R. Porter Executive Vice President CRP/tbk cc: Mr. Mike Casey. Zoning and Planning Commission City of West University Place 3800 University Boulevard Houston, Texas 77005" Above correspondence on letterhead "UNICENTER". "September 3, 1981 Mr. Mike Casey, Chairman West University Place Planning and Zoning Commission City of West University Houston, Texas 77005 Dear Mr. Casey: Please find attached a copy. of a letter I sent a Mr. Williamson on reference our development at .Belmont and Holcombe. bVe are continuing to be harrassed by this gentlemen and are rather unsure how to deal with him. I am sorry to have to bother you again with this matter. 49e will be at the Septem- ber 10 meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission and hope the matter can be settled at that time. 8~ Sincerely, /s/ Charles. R. Porter, Jr. Executive Vice President CRP/va" Chairman Casy advised that the above letter was delivered to his office with a copy of Mr. Porter's. letter to Mr. Williamson dated September 3, 1981 attached on a letterhead 'UNICENTER!. Mr: Farrell came to the meeting at this time. Chairman Casey asked Mr. Williamson if he had a written agreement with Unicenter Properties, Inc, for a joint development and. he replied: "Of course not". Board members discussed various setback requirements for townhouse construction anal Mr. Casey stated to Mr. Williamson-that. he, although not speaking for other members, would consider a plan from Mr. Williamson whereby Belmont St, was con- sidered as the front of Mr. Williamson!s property. Mr. Williamson stated that he felt by denying him the right. to incorporate and use the access and driveway pro- posed by the Unicenter Properties would be denying him the right to develop his property. inasmuch as in accordance with the ordinance to consider setbacks as lots were originally subdivided, he cannot develop three townhouses on his pro- perty by using the south boundary line as the front setback and the north as a rear setback of 20 ft., as his property is a parcel of lots fronting on Bellaire Boulevard. Motion by Mr. Farrell, seconded by Mr. Abell, that preliminary plans for the construction of townhouses from Mr. Robert C. Williamson on North 60 ft. x 1.00 ft. of Lot 1 North 35 ft, x 60 ft. of Lot 2 Block 3 b9est University Place 1st Addition 6514 Belmont and A portion of South 100 ft x 140 ft. of Lot 1 and South 35 ft. x 140 ft. of Lot 2 Block 3 West University Place 1st Addition be denied. Voting Aye: All Voting No: None Minutes of the special meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission on July 23, 1981 were approved with the addition of Mr. Allen's name in attendance. Minutes of the regular meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission on August 13, 198.1 were not approved pending further review. I I ~l I S'7 With no further business to come before the Commission, upon motion duly made,. seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Q r. ~~ - _. ~ ~~.. -_ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ATTEST : ~°j~ Secretary