Cleveland Advocate - News
City council approves changes to zoning ordinance
 |
| Mike Stephens (left) talks with Willie Carter (center) and Scott Lambert about zoning and annexation after the November 13 Cleveland City Council meeting. City council voted to approve zoning for four recently annexed plots and decided not to vote on a rezoning item. |
By ALEX WUKMAN
The Cleveland City Council voted unanimously to remove the R2 classification and the maximum height stipulation from the city’s zoning ordinance. The changes to the zoning ordinance were prompted by recommendations from the zoning commission and came just six months after the ordinance went to the voters in the May general election.
The elimination of the 35 feet maximum height requirement was done because of a pending real estate deal with a hotel developer.
“The developer can’t build the hotel under 35 feet,” said J. Andrew Rice, a consultant to zoning board.
Rice went on to explain that the Cleveland’s attorney Ken Wall felt that it would have been illegal to issue a hardship variance to the developer because the height requirement was preventing the construction. He said it had to be taken up by the zoning board.
When the zoning ordinance was being proposed, the height requirement was added for safety concerns. At the time the safety concerns were explained by City Manager Philip Cook as being based on the fact that the Cleveland Volunteer Fire Department didn’t have a truck that could reach much higher than 35 feet.
Steve Wheeler, Cleveland fire chief, and John Davis, city building inspector, stated at the city council meeting that even though the status of fire department’s trucks hadn’t changed that safety would not be an issue.
“We’re under the international building code and it addresses the issues of fire safety and fire suppression,” said Wheeler.
Wheeler stated that the city’s building code lays out in great detail which buildings have to have sprinkler systems and which don’t.
“The taller the building, the more sprinklers it has to have,” said Wheeler.
Wheeler’s comment prompted local resident and fellow firefighter Robert Enloe to ask, “What about [fires] during construction?”
Davis responded that building codes don’t take effect until after the building is occupied and that any fire code enforcement would be based on OSHA’s requirements.
Davis also felt that the zoning code preempted the existing building codes.
“We are circumventing our own building code with this,” said Davis.
Enloe, however, wasn’t finished; he raised the issue of privacy. He objected to removing the height ordinance and allowing a multi-story commercial building to be built near a residential area, therefore infringing on a homeowner’s right to “run around in the backyard.”
Enloe didn’t respond to questions regarding his feelings about multi-story homes built in neighborhoods. He also raised complaints about a measure brought before the zoning commission to re-zone a piece of property at the intersection of Love and Liberty streets.
The current designation of the property is residential; however the property owner Kathleen Anglin was seeking to have it classified as commercial.
“The people who are building the hotel are interested in buying my property and they won’t buy it if it’s not zoned commercial,” said Anglin.
Enloe responded by attempting to paint Anglin as an outsider.
“You bought that property as an investment. I know it’s been sold three times,” said Enloe.
His attention turned elsewhere when Anglin tried to explain that she had inherited the property from her deceased husband.
Enloe stated that he and the other neighbors opposed to the rezoning of Anglin’s property had issues regarding what would be built after it was re-zoned.
“From what I read, it could be anything from a car wash to storage rooms,” said Enloe.
Zoning commission member Eddie Lowery confirmed that zoning something commercial means that any of the approved business types could conceivably build there.
Enloe then asked if that meant that it could be a 24-hour establishment and Lowery confirmed that there are currently no operating hour stipulations in the zoning ordinance.
“It’ll be just like Whataburger,” said Enloe. “We already had one neighbor move out because he couldn’t take it anymore.”
He also raised concerns regarding the drainage, sewage, freeway access, property taxes and road width.
He illustrated his points by stating that after a rain storm, raw sewage can be found in what he termed his ‘road ditch.’ He said he and other residents are concerned that if Anglin’s undeveloped piece of property is re-zoned commercial, their residential property taxes would rise. His other concern was that the street is currently too narrow to allow an 18-wheeler to turn.
“None of you people would like to be mowing your yard and have wheel marks in your road ditch,” said Enloe.
Lowery responded by stating that the property tax concern should be raised with the Liberty County Appraisal District and that the rest “are all city service issues that have nothing to do with zoning.”
Rice explained that the only things that fall under the purview of the zoning commission are height and privacy issues.
Enloe raised another point regarding a buffer zone between a commercial building and a residence to which Davis responded that currently the only requirement is a solid eight-foot-tall fence.
“There’s no buffer between the back of a commercial building and a residential one besides an eight-foot wooden fence,” asked Enloe. Davis replied that was true.
