HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-07-1989 Meeting
LA PORTE BOARD OF
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 7,
ADJUSTMENTS
OF
1989
Members Present: Deborah Bernay, Jody Seeger, Steve Hines,
Willie Walker, Charles Christensen
Members Absent: None
City Staff Present: Director of Community Development Joel H.
Albrecht, City Inspector Mark Lewis,
Community Development Secretary Nina
Browning, Assistant City Manager John
Joerns, Mayor Norman Malone, Assistant
City Attorney John Armstrong.
Others Present: David Couch, Debbie Couch, Gary Davis,
Charlie Boyle, Mr. & Mrs. Edwin Mills,
Lloyd Williams, Nathan Crawford, Charlotte
Williams, Fred Burns, Bruce Mosier and 2
other citizens.
1) CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Deborah Bernay at
7:05 PM.
2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 24, 1989 MEETING.
A motion was made by Charles Christensen and seconded by Jody
Seeger to approve the minutes as presented. All were in favor
and the motion passed.
3) CONSIDER APPEAL TO THE ENFORCING OFFICERS DECISION (#A89-004)
REGARDING THE DECISION OF THE ACTING BUILDING OFFICIAL TO
ISSUE A BUILDING PERMIT TO MR. DAVID COUCH FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,000 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY BUILDING, WHICH
IS LOCATED AT 9910 NORTH "H" STREET.
Chairman Deborah Bernay called on the opponents to present
their case at this time. The first speaker for the opponents
was Attorney Bruce Mosier. It was not necessary for Mr.
Mosier to be sworn in since he was presenting a statment only.
Mr. Mosier was employed by Gary Davis and Mr. and Mrs. Edwin
Mills to present an appeal from the granting of a building
permit to Mr. David Couch on Ave. "H", La Porte, Texas for the
construction of a 2,000 sq. ft. building. Mr. Mosier stated
that before he made a statement he would offer to the Board
a compromise position that could perhaps alleviate the
necessity of this appeal. " We would withdraw our objects to
the construction of the building if the building was moved
Board of Adjustment
Minutes of 11-7-89
Page 2 of 5
•
back on the lot in an area that's approximately even with the
construction of the other barns in the neighborhood, so that
this barn does not exist closer to the road than the house.
It is our No. 1 fear that the construction of this 2,000 sq.
ft. metal building in a zoned residential area will invite
the encroachment of commercial activity in the area because
it is a commercial adaptable building, much more readily
commercial adaptable than the residents in the neighborhood.
We also fear because of the type of equipment, the type of
other things that could be stored in this building that it
could create afire hazard because it is to be built according
to the permit very close to another building. We also fear
that it will cause additional drainage problems in the
neighborhood, specifically to a neighbor who fears that the
construction of this building will cause the water to sheet
across this property and into his garage. There is a letter,
that I' m sure you are aware of , written by your Fire Marshall ,
that states "the building violates the fire code for the City
of La Porte because it would be built more than 500 ft. from
the existing fire hydrant" and would be then unprotected and
would be in violation of specific illegality under the
ordinances of the City of La Porte. We would offer this
compromise, we feel that building it in the rear of the lot
would accomplish a number of things, No. 1, it would not be
built in such an area that would adversely affect at least as
much of the drainage in the neighborhood, it would not be the
fire hazard that it would be if it was built next to the house
and further it would not invite the commercial encroachment
into this neighborhood as it would if it were built close to
the road. I would suggest that if the Board would amend the
building permit to allow Mr. Couch to build this building on
the back of his lot that we would have no objection to it at
that point."
Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong stated that the Board
of Adjustment in dealing with situations has the authority and
power to reverse, alter or affirm the decision of the Building
Official, in exercising that power the Board of Adjustment has
no greater power or authority than the Building Official. The
Board of Adjustment could only approve a compromise that would
put the building further back than it is. The Building
Official does not have the authority to require a building be
set back beyond the limits of our ordinance. However, if the
permit applicant, Mr. Couch, were to agree to such a move the
Board could enter that on the record and accept the
compromise.
•
Board of Adjustment
Minutes of 11-7-89
Page 3 of 5
Mr. Mosier ask at this time that Mr. Couch comment on the
proposal made by his clients.
