My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
03-24-1994 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA
LaPorte
>
.Minutes
>
Zoning Board of Adjustment
>
1990's
>
1994
>
03-24-1994 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/1/2017 4:36:17 PM
Creation date
7/31/2025 11:32:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Meetings
Meeting Body
Zoning Board of Adjustments
Meeting Doc Type
Minutes
Date
3/24/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Page 7 of 8 <br />Board of Adjustment <br />Staff Report of 3-24-94 <br />#A93-004 <br /> <br />The intent, simply stated, is that the Bay Oaks Subdivision is best suited to continue as a <br />subdivision of conventionally built single family homes. Given the extensive and public <br />nature of the Comprehensive Plan development process, staff feels the Plan should be <br />construed as representing the best interest of the community. <br /> <br />With this in mind, staff would summarize the key points of this matter as follows: <br /> <br />· The Building Official's decision was to deny a permit for replacement of a <br />non-conforming "structure". The decision did not deal with non-conforming <br />"use". <br /> <br />· The H.D.D. Code manufactured home was a non-conforming structure. <br /> <br />· This structure was afforded protected status until the July 25, 1993, fire. <br /> <br />The structure, in the estimation of the applicant, was effectively destroyed by <br />fire. This is evidenced by her decision to have the structure demolished. <br /> <br />· The applicant's decision to have the structure demolished was made <br />independently and not at the direction or recommendation of the City. <br /> <br />· Issues raised by the applicant's attorney such as constitutionality of the Zoning <br />Ordinance and possible conflict with state and federal law are not matters <br />that the Board of Adjustment is empowered to consider. Therefore, they <br />should not be considered in conjunction with this appeal. <br /> <br />· There is no reasonable difference of interpretation as to the intent of the <br />Zoning Ordinance or map. <br /> <br />· The requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, as they apply to non-conforming <br />structures, are reasonable and should be upheld. <br /> <br />· The Building Official properly interpretated the requirements of the Zoning <br />Ordinance. His decision is reasonable and should be upheld. <br /> <br />· Granting this appeal would afford a special privilege to this property. <br /> <br />· Granting this appeal would not be consistent with the best interest of the <br />community, nor would it be consistent with the spirit or intent of the Zoning <br />Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.