Laserfiche WebLink
ZBOA <br />03/28/13 <br />413-95000001 <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />Conclusion: <br />regulation. This consistency in the enforcement of the regulation ensures <br />no "special privilege" to any one property. <br />The zoning ordinance objective is to eliminate and/or ameliorate <br />nonconformities. Typically, eliminating nonconformities is addressed <br />when property owners decide to develop, renovate or remodel their <br />properties. Granting this request would indeed grant a special privilege to <br />this property owner. <br />c) The decision of the Board must be in the best interest of the community and <br />consistent with the spirit and interest of the city's zoning laws and the <br />comprehensive plan of the city. <br />Staff believes reoccupying an unsafe structure would conflict with the <br />intent of the regulation and would not be in the best interest of the <br />community or be consistent with the spirit of the City's Zoning Ordinance. <br />While the property owner has presented an estimated cost to renovate the <br />building, which is alleged to be less than 50% of the appraised value <br />($41,742 Improvement value per HCAD), the Board may not grant <br />permission to issue a permit for remodeling a nonconforming and <br />obsolescence of structure unless the owner is able to prove that it can <br />reasonably be done for that cost. <br />The general intent and purpose behind the zoning ordinance is to promote <br />public health, safety, and welfare. This is accomplished by providing a <br />safe transportation system, providing sufficient open spaces and <br />landscaped areas, and preventing the overcrowding of land as well as <br />ensuring stable structures. The zoning ordinance clearly provides for these <br />items. Upholding the enforcement officer's decision in this case would <br />certainly be in the best interest of the community and would be consistent <br />with the spirit and interest of the City's Code of Ordinances. <br />Based on the facts and considerations noted in this report, Staff feels the <br />enforcement officer's decision is correct. <br />Staff recommends that the Board deny this appeal and uphold the <br />ordinance provisions found in Sections 106-261 and 106-262 of the City's <br />Code of Ordinances. <br />