At this point Mr. David Couch addressed the Board of
Adjustments. Mr. Couch stated that he had no objections to
moving the building back some, in fact he said he needed to
get it a little further back to serve the purpose he needed
to serve, but it was not feasible for him to put it on the
back side of his lot. If he put the building on the back side
of the lot it would be more expense to him, because he would
have to build a road to the building and he would have land
that he could not use. He would be willing to go 60-65 ft.
back off the property line from the road side, if everybody
agrees to this.
Chairman Bernay called for a minute recess at this time for
the parties concerned to discuss (off the record) the
proposals made and see if an agreement could be reached.
RECESS - 7:15 - 7:30 pm
Meeting was called back to order and Mr. Mosier again stated
to the Board the feelings of his clients and ask that the
Board deny this permit.
Gary Davis was sworn in at this time and proceeded with his
testimony. In defense of his position he stated his concerns
as the drainage problem that could be created, the fire hazard
as presented by this building and the property value. Mr.
Davis felt that there were other alternatives that Mr. Couch
could look into on the placement of the building in question.
Joel Albrecht was sworn in at this time. He then summarized
the background of the issuance of the building permit to Mr.
Couch. Mr. Albrecht then went over the findings required of
the Board in order to grant an appeal, they are as follows:
A. That there is a reasonable difference of interpretation
as to the specific intent of the zoning regulations or
zoning map, provided the interruption of the enforcement
officer is a reasonable presumption and the zoning
ordinance is unreasonable.
B. That the resulting interpretation will not grant a
special privilege to one property inconsistent with other
properties or uses similarly situated.
• s
Board of Adjustment
Minutes of 11-7-89
Page 4 of 5
C. The decision of the Board must be in the best interest
of the community and consistent with the spirit and
interest of the City's zoning laws and the Comprehensive
Plan of the City of La Porte.
Mr. Albrecht concluded that staff, as evidenced by the
decision to issue a building permit to the Couch's, feels the
intent of the Zoning Ordinance nor the Comprehensive Plan have
been violated. It is however, up to the Board to make a
decision regarding both this issue and the best community
interest. Staff stands behind the decision to issue building
permit #1431.
The Board was made aware of the options established to guide
the Board when considering an appeal. These options are to
deny the appeal, deny the appeal with stipulating conditions,
or grant appeal #89-004.
Other Witnesses speaking:
1) Nathan Crawford - neither for or against
2) Lloyd Williams - in favor of building permit
3) David Couch - would like permission to build his building
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - 7:55 PM.
4) CALL FOR VOTE TO APPROVE OR DENY APPEAL #89-004.
A motion was made by Steve Hines to uphold the Building
Official's decision and the issuance of the building permit,
seconded by Jody Seeger. All were in favor and the motion
carried.
At this time, Chairman Bernay read Section 11-610 of the
Zoning Ordinance that establishes the procedures for appealing
a decision of the Board of Adjustments.
5) CONSIDER ADOPTING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR THE SCHEDULING
OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETINGS.
The proposed procedures for the Board of Adjustments in
setting of meeting, completing application and filing fee,
post notice of Public Hearings, notifying property owners
within 200 ft. of the request, getting out agendas, etc. A
motion was made by Steve Hines and seconded by Charles
Christensen to adopt these procedures. All were in favor and
motion carried.
Board of Adjustment
Minutes of 11-7-89
Page 5 of 5
6) ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
8:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
w
Nina Browning, Secret ry
Community Development
Minutes approved on the ~~ day of 1989.
i
,~ / ,~
~'~..~-~ F--~-
Deborah Bernay, Chairman
Board of Adjustments
•
SPECIAL E X C E P T I O N R E Q U E S T
SE89-004
B A Y S H O R E E L E ME N T A R Y S C H O O L
•
• ~~i
.,
.~. ~ CITY OF LA PORTE •
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT '
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST•
-------------~-------------------------------Application-No..~ ~--•---`---
OFFTCE-USE_-ONLY: Fee.~._._.$~.O~OQ Date Received: ___._...._.___....__._._.
Receipt N o .. _ ...___._~__
NOTE: This Fee is Non-Refundable Regardless of the Board's~Decision.
Applicant: ____._.._..-..._._._...._....-.-•__-_
Name
PH:
Address
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
__._._._..___._.____._.___.__._._._._...._.____.___._._.. to act on my behalf in this matter.
Owners : ~_._._.____..__._.. _...._._----.---•----_.__._.__.___.__-•-_-----•_-_-.
- Name
-•-----.----_...._._.W.~_.-._.._ _.._._.__....._.__....___._._._._._._._._._.._..-.-_-•_-• PH . ..._~__._._.