As the discussion continued, it turned to the idea of another amendment to the ordinance that would create a second commercial classification with much more stringent requirements regarding building height as well as mandating the inclusion of green space between the commercial and residential buildings.
The zoning commission recommended tabling the proposal to re-zone Anglin’s property due to concerns from the neighbors. There were no objections raised to the elimination of the R2 classification.
The elimination of the 35 feet maximum height requirement was done because of a pending real estate deal with a hotel developer.
“The developer can’t build the hotel under 35 feet,” said J. Andrew Rice, a consultant to zoning board.
Rice went on to explain that the Cleveland’s attorney Ken Wall felt that it would have been illegal to issue a hardship variance to the developer because the height requirement was preventing the construction. He said it had to be taken up by the zoning board.
When the zoning ordinance was being proposed, the height requirement was added for safety concerns. At the time the safety concerns were explained by City Manager Philip Cook as being based on the fact that the Cleveland Volunteer Fire Department didn’t have a truck that could reach much higher than 35 feet.
Steve Wheeler, Cleveland fire chief, and John Davis, city building inspector, stated at the city council meeting that even though the status of fire department’s trucks hadn’t changed that safety would not be an issue.
“We’re under the international building code and it addresses the issues of fire safety and fire suppression,” said Wheeler.
Wheeler stated that the city’s building code lays out in great detail which buildings have to have sprinkler systems and which don’t.
“The taller the building, the more sprinklers it has to have,” said Wheeler.
Wheeler’s comment prompted local resident and fellow firefighter Robert Enloe to ask, “What about [fires] during construction?”
Davis responded that building codes don’t take effect until after the building is occupied and that any fire code enforcement would be based on OSHA’s requirements.
Davis also felt that the zoning code preempted the existing building codes.
“We are circumventing our own building code with this,” said Davis.
Enloe, however, wasn’t finished; he raised the issue of privacy. He objected to removing the height ordinance and allowing a multi-story commercial building to be built near a residential area, therefore infringing on a homeowner’s right to “run around in the backyard.”
Enloe didn’t respond to questions regarding his feelings about multi-story homes built in neighborhoods. He also raised complaints about a measure brought before the zoning commission to re-zone a piece of property at the intersection of Love and Liberty streets.
The current designation of the property is residential; however the property owner Kathleen Anglin was seeking to have it classified as commercial.
“The people who are building the hotel are interested in buying my property and they won’t buy it if it’s not zoned commercial,” said Anglin.
Enloe responded by attempting to paint Anglin as an outsider.
“You bought that property as an investment. I know it’s been sold three times,” said Enloe.
His attention turned elsewhere when Anglin tried to explain that she had inherited the property from her deceased husband.
Enloe stated that he and the other neighbors opposed to the rezoning of Anglin’s property had issues regarding what would be built after it was re-zoned.
“From what I read, it could be anything from a car wash to storage rooms,” said Enloe.
Zoning commission member Eddie Lowery confirmed that zoning something commercial means that any of the approved business types could conceivably build there.
Enloe then asked if that meant that it could be a 24-hour establishment and Lowery confirmed that there are currently no operating hour stipulations in the zoning ordinance.
“It’ll be just like Whataburger,” said Enloe. “We already had one neighbor move out because he couldn’t take it anymore.”
He also raised concerns regarding the drainage, sewage, freeway access, property taxes and road width.
He illustrated his points by stating that after a rain storm, raw sewage can be found in what he termed his ‘road ditch.’ He said he and other residents are concerned that if Anglin’s undeveloped piece of property is re-zoned commercial, their residential property taxes would rise. His other concern was that the street is currently too narrow to allow an 18-wheeler to turn.
“None of you people would like to be mowing your yard and have wheel marks in your road ditch,” said Enloe.
Lowery responded by stating that the property tax concern should be raised with the Liberty County Appraisal District and that the rest “are all city service issues that have nothing to do with zoning.”
Rice explained that the only things that fall under the purview of the zoning commission are height and privacy issues.
Enloe raised another point regarding a buffer zone between a commercial building and a residence to which Davis responded that currently the only requirement is a solid eight-foot-tall fence.
“There’s no buffer between the back of a commercial building and a residential one besides an eight-foot wooden fence,” asked Enloe. Davis replied that was true.
As the discussion continued, it turned to the idea of another amendment to the ordinance that would create a second commercial classification with much more stringent requirements regarding building height as well as mandating the inclusion of green space between the commercial and residential buildings.
The zoning commission recommended tabling the proposal to re-zone Anglin’s property due to concerns from the neighbors. There were no objections raised to the elimination of the R2 classification.
Copyright © 2009 - Houston Community Newspapers Online