Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05281974 ZPC Minutes~a t~ _ SPEC CAI. MEET ~N~ ZON[NG AND PLANN[NG COMMfSS[0N MAY 28, 174 The Zoning and Planning Commission of the City of West University Place conR vened in special session, Tuesday, May 28, 1974, at the City Hall, 7:30 p.m. The following members were present: Mr. E. Cene Hines, Chairman, presiding; Members 0. C. Bartholomew, W. Peter Lipscomb, and H. A11en Weatherby. Mr. Roland. Dahlin was absent. The Chairman ascertained from the secretary that proper notice of meeting had been posted on the bulletin board at the City Ha11 three days prior to the scheduled meeting as required by HB3, Amending 6252-17 V.C.S. Motion by Mr. Lipscomb, seconded by Mr. Weatherby, to recess the special meet ing and open Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. L. B. Schwartz-~ Bach to subdivide Lct 4, Block 70 West University Place lst Addition 3330 Tangley into two (2) lots, each 50 ft. x 150 ft., each facing Tangley. The Chairman ascertained from the secretary that legal notice of the Public Hearing was published in The Southwestern Angus on May 10, 1974, and all property owners within 200 ft. of the property were notified in writing of the Public Hearing. It was also reported that no correspondence had been received either for or against the subdivision. Mr. Hines explained the procedure to be following during the Public Hearing, introduced the secretary and members of the Zoning and Planning Commission, and administered the oath to all persons desiring to speak either for or against the subdivision during the Public Hearing. Mrs. Schwaxtzbach, 3330 Tangley, speaking for her~plication: T request the property be subdivided into two (Z) lots, as I am linable to go uo and down stairs of our two story house and my husband is not able to maintain the yard. We have a buyer for our property; however, the porches is contingent on the subdivision of our lot being approved by this. Commission. Mr. Hines: It is my understanding that these lots, if the subdivision is approved, would both face Tangley. Ts this correct? Mrs. Schwartbach: Yes, this is correct. Mr. John Olsen: I am the potential purchaser of this property, contingent upon this application being approved. I plan to move the present house onto one (1) of the proposed lots and remodel it. This would leave the other lot availabe for the construction of a new house. Mr. Tom Austin, 3402 Tangley: I am for this subdivision being granted. It would improve the value of the surrounding property if another house is built on one (1) of the proposed lots. I can also understand Mrs. Schwartzbach wanting to leave her big house. ~,: _ Mrs. Lurline Sampson, 3401 Tangley: Tam for the subdivision of this pro- petty. Tt would improve the value of the adjacent property. Mr. T. I~. Austin, 3402 Tangley: T think it would be nice to have a new house on the block and certainly Lmderstand the neighbors position. Mr. Lipscomb: T would like to make a comment. The sign in the Schwart~ Bach yard says three (3) lots. T want to make sure the potential-buyer understands this situation. This application for subdivision is being con- sidered by this Commission as one (1) lot. ,~ Mrs. Schwartzbach: We understand this now. The mix up came because our ~ title and tax notice boeth say three (3) lots. We have not misrepresented C this property to anyone. Q Mr. Olsen: T understand the situation and do not feel that this property A has been misrepresented to me. Motion by Mr. Weatherby, seconded by Mr. Bartholomew, to close the Public Hearing to consider the subdivision of Lot 4, Block 70 West University Place 1st Addition 3330 Tangley into two (2) lots, each 50 ft. x 150 ft. , each facing Tangley. Motion by Mr. Weatherby, seconded by Mr. Bartholomew, that application from Mr. Schwartzbach to subdivide Lot 4, Block 70 West University Place 1st Addition 3330 Tangley into two (2) lots, each 50 ft. x 150 ft., each facing Tangley, be allowed with the understanding that this application has been considered as one (1) lot subdivided intwo two (2) lots. Voting Aye: All Voting No: None Commissioners agreed to spend the next ten (10) minutes in a work session instead of taking a recess. Chairman requested secretary retire from meeting at this time to run. copies of judgment decreed in District Court concerning subdivision of Lot 2, Block 40, West University Place 1st Addi- tion instigated by Mr. Doy D. Myers, owner. Copies were distributed to mem- bers for their information and study upon secretary's return. Copies of Ordinance $1015 and X1016, calling joint Public Hearing of the City Commission and the Zoning and Planning Commission on ,7une 