10-24-2002 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment

Browse Search

• • - Zoning Board of Adjustment November 20, 2002 #V 02-002 . Page 2 • That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the best public interest. • That literal enforcement of the chapter will result in unnecessary hardship because of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape, topography or other extraordinary or exceptional physical situation unique to the speck piece of property in question. "Unnecessary hardship" shall mean physical hardship relating to the property itself as distinguished from a hardship relating to convenience, financial considerations or caprice, and the hardship must not result from the applicant or property owner's own actions; and • That by granting the variance, the spirit of the chapter will be observed The Boazd must decide if the applicant's request to build 200 units instead of 180 units per Section 106-333 Tab1e~B is reasonable. The Boazd is charged with deciding whether all of the above conditions were met. Nonetheless, Staff believes that Mr. Helm's request does not meet the test for hazdship for the following reasons: First, while the tract has a "flag shaped" configuration, this has not precluded nor impaired development. Furthermore, the amount of acreage located in the floodplain will not.impose a burden on developmern. Second, allowing 20 additional units (approximately 11% over the current standazds) would not negatively impact the community; however, it cleazly goes against the new regulations approved by Planning and Zoning Commission in May 2002 and adopted in October 2002 by Council. During the Council's workshops and public heazing, the Council agreed that the 180-unit maximum was sufficient. Next, the requirements for the placement of 3-story buildings will protect the privacy of adjacent residential development. Mr.. Helm indicated that the current layout of the complex does not impede the project. Fourth, mairnenance of the property will occur, because all multi-family developments aze required to issue a bond ensuring .their commitmern to the upkeep of the complex for its lifespan. Conclusion: ~ The applicant has not demonstrated that circumstances unique to his property exist. Based on the facts outlined iri this report, the conditions required fo grant a~ variance do - not exist. meals: Asper Section lOt%r 196 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte: Arty person or persons; jointly or severally, aggrieved by arty decision of the Board of Adjustment, or arty taxpayer, or arty o,~cer, department, board or bureau of the city may present to a court of record a petition for a writ of certiorari, as provided by V.T.C.A., Local Government Code Section 211.011, duly verified setting forth that such decision is illegzzl, in whole or in part, spec~ng the grounds of the illegzrlity. Such petition shall be presented to the court within'ten days after the filing of the decision in the o,~ce of the Board of Adjustment. .