Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12131977 ZPC MinutesLl .REGULAR MEETING ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 13, 1977 The Zoning and Planning Commission of the City of West University Place convened in regular session on Tuesday, December 13, 1977,7:30 p.m., with the following members present: Chairman Norton, presiding; Members Casey and Nuffer. Mr. Johnson and Mr. LaCook were absent. Proper notice of meeting had been posted at the City Hall three days prior to the scheduled meeting. Public Hearing to consider the application to Mr. M. T. .Crump, owner, to subdivide Lot 2, Block 40 West University Place 1st Addition 6636 Buffalo Speedway into two lots, each 50' x 100', each facing Buffalo Speedway, was opened at this time.. The Chairman ascertained from the secretary::that proper notice of the public hearing had been published in The Southwestern Argus on November 16, 1977 and that notice to property owners within 200' of the subject lot had been mailed on November 16, 1977• The Chairman outlined the procedure to be followed for the public hearing and..ad- ministered the oath to all those in the audience who desired to speak concerning this subdivision. Mr. M. T. Crump, owner, stated that bout four years ago an application to sub- divide this property in this same manner had been disapproved by the Zoning and Planning Commission, but that a number of things had occurred during that period of time which he felt had changed the situation; that the cost of fuel and affected the life style of most neighborhoods- size of homes and lots, desira- bility of townhouses - and that economic considerations makes it difficult to afford a large lot or a large lot.. with a small home. He also stated that at the time of the first application there were only about a dozen townhouses in West University Place on Bissonnet and at this time there are about forty-five town- houses constructed or under construction on Bellaire Boulevard some of which are only a block from his lot. He said he had been trying to buy this lot or at least one-half of this lot for. about a year and a half and that he felt he would be con- tributing by removing an old fifty year old house and a vacant lot and building two new homes anal that he would not be devaluing the neighborhood by the subdivi- Sion. He noted that most of the lots on Buffalo Speedway. were presently. 50 ft. tots and that he had talked to a number of neighbors and had received no objection from them about the subdivision of the lot. Upon questioning from the members of the Zoning and. Planning Commission,. Mr. Crump made the following statement: That he owns the entire }ot with the intention of selling the half on which the existing house is located if the subdivision is granted and to build on the vacant half; that the existing house is located on the north one-half of the lot and that it is a habitable two bedroom house which is now rented; that there are no 50 ft. lots on the north side of the 6600 block of Buffalo Speedway, but give out of six lots on the north side of the 6600 block of Buffalo. Speedway are 50 ft. lots; that he justifies increasing .the density by keeping up the quality of homes in West University Place as prices rise and that he did not feel that the manner in which West University Place is struct- ered to .provide for the townhouses that a few new residential homes created by subdivision would over burden utilities. Mr. Ernest N. Hensen, 6630 Buffalo Speedway., posed several questions to Mr. Crump which were repetitive of testimony he had already given concerning his ownership of the entire lot, number of 50 ft. lots in the block, reason for selling. one-half of the lot, as well as questions concerning his. attempted purchase of the south one-half while it was owned by Mr. Myers and questioning. of neighbors. 'C!" Mr. Hensen gave a brief history of this lot and the one he owner (Lot 3) stating It1"j that atone ti me they were unde r co mmon ownership which had resulted in a poor O planning usage and stated .that. his house, which is adjacent to the subject lot on "~ the north, was so situated that oth er than tearing. it down no other lot could be ~ created on his .1.00 ft. lot and.: that this was true of other lots on the west side of the street. He stated that the 50 ft. lots across the street were well-planned with driveways correctly placed and house of conventional style and he felt the building of_a townhouse-style house with parking in front would detrimentally affect the loo ks of the block. Dr. Joseph A. Walter, 662.2. Bufflo Speedway, directed several questions to Mr. Crump which concerned his alleged harassment of himself to sign an application for subdivision during the time he was the owner of the property. Chairman Norton admonished Dr. Walters that this was not proper testimony, that they were not there to defend or prosecute, and to please confine his remarks as to his opinion on why or why not the subdivision should be approved or disapproved. Dr. Walters stated he was opposed to the subdivision of the lot: 1. There are still-plenty of lots left in West University Place which have decent footage-and size for building rather than splitting up this one.. 2. Basically opposed because of continuity and beauty of the block and that it would destroy a landmark house and put up a townhouse which would ruin the looks of the. block. He presented at this time letters from the following persons opposed to the sub- division: Mrs. Guss A. Schill, 6b17 Buffalo Speedway; Mr. and Mrs. M. James Hen- derson, 662.1 Buffalo Speedway; Mr. and Mrs. Walt Chandler, 6637 Buffalo Speedway; Mr, and Mrs. Richard J. McPherson,. 6603 Buffalo Speedway; and Mr. and Mrs. Mike Jamail, 6629 Buffalo Speedway. Members of the Zoning and Planning Commission advised that architectural style and aesthetic taste cannot be a basis judgment for subdivision, but health, fire and safety of residents of West University Place and overall benefit to West Univer- sity Place. Dr. Walters and Mr. Hensen both said that West University Place sewer system is already strained and the. city. is now being required to renovate .the system to meet State standards and that water pressure is low in this area. Mr. T. H. Norman, 6b48 Buffalo Speedway, stated. he opposed this subdivision as he did the other application from Mr. Myers; that he and Dr. Walters had attempted to buy the south one-half of this lot from Mr. Myers but were turned down; that it would change the character of the neighborhood; that. he believed this was the most beautiful block in West University, Place; and that subdivision of hots addded to the already burdened Fire Department and Police Department. services and utility facilities. Mrs. Janice