12 ~ 13, 1974, to consider the Zoning and Planning Commissioners recommendation to the City Commission for rezoning of certain peripheral properties, were presented to the members for their study and discussion. A copy of the Traffic Engineering Analysis for the City of West University (Edloe Overpass) was submitted to the Commission for their revie~,rand has been placed on file in the City Manager's office. The secretary returned to the meeting at this time-and copa.es of .the judg- ment decreed. in District Court concerning subdivision of Lot 2,81ock 40, West University Place 1st Addition instigated by 1~tr. Doy D, ldiyers, owner, were distributed to members for their consideration, Nation by Mr, Lipscomb, seconded by Mr. Weatherby, to recess the special meet- ing and open Public Hearing to consider theapplication of Mr. Cecil C. Lan- caster to subdivide Lot 7, BLock 29 West University Place 1st Addition 6401 Westchester into three (~) lots, two (2) facing on Westchester, and one (1) facing Duke Street, each to be 50 ft. x 100 ft. The Chairman ascertained from the secretary that legal notice of the Public Hearing was published in The Southwestern Argos on N1ay 10, 1974, and all pro- perty owners within 200 ft. of the property were notified in writing of the Public Hearing. NJr. Hines introduced the secretary and members of the Zoning and Planning Commission, explained the procedure to be followed during the Public Hear ing, and administered the oath to all persons desiring to speak either for. or against the subdivision during the Public Hearing. Mr. Cecil C. Lancaster, 5115 Beechnut (owner of property located at 6401 Westchester), speaking fox his application: I desire to divide the present lot into three (3) lots, each 50 ft. x 100 ft., two (2) facing Westchester and one (1) facing Duke Street. T propose to have the present house moved to one (1) proposed lot, as it is now sitting on two (2) of the proposed lots, leaving the garage where it is. Mr. Roland Dahlias entered the meeting at this time, Mr. Lipscomb: Where would the house be moved? Mr. Lancaster: I would move the house to the proposed corner lot. Mr. Hines introduces Mr. Dahlias at this time. Mr. Hines: Would you explain leaving the garage in its present location? Mr. Lancaster: The garage is already located on the proposed corner lot facing Duke. NIr. Hines: If the house is relocated and moved to the proposed corner lot, this would leave both garage apartments on the other proposed lots. Mr. Lancaster: If application is granted, t plan to leave the garage apart- ments where they are for the pxesei~t, but plan to demolish them and improve the property in the future, Mr. Lipscomb: Are the apartments occupied'? Mr. Lancaster: Yes. Mr. Hines stated that a_f the garage was left on the other proposed lots they would not be allowed to be apartments. The following letter was received concerning the subdivision of this lot and copies distributed to members for their information and consideration: May 26, 1974 Zoning and Planning Commission City of West University Place 3800 University Boulevard Houston, Texas 77005 Members of the Commission: By your notice under Reference 743, you have advised that Mr. Cecil C. Lancaster has filed application to subdivide two (2) lots at the corner of Westchester and Duke Btreets into three (3) lots, each 50 ft. x 100 ft. As the owners of the property at 6429 Westchester, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on this application. We are unalterably opposed to approval of this application. The fact these two (2) lots are located on a corner should not allow them to be developed in such manner to affect the jingle residence nature of West University. Approval of this request, and others which would undoubtedly follow the precedence set thereby, would create townhouse- type areas within the internal parts of our city. This would be mos undesirable. Lots in West University Place, being genrally 50 feet wide, are small by comparison with standards in new subdivision. To allow crowding a third house in the rear of two lots because they are located on a corner would degrade the home like atmosphere of the neighborhood. Values of the nearby property would be adversely affected by such crowding. We are relying on the sound judgment. of the members of this Commis- sion to maintain the dignity of our residential areas. We urge you to deny this application to crowd three houses on two lots. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Mrs. Thomas B. Malloy /2/ Thomas B. Ma11or Mrs. ,roan O'Malley, 6404 Westchester: I am opposed to this subdivision. It would create too much population desty to that area and a greater parking L problem would occure. T would, at this time, like to present the Commis sign with a petition signed by the resident owners of surrounding property affected by the proposed subdivision. This petition reads as follows: May 15, 1974 Zoning and Planning Commission City of West University Place, Texas 3800 University Boulevard Houston, Texas 77005 Reference: 743 We, the undersigned residents and property owners of the City of West University Place, all of who reside in the general area of Duke and Westchester Street, wish to make known to you our object- ion to any subdivision of-the property situated at 6401 WEstchester in the VI Zoning`District, being Lot 7, Block 29, West University Place First Addition, in the City of West University Place. We believe that the subdivision of this property into three (3) lots, each 50 ft. x 100 ft., two (2) fronting on Westchester, and one (1) fronting on Duke, will destroy the residential character- istics of the neighborhood. Sincerely yours, Signed: Mrs. Alzira G. Jones 6420 Westchester Mr. and Mrs. Thos. P. Camp 6352 Sewanee R. V. Stone 6356 Westchester Mrs. R. V. Stone 6356 Westchester E. J. O~Ma11ey, Jr. 6404 Westchester Mrs. Joan F. O~Ma11ey 6404 Westchester Robext M. Booth(Wi11is ~ Nell Witt) 6415 Westchester Roy W. Hefley 6353 Westchester Mrs. Roy Hefley 6353 Westchester Mrs. Rena Mullens 6402 Rutgers Mr. A~tfnzr de Tranattes 6424 Westchester. Mrs. Corinne E. Norton 6411 Westchester Ted P. Finklea 6416 Westchester Lee Hawkins 6417 Westchester Effie Hawkins 6417 Westchester Mrs. T. W.Cleveland 6412 Westchester J. W. Sandle 6412 Westchester Mr. and Mrs. C. C. Gallaway 6345 Westchester Mr. and Mrs. John Povlick 6355 6ewanee Mr. and Mrs. Rudolf Osgzani 6347 Sewanee Mr. and Mrs. Carroll S. Hudson 6351 Sewanee Mr. and Mrs. James R. Reese 6421 Westchester Presented to the Commission fox their information and consideration cones cerning the application of 1~, Cecil Lancaster to subdivide his property loca- ted at 6401 Westchester and place on file in the City 1Hanager~s office. Mr. R. V. Stone: I am opposed to the subdivision of this property because it would set a precedence and create traffic and parking problems and be detrimental to our community, Mr. Roy Hefley, 6353 Westchester: I am against the subdivision of this property due to the density of population and because of the garage apart ments, where at least five (5) cars. are coming and going at all times of the ,~ day and night. T have lived here 36 years and have five (5) children, I do ~ not want a situation like Phis near me. ,b ~ Mr. Arthur de Tranaltes, 6411 Westchester; I am against the subdivision of ~ this property for the same reasons stated by Mr. Hefley, Q Mr. Lipscomb: Is there more than one house and is the house or houses rented? Ts the house a duplex? Mrs. Lancaster: .The house is a duplex and has always been a duplex and rented since Mr, Hefley moved there. Everyone in West University knows it is and has alwayy been rental property, Mrs. Nell Witt: I agree with Mr. Hefley. The traffic is already bad with cars coming and going ~.t all hours of the day and night. Subdivision of this lot would make a bad situation worse. Mr. T. W.Cleveland, 6412 Westcheste, asked to be allowed to speak. He was not present at the opening of the meeting and had not taken the oath. Mr. Hines administered the oath to Mr. Cleveland at this time. Mr. T. W. Cleveland, 6412 Westchester: I have been a resident in the area for 2-1/2 years. Tenants have come and gone in the rental house and apartments. Subdivision of this lot would create a great tax on .the water and sewer lines. Beautification of the corner would add more to the are and looks better than three (3) rent houses. I waited 14 years to move into West University and wish to add to the betterment of the city. I am against anything that will detract from the neighborhood and the city. I am against this proposed subdivision of Mr. Lancaster's lot. Mrs. Irene Stone, 6356 Westchester: We waited so long to get into West University. We planned our house and thought West University the nicest place anyone could live. This is our permanent home. We are not against anyone im- proving their property and would like to see two (2) houses built on the property instead of having it divided into three (3) lots. Mrs. Arthur de Tranaltes, 6424 Westchester: Everyone of the neighbors here has been very kind in stating their objections to this proposal. I feel, however, that this should be said. Mr. Lancaster stated that his property is rented to three (3) single gentlemen. I question this. There are 5, 6 of 7 men coming in and out of the rent houses at all hours of the day and night. People .come and go .