Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 3 of 10 <br />Zoning Board of Adjustment <br />Minutes of March 24, 1994 <br /> <br />La Porte. Mr. Keeney's further comments were directly derived from his <br />"Appeal of Enforcement Officer's Decision to Zoning Board of Adjustment", <br />dated November 24, 1993, and received by the Board on that date. Said <br />"Appeal" is attached to these minutes as Exhibit "B". <br /> <br />Mr. Capen asked Mr. Keeney if he was expecting the Board to rule on the <br />constitutionality of the appeal. Mr. Keeney replied that this hearing is the <br />first step they are taking and that it is important to get all of the issues into <br />the record. The appeal from this Board is to a District Court on the <br />Substantial Evidence Rule. Everything you want to get before that Court <br />must be entered into the record at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Harrington addressed Mr. Keeney's statements regarding Section 4-202. <br />The City has no objection to this property being used as a single family <br />residential property. Mr. Harrington noted that the issue before the Board <br />is whether or not the Enforcing Officer made an incorrect interpretation of <br />a non-conforming structure which is Section 4-201 and not Section 4-202. <br />Another issue addressed by Mr. Keeney dealt with accidental damage to <br />structures. Mr. Keeney raised the issue that it doesn't talk about structures <br />being replaced. Mr. Harrington stated that if any non-conforming structure <br />burned to the ground, the City would not allow someone to rebuild a stick <br />built non-conforming structure. Ms. Stevenson's mobile home could have <br />been repaired had it not been too damaged, but it could not be completely <br />replaced. <br /> <br />Mr. Zoller asked for help in interpreting the words "rebuild" and "reconstruct". <br />Mr. Harrington replied that the structure could be repaired, rebuilt, or <br />reconstructed, since this type of structure is capable of having repairs done to <br />them. <br /> <br />Mr. Capen asked Mr. Keeney if the purpose of his report was to get all the <br />issues into record so it can be taken to court. Mr. Keeney replied that he <br />sincerely hoped that the Board voted to overrule the decision of the Enforcing <br />Officer. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />Mr. Keeney asked for a moment of rebuttal to Mr Harrington's remarks. He <br />stated that the Zoning Ordinance is a restriction on property owner's rights <br />