07-27-95 Regular Meeing and Public Hearing

Browse Search

enforcement officer is a reasonable presumption and the zoning ordinance is unreasonable. . That the resulting interpretation will not grant a special privilege to one property inconsiste~ with other properties or uses similarly situated. . The decision of the Board must be in the best interest of the community and consistent with the spirit and interest of the City's zoning laws and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of La Porte. I In terms of this request, there is no real question regarding the specific intent of the Zoning Ordinance, or map. Setback requirements are clearly spelled out by Ordinance. Zoning district boundaries are clearly defmed on the City's Zoning Map. The Enforcing Officer's decision to deny the permit was also reasonable. Given the clear regulations established by the Zoning Ordinance and Map, denial of the permit was the only action the officer was able to take. What is at issue is the question as to whether the Zoning Ordinance's intent, as it applies to this specific property, is reasonable. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to examine the intent behind BI setback regulations. Ordinance Section 7-200 establishes the purpose behind BI regulations. . The purpose of the Business/Industrial Park District is to provide for the establishment of industrial development that is compatible with surrounding or abutting residential districts and to encourage high level performance standards. Development in the Business/Industrial Park District is limited to administrative, wholesaling, manufacturing and related compatible uses, with suitable open spaces, landscaping and parking areas. As noted in the preceding paragraph, BI zones are intended to act as buffers between residential areas and more intense industrial activities. Building setback is one means of achieving this buffering effect. Another reason for the somewhat large setbacks relates to the types of business activity that are allowed in BI zones. The majority of uses permitted in BI zones are either trucking related, or rely on trucking for pick up and delivery. In the context of this appeal, the question is whether a 40 foot rear setback on this property is necessary either for buffering, or to facilitate on site truck maneuvering and circulation. As illustrated on Exhibit A, the rear property line of the applicant's tract directly abuts an adjoining property. There is no intervening road or easement. As illustrated on Exhibit B, the applicant's rear property line is also a zoning boundary. The abutting property is zoned Light Industrial (LI). LI setback from side and rear property lines is lO feet.