~i every three. (3~ ox i?oux C42 months:; the tenant~`nevex seem-to be permanent. We have teenage daughters, as doesl~r. Fiefley, and this situation is not indi~ cative to a family atmosphere. Tn addition to-this, the addition of more rent property would create greater parking problems. We have two (2) boys and the parked cars create a danger, as the children must go almost intothe streetbefore they can see if any cars are coming. Mr. Jack OFNialley, 6404 Westchester; T can appreciate Mr. LancasterFs position. However, T have a 13 year old daughter-and frankly it is disturbing to see men coming and going at all hours and not knowing who belongs there and who doesn't. I donFt think what goes on there is very conductive to this area and our neigh- borhood. We want West University kept for families and children. We feel that the coming and going at all hours of the night and day by different people is an invasion of the privacy of this. neighborhood. Nor. Hines: There is nothing in the Zoning Ordinance preventing the renting of any property,. The purpose of this Commission is not to consider the moral standards of occupants living in rental property. Please omit this type of in~ formation from your remarks concerning this proposed subdivision. Parking applies to this Commission and any subsequent building would have to follow the standards set forth by the city, Mr, Stone: This disturbs me, as it could start a precedence and there could be seven (7) more houses built there facing Duke Street and this would be wrong. This is my biggest objection. Mr. de Tranaltes: I would like to ask Mr. Lancaster if he plans to move his present main structure to the corner and demolish the garage apartments. Mr. Lancaster: I would eventually improve the property and turn a portion into a one (1) family dwelling; however, it is impractical for me to do all of this at once. Mr. Lancaster: I noticed cars parked near my property that did not belong to the tenants. T investigated this by calling the city and had the police investi- gate. 1 found out that one of our neighbors was parking his car at my property. Another time I noticed a car had been parked at my property for a number of days. ~Jpon investigation I found out the car had been deserted. I feel that my character has been reflected upon. We cannot control the morals of the people renting our property. T have tried to eliminate these type of people. There are two (2) families and a total of eight (8) people living on my property. Mr. Hefley has seven (7) people living on his property. Mr. de Tranaltes: How are you going to improve the property with the garage apartments? Mr. Hines: Any changes within that property will have to meet building require- ments and city requirements. Changes must be made according to the regula- tions of West University Place. Motion by Mr. Lipscomb, seconded by Mr. Weatherby, to close the Public Hearing to consider the subdivision of Lot 7, Block 29 West University Place 1st Addition 6401 Westchester .fit i into three (3) lots, two (2) facing on Westchester, and one (1) facing Duke Street,-each to be 50 ft. x 100 ft. Voting Aye:- A11 Voting No; None Motion by Mr. Weatherby, seconded by Mr. Lipscomb, that application from Mr. Lancaster to subdivide Lot 7, Block 29 West University Place 1st Addition 6401 Westchester Q Ca into three (~) lots, two (2) facing on Westchester, and one (1) facing Duke Street, each to be 50 ft, x 100 ft., be denied, because the establishment of such a key lot facing Duke Street would create a situation which could have a direct effect on the area, as well as an undesirable parking situation. Mr. Hines stated that although lots in West University have been subdivided to create key lots, the side yard set back was the same as the present houses on the street. The creation of three (3) lots within the area out of a single 100 ft. x 150 ft. lot has not been done in this particular area. Mr. Weatherby stated that he, although he was not speaking for other members of the Commission, would be receptive to anapplication making two (2) lots facing Westchester, assuming this application is denied , Voting Aye: A11 Voting No: None The Chairman declared a four minute recess before recomreningthe regular meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission The definition of a "family was discussed with the City Attorney, but no action was taken at this time. Further discussion will be held at a futuremeeting. With no further business to come before the Commission at this time, upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjurned at 9:10 p.m. ~, ~//- / irman ATTEST: ~j~/./''~.~_ Secretary