Hensen, 6630 Buffalo Speedway, stated she was opposed to he subdiviion and described the west side of the 6600 block of Buffalo Speedway as having beau- tiful hones on 100 ft. lots and she felt this would be destroyed by the subdivision.. Mr. Hensen stated he felt there was a place for smaller :townhouse type lots and that was on the periphery of the city. In answer to question from Mr. Casey to Dr. Walters as to why. he sold the lot to Mr. Crump if he was opposed to the subdivisio, he said he did. not know that he could ask again for subdivision after it had been disapproved previously. Chairman. Norton administered the oath. to .Commissioner Greene who came to the meeting late. Commissioner Greene stated that he lived directly across-the street from this tot and he understood a new application could not be made after a disapproval. The Chairman explained that in view of changes since the previous disapproval in fairness to the applicant and citizens of West University Place, the Zoning and Planning. Commission felt a public hearing should be called to .hear evidence on this application and that this public hearing was now being held. In answer to a question from Mr. Nuffer concerning his reason for thinking the subdivision of this property would be for the good of West University Place, Mr. Crump stated that he felt each application should be dealt with separately; that there are lots on Buffalo Speedway which are vacant that are overgrown and that when they are not kept it is detrimental. to the whole neighborhood and whole city; that we are looking at change that is facing West University as well as other parts of the Houston area and that some way we have to make changes that have been started and that may continue;. that Houston and West University Place is growing and people have to have p}aces to live and that he does not feel 50 ft. lots are a detriment to the community and that water and sewer facilities. that are 50 years old have to be up dated whether or not. density is increased. Motion by Mr. Casey,seconded by Mr. Nuffer, that public hearing be closed. Voting Aye: All Voting No: None The meeting was recessed for ten minutes. The recessed meeting was._called to order and members discussed order in which agenda items should be considered. Motion by Mr. Nuffer, that Item No. 3 "Further consideration of Rules of Procedure" should be considered at this time. During discussion of this motion, it was unanimously decided that the discussion and final adoption of the Rules of .Procedure should be tabled until a full comple- ment of the members of the Commission are present and that .action of this meeting should be based on the Rules of Procedure as temporarily adopted at the special meeting of November 7, 1977. Mr. Nuffer withdrew his motion. Motion. by Mr. Nuffer, seconded by Mr. Casey, .that consideration be given at this time to the approval or disapproval of subdivision of Lot 2, Block 40 West University Place 1st Addition ltl~ O Q Q Voting Aye: All Mr. Casey stated that he questioned .how much you can restrict usage of a man's property, in particular this piece of .property. It was noted that. Lot 3 of this block had at some time been subdivided as shown.. on city map although not developed as such and what would be the result if at some future date some owner should decide to develop this lot as two tots; that he could see that economics and continuity are considerations which could become important in the future and that. he appreciated the people's ideas of aesthetic value, but that no one can dictate a life style. Uoting No: None Mr. Nuffer stated that he had some real reservations about. subdivision on principle and the fire hazards, utilities and police protection are also considerations; that changes have certainly been made and maybe we owe a duty to our citizens to make residential lots more easily available. Chairman Norton stated that he had some reservations on particular properties, that he thought the issue to be considered is improvement to the city and the density problem; that probably. in this area of West University P1 ace there was a larger per- tentage: of 100 ft. lots than in other areas; that allowing more density might com- promise the overall situation of .the city; that allowing subdivision of the. larger lots for economic reasons might result in pressure that might ultimately result in requests for multi-dwelling lots; that-the city .has acknowledged change in the creation of the townhouse districts; and that he felt the character of the town would be ultimately changed by subdivision. During discussion, it was. also pointed out that this particular lot, if subdivided, would contain .two lots, 50' x 150', which is over the minimum requirements for a lot in West University Place, and that it was felt we should not look at things that might happen ten years from now, but circumstances as they are now for the city. Motion by Mr. Nuffer, seconded by Mr. Casey, that application of Mr. M. T. Crump to subdivide Lot 2, Brock 40 West University Place lst Addition into two lots, each 50' x 150', each facing Buffalo Speedway, be denied. Voting Aye: .Nuffer Voting No: Casey Norton Preliminary ..plans for the construction of townhouses on Lot 2, So. portion of Lot 3, Block 41 West University Place 1st Addition- 3200 Block of Bellaire Boulevard were presented by Mr. and Mrs. G. G. Lawrence, owners, and Mr. Charles Dickson, architect. Mr. Dickson stated the plans called for the construction of eleven luxury type `.. townhouses to be sold within the $100,000 range with 2200 to 2400 sq. ft., swimming pool and security guard station, and a gate across the driveway into Rutgers . Discussion of the plans concerned fences, setback of swimming pool,. accessibi- lity to units at east end of project and terminus of driveway for turn around. Motion by Mr. Casey, seconded by Mr. Nuffer, that preliminary plans for the construction of townhouses on Lot 2, So. portion of Lot 3, Block 41 West University Place lst Addition be approved as presented subject to the following: 1. Swimming pool setback from the Rutgers property line to be 8 ft. instead of 5 ft. 2. Lot 4 dimensions to be adjusted to provide an additional 24 ft. of common driveway area to act as a proper terminus. and subject to compliance with building code, or other governing ordinances, whether or not herein specified, for any subsequent. construction. Voting Aye: All Voting No: None Minutes of the special meeting of the Zoning and Planning Commission on November 7, 1977 and the regular meeting on November 8, 1977, were approved as submitted. With no further business to come before the Commission, upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, .the meeting adjourned a~15 p.m.