01-27-10 Special Called Regular Meeting and Public Hearings of the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment

Browse Search

Board of Adjustment March 25,2010 #VIO-OOl Page 2 of3 Analvsis: The pool proposed by the applicant complies with the required side setbacks and deck placement requirement; however, it does not comply with the required setback from the house and/or utility easement in the rear yard. The applicant is requesting the following: D Allow the water's edge of the pool to be 3' off the house instead of the City's standard 6' setback. (Allow a 3' reduction.) D Allow the water's edge of the pool to be l' off the utility easement instead of the City's standard 3' setback. (Allow a 2' reduction) The Code of Ordinances defines a variance as a deviation from the literal provisions of the chapter which is granted by the Board when strict conformity to the zoning ordinance would cause an unnecessary hardship because of the circumstances unique to the property on which the variance is granted. Except as otherwise prohibited, the Board is empowered to authorize a variance from a requirement when the board finds that all of the following conditions have been met. a) That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the public interest; b) 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 specific 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 c) That by granting the variance, the spirit of the chapter will be observed. The Board must decide if the applicant's request for constructing a swimming within three feet of the house is reasonable. The Board is charged with deciding whether all of the above conditions have been met. Staff s review of the case does not indicate an "unnecessary hardship" relating to the property itself. Staff finds no extraordinary or exceptional physical situation unique to the specific piece of property in question.