Laserfiche WebLink
<br />': <!' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />...... .,. <br /> <br />Staff Report <br /> <br />May 27, 2004 <br /> <br />Requested by: <br /> <br />Requested for: <br /> <br />Location: <br /> <br />Zonine::, <br /> <br />. Backe:round: <br /> <br />Analvsis: <br /> <br />Variance Request #V04-004 <br /> <br />Mr. T~ Buchanan & Ms. Teresa Buchanan (Property Owners) <br /> <br />Lot 2, Block 3 of Summer Winds Section 3, W. B. Lawrence Subdivision, William M. <br />Jones Survey, Abstract482, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. . <br /> <br />9501 Dry Desert Way <br /> <br />. Low Density Residential (R-I) <br /> <br />Per the survey, this property is 8,288 S. f. The primary residence alone is 3,314 S. F. <br />, with the addition of an existing roofed patio of approximately 387 S.F. The total square <br />footage under roof, therefore, is 3,701 S. F. This patio was const:rll:cted without issuance <br />of a city permit. <br /> <br />-Per City Ordinance 106-333 Table H. 'Page CD106.47 (supp. No.9), the maximum <br />allowable lot coverage for single family detached dwelling units -is 4.0% for this type of <br />lot. The allowable coverag~ for the subject lot is 3,315 S. F. With the patio cover, the <br />residence is 386 SF. over the limit or at 44.65% coverage. To be in compliance with <br />city ordinance, therefore, the patio, cover would have to be removed. - <br /> <br />lIDs variance requests seeks to allow the current.covered patio of387 S. F. to remain in <br />pl~e. The owner states, that they were unaware of the 40% requirement and were not <br />informed by the builder at closing. They also intended, in the future, to build a storage <br />. shed in their back yard;' Staff recogmzes that the patio cover was done in a professio~al <br />, manner, enhances the appearance of the property and does not protrude beyond the house <br />itself. they state that it would take 'a good sum of money to tear the patio cover down <br />and repair the roof on the house. They further ask relief .from the provision of the Section <br />106-333 to enjoy their investment. . <br /> <br />Section 106-192(b)(I), in the Code of Ordinances, defines a variance as a deyiationfrom <br />t~e literal provisions of the chapter, which is granted by the Board when strict <br />conformity to the chapter would cause an unnecessary hardship because of the <br />circumstances unique. tt;) the property on wh!ch the variance is granted <br /> <br />-Section I 06~ I defines lot coverage as "... the 'area under rqof on any given lot." <br /> <br />Except as' otherwise prohibited, the board is empowered to authorize a varimce from a <br />requirement when the board finds that all of the following conditions have been met: <br /> <br />.:. That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the best public interest. <br /> <br />.:. That literal enforcement of the chapter win result in unnecessary hardship beCause of <br />exceptional narrowness, ~halloWness, shape, topography or other extraordinary or <br />