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 2 of 5 <br />Zoning Board of Adjustment <br />Staff Report of 4/2B/94 <br />V94-003 <br /> <br />After becoming aware of the new driveway, the City informed the applicant <br />that it must be removed. This was based on the provisions of Zoning <br />Ordinance Section 10-605. Figure 10-3 of this section requires 150 feet of <br />street frontage in order to have two driveway entrances. As noted, the "A" <br />Street face of this property is 125 feet. Mr. Poteet is requesting a variance <br />that will allow him to maintain the second "A" Street driveway. <br /> <br />Analysis: <br /> <br />Zoning Ordinance Section 11-606 defines a variance as a "deviation from the <br />literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance granted .., when strict conformity <br />to the Zoning Ordinance would cause an unnecessary hardship because of the <br />circumstances unique to the property ...." This section also charges the Board <br />to grant variances only when it finds that all of the following conditions have <br />been met. <br /> <br />1. That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the <br />public interest. <br /> <br />2. That literal enforcement of the Ordinance will result in <br />unnecessary hardship because of exceptional narrowness, <br />shallowness, shape, topography or other extraordinary or <br />exceptional physical situation unique to the specific piece of <br />property in question. "Unnecessary hardship" shall mean <br />physical hardship relating to the property itself as distinguished <br />from a hardship relating to convenience, financial <br />considerations or caprice, and the hardship must not result from <br />the applicant or property owner's own actions; and <br /> <br />3. That by granting the variance, the spirit of the Ordinance will <br />be observed. <br /> <br />The first issue to be dealt with will be hardship. As noted in the background <br />section of this report, the original driveway arrangement has proven to be <br />unworkable. Elimination of the second "A" Street driveway would result in <br />damage to both public and private property as drivers exit across "lawn" area <br />and through the City's drainage swale. The ability to exit at a wide variety of <br />points and angles would result in a potentially unsafe traffic situation of "A" <br />Street and at the feeder road intersection. Placing physical barriers to force <br />vehicles to use only the original drives would result in drivers exiting against <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.