Address
I am requesting a Special Exception to Sect. ~.__ of the City
Zoning Ordinance No. 1501. I am requesting this Special Exception for
p r o p e r t y l o c a t e d a t __.___.____~__._. _._._._.__._._._.___._-___ _~.___.__----.._--
Address _ Legal Description
( ) Site Plan ( ) Minor Development Site Plan
( ) Major Development Site Plan ( ) General Plan
A Site Plan of the property is attached. Also, I have listed the
information requested below on the following pages of this form.
a) All facts concerning the matter that has led up to this request.
b) The type of relief I am seeking (setbacks, lot coverage, etc.).
c) The grounds upon which I an, making this request.
~ If applicant is NOT the owner, he must provide Authorization to act
on the Owner's behalf.
Date Applicant's Signature
' OFFICE USE ONLY
Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Yes ( ) No ( )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments: __.__._._.~.___.-_..._._._._.
Meeting Date: _._._._._._._.___. Applicant Notified of Date: _._._......_.__...._._..._.
• Board's Decision: Approved ( ) Denied ( ) .
Notice of Board Decision mailed to Applicant/Owner: _._.~._...._._._._.__._..___
'~' ~ •
•
PAGE 2
A Special Exception is a deviation from the requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance. Before they grant a special exception, The Board of
Adjustments must determine that the exception is not contrary to the
best public interest and will not adversely affect the value or use of
adjoining property.
Special exceptions may be granted for the following' items only:
(1) The reconstruction of or addition to a building occupied
by a nori-conforming use. Additions cannot extend past
the lot occupied by the original structure or use. The
reconstruction or use cannot prevent the property from
returning to a conforming use.
(2) Deviation of yard requirements under the following cir-
cumstances:
(a) Exceptions to front yard requirements if front yard
setbacks are not met on abutting pieces of property.
(b) Exception to rear yard setbacks if any four (!4) lots
within a block do not meet setback requirements.
(c) Exceptions to yard requirements on corner lots.
(d) Exceptions to front yard requirements if existing
front yard setbacks on a block are not uniform.
(3) Waiving or reduction of off street parking and loading
requirements i.f the Board feels they are unnecessary
for the proposed use of a building or piece of property.
Please remember it is the Applicant's responsiblity to prove
that a Special Exception will meet the above conditions.
If there is not adequate room on the remainder of this form to
list all pertinent information, please feel free to attach an
additional letter or any information and exhibits you feel the Board
should consider.
FACTS RELEVANT TO THIS MATTER:
;•
~'
TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT:
_ THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST:
•
PAGE 3
CED/1-'87
.._.. CJ1'Y OF' LA YORTE
' ~ ZUNING HOARD OF ADJUS~NT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST•
----------------- Gf/~e.«~of Application No.:f~~19._.-moo
OFFICE USE~ONLY.: Fee,,_~~ /~~`%/ Date Received: -!/ l6 ~. _.
Receipt No.. -
. ----~
NOTE: This Fee is Non-Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision
---------------------------------------------
Applicant: a ~orte-1.~,._l~s~..~(g~--f_S~4oe! .D.:s-tr~~f--------_.
Name
3ot_.~c:s~~~ip~,.wt~.~ ~.~.. PH: ~7~-~s/3
Address
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
-,y_--_---~--______•__-______.__, to act on my behalf in this matter.
Ow n e r ~ . ._.__------•-----._... _.-------~-•-~-~--•------------
Name
___ _ P H : .---~--
-----.__.__._._.~.-. A d d r e s s-~----.- -- -
I am requesting a Special Exception to Sect. 5-7~j<< B of the City
~ Zoning Ordinance No. 1501. I am requesting this Special Exception for
property located at 3v1 _J34~, D..kr,y~-.__._`__[~9___.Ii1~~:ts_L1? Qf Bik ,.~.•
A dress Legal Description
(~ Site Plan ( ) Minor Development Site Plan
( ) Major Development Site Plan ( ) General Plan
A Site Plan of the property is attached. Also, I have listed the
- inforniation requested below on the following pages of this form.
a) All facts concerning the matter that has led up to this request.
b) The type of relief I am seeking (setbacks, lot coverage, etc.).
c) The grounds upon which I'am making this request.
- ~ ~ If applicant is NOT the owner, he tnti~t provide Authorization to act
on the Own is-behalf.
