12-04-2003 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment

Browse Search

• Zoning Board of Adjustment 7amia y 22, 2004 #VO4-001 Page 2 of 4 In accordance with Section 106-192(b)(2)(b), the applicant is asking the Board to grant relief to the "unnecessary hardship" resulting from, the shallowness, creek and conservation area unique to this property. The standard frpnt yard requirement is 15'. (See Exhibit Q. However, you will note the survey/site plan provided by the applicant identifies the need for a 5'rear yard in lieu of the standard 15'. Also, the minimum landscape setback from a conservation area is 20'. However, you will note the survey/site plan does not identify any landscape setback. (See Exhibit Q. Analysis: Section 106-192(bxl), in 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 chapter would cause an unnecessary hardship because of the circumstances unique to the. property on which the vw lance 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. ❖ That the graining of the variance will not be contrary to the best public interest. ❖ 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 0 That by granting the variance, the spirit of the chapter will be observed. In determining if granting the applicant's request would be contrary to the general public, Staff recognizes that the development of the property would not create a problem with adjoining properties. When looking at the second condition, Staff has determined that the property ' does meet the physical hardship test. Literal enforcement of current regulations would render the site "unbuildable". As previously noted in this report, relief from the standard front yard setback is being considered separately (under a .special exception request); therefore, only the rear yard and conservation area issues are discussed in this report.