Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Board of Adjustment • • <br />Minutes of October 24, 2002 <br />Page 2 <br />~. Motion by Bob Capen to approve Appeal of the Building Official's Decision #A02- <br />003 with the following conditions: <br />1. Permit approval shall require certification from a Texas registered engineer <br />that the existing slab will adequately support asingle-family dwelling. <br />2. Permit approval shall require written approval by a State licensed master <br />plumber that the existing ground plumbing is in working order. <br />3. Permit application shall reference Appeal #A02-003. <br />Second by Rod Rothermel. All were in favor and the motion carried. <br />IV. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR ENLARGEMENT OF A NONCONFORMING <br />STRUCTURE, #NCS02-001, WHICH SEEKS APPROVAL TO ENLARGE A <br />FRONT YARD FENCE. REQUEST IS BEING SUBMITTED AS PER SECTION <br />106-262(G) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE. <br />Ms. Wilmore presented staffs report: The applicants, Bryan and Brandy Gwin, are <br />requesting approval to enlarge a nonconforming structure by replacing an existing front yard <br />fence with a decorative 4-foot wrought iron fence. The height and material of the fence <br />would change; the fence location would not <br />Ms. Wilmore noted the applicants plan to utilize the site for the retail sale of boats. Previous <br />owners operated a used car lot at the site that included apre-existing, nonconforming two- <br />foothigh post and cable kont yard fence. The current, owners claim the existing front yard <br />fence does not satisfy dze requirements of d~eir insurance company. <br />Staff believes that increasing the height of the fence will increase the degree of <br />nonconformity. _ <br />A. PROPONENTS <br />Chairperson Grant swore in Birney Havey. Mr. Havey explained the new <br />fence is necessary to satisfy insurance company requirements. The new <br />landscaping will partially hide the new fence. <br />Chairperson Grant swore in the property owner, Bryan Gwin. Mr. Gwin <br />stated that the concrete slab area in the front would be lost if the fence were <br />moved back. It would create an area that would be unusable between the <br />fence and the new landscaping that is being installed. Mr. Gwin also noted <br />the need for this type offence for insurance purposes. <br />B. OPPONENTS <br />None <br />