. ~ - ~ ---
1_ .~_~ ,
A plicant s Signature
Date
= ~ OFFICE USE ONLY ~ ~ ,( ~~
• Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Yes (~) No ( )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments : _.11!4.rL Z~..--------
tdeeting Date: Nd~U_._.__._.__: Applicant Notified of Date: _. iS_.___..__..._
. Board's Decision: .. Approved ((/ ) Denied ( )
•
Notice of Board Decision mailed to Applicant/Owner: _.__..........__._.~.____
•
•
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQIIEST #SE89-004
REQUEST FOR:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUESTED BY:
REQUESTED RELIEF:
ZONING:
Bayshore Elementary School, 301 Bay Oaks Drive
(See Exhibit "A")
Lot 9 of Block 3, and Lots 1-12 of Block 4;
Bay Oaks Subdivision
La Porte Independent School District,
represented by Dr. Richard Hays.
A 7.3 foot Special Exception to the 20-foot
setback requirement of Zoning Ordinance 5-700,
Table B, Residential.
R-1, Low Density Residential
The Bayshore Elementary School is an existing facility which
was originally built in the mid 1960's. The School District is
proposing two new additions to the present building. In accordance
with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the School District
has applied for a Special Conditional Use Permit to allow
construction of the proposed additions. The Planning and Zoning
Commission, on November 16, 1989, recommended approval of this
application. The recommendation is subject to approval of a
Special Exception by the Board of Adjustments as well as other
conditions which will be discussed later in this report. City
Council will take final action to approve or deny this request on
December 11, 1989.
Due to an odd lot configuration shown on Exhibit "A", the
proposed west wing will not meet the twenty (20) foot rear setback
required by Section 5-700, Table B of the Zoning Ordinance. All
other zoning requirements regarding placement of the proposed
structure have been satisfied.
The School District is seeking a Special Exception to rear
setback requirements as provided for by Section 11-605.2.b.2. of
La Porte's Zoning Ordinance. This paragraph allows the Board of
Adjustments to grant the following Special Exception:
"To deviate from yard requirements in the following
circumstances: A yard exception on corner lots."
.. •
SPECIAL EXCEPTION QUEST #SE89-004 •
PAGE -2-
The Bayshore Elementary School, as indicated by Exhibit "A", is
located on a corner lot.
Section i1-605.2 also states:
[A Special Exception] shall be granted...only when the
Board finds that such Special Exception will not affect
the value and use of adjacent or neighboring properties
or be contrary to the best public interest.
It is the Board's charge, based on testimony from the applicants,
staff, and concerned citizens, to determine whether or not these
conditions have been satisfied.
ANALYSIS'
Although a large portion of the school property is a double
frontage lot, the western portion (south property line) abuts a
series of single family homesites which are located in the City of
. Shoreacres (see Exhibit "A"). The south wall of the proposed west
wing is to be located 12.8 feet from this property line (See
Exhibit "B"). As the School is assigned a Bay Oaks address, this
• line is considered to be a rear line and as such, is subject to
rear setback requirements.
Special Exceptions to yard setback requirements are allowed
for corner lots due to the fact that setbacks on these lots are,
to a large extent, subject to lot orientation. For example, if
Bayshore Elementary were assigned an Oakshores or a Fairfield
street address, the southern property line would be considered a
side property line. The required side setback for a school located
in a residential zone is 10 feet. The setback of the proposed
addition would then be greater than that required by the Zoning
Ordinance.
With this in mind, it is necessary to consider possible impact
on neighboring property. The proposed addition will primarily
affect one homesite (see Exhibit "B"). Since the rear wall of the
addition will be located fairly close to the rear property line of
this home, the School District has agreed to meet the following
conditions:
1) The 12.8 foot setback area is~to be fenced with gates on
the east and west ends (see Exhibit "B").
2) This fenced area is to be landscaped to make it as
visually attractive as possible. The landscape plan is
• to be approved by the Director of Community Development.
• SPECIAL EXCEPTION QUEST #SE89-004 •
PAGE -3-
•
3) Drainage will, by means of underground culvert, be
channelled away from neighboring residential homesites.
This drainage plan should provide a significant
improvement to the present drainage situation.
4 The School District will, if requested by the neighboring
property owner, install security lighting to illuminate
the fenced area and adjoining residential rear yard.
The provisions listed above are attached as conditions to the
Conditional Use Permit application currently under consideration.
If the permit is approved by City Council, these conditions will
become binding. If the permit is disapproved, the additions cannot
be built.
CONCLUSION•
This request meets ordinance prerequisites regarding
exceptions to corner lot setbacks. It is therefore eligible to be
• considered for the requested Special Exception to allow a rear
setback of 12.8 feet. It must, however, be determined by the Board
whether or not the measures proposed by the School District are
• adequate to prevent adverse affect to "the value and use of
adjacent or neighboring property". This determination will dictate
whether or not it is appropriate to grant this request.
OPTIONS•
I. Approve request.
II. Disapprove request.
III. Table request for further consideration at future date.
1
•
r~
35
F
36
37
11
4 I. 6
U
Y
J
I ~ 9 10 10 I I
BAYSIDE
i I I a I
19 N 1 ~
2 W 2 3 a\ l~
. 9 •
~\
23
21 2 4
22 I 22 1 1 \
2 `
19 .\
~`.
W -._--I
--- Q J
0 (A I \\
J
:~ Q
_ U - -
12 11 12 II 12 4 ~
DRIVE RESERVE
2a 1 24 1 24 I :4 ~ zuo 11)0 0 200 e~0
- - ` -
_IL- •~ / / SCALE OF FEET
25 20 5 - ~ - - 2 'fl ~ ~~
- W .
23 2J - _... 4~ -~ 5 99
- Q
I!
ROAD
1 V
~ I I
~ a
6 FALK AVE. ~ -- --- -~'1 -- _ -• x - i' ,}
-~ 13 17T- 13 12 13 9 10
_ ,-
I I e 1 16 I `~ I I' I .Li_ ~ _ ... 16' ~ I I• 8 9 / =~
DWIRE DRIVE ~ DWIRE DRIVE ° '
I 6 I 9 .. 1 12 1 10
- - m 5 - _ - - - i ~.
BAY OAKS DRIVE / 6A.I JAKS _DRIV__E
301 SAY OAKS DR.; (~
' - 7-'-j I I
1 3 e ~ i• ~ /I n ~nl.nll Ohl. •.L•n,l.l ~ ur..r ~~ ~ I tiz11311 L_I ~ I III Iz
~ ~%'' ~ / o
i ~ ~/
/ /-DISTRICT l BOUNDARY ~ _
I + I 34 9 clTr LIMITS - Q I 1. ,
iO iAIRFIELD F4 RFIEL _ AVE. _ _
I • \\~ f ! I
1.. 1 ~ ' I ~ ~
MEADOWLAWN MEADOWLAWN ~ AVE.
~ I + II 10 I I b `C ~~ J•' sG I_~I .. I~r. - -
a - \ 1 -'--t- - -
~, -3 - ti
~~ ~P
20 n II Is 1 is el I
// ' ~ ~ -
FOREST FOREST- ~ ~ AVE.
I a I 6 ~S~ I
W ,~
_ _ _QS . _ L~~\ }4
20 17 I I
~. SEAOROVE SEAGROVE _ ~' '.'' L' ' ' '" AV
A . \
_..~ -L. ~ .l- I
x
SNOREACR S ri SHOREACRES BLVI
T I
I 6 ~, j I' I ' ~ ~ ~.. Q I O 9 •~ ' I
23 I -~ 14 1 6 i II v~ 7 . ~,~ .
_ ~
OA'K ALE OAKDALE ' '
W -.r - -t.. - - -• -- CITY ~~ ~~ , ~ ~ i
17 11 m IU I - G
• ! ~ -1--- ! - • ~ EXHIBIT A .
i•' HADYLAWN '_~ __ r- _S_H_A_DY LAWN
., I ~~ I , ~ i ..~.~
~'
I
i
I
i
1 t
I ~
0
.,
1
I
• i
i
I
I
. .~ . .. ~ . s: .,
~' I I ~_ 1 :;s ; :I
1 ~ ~
- - - - - -'-~ ' ~ l ;:
\ ~ o
\~ \
~ ~ ~ s ~ ~~\ - ~ Z
~ ~ '" \
~ ~ y
w
~'
I K~
.. ~
1
' II 11 1~
I / ~ i ..J~ L!.
j' \ I ~
• 1• I .
i 1 7
1'/ - \ ~
• s~..
~
{1 I
!~
i :r t
a
..
V~
.
i~ j
, E
.
_' 1
.€ I i
t i
' ji' '
.
. '' .a
:: •
c i
11
•~ a0~
yy
a M-~ ~1' !l'_
~~~r ~:
O
{
C
}
H
i
a
1
s
r
t
i
`,Y..~.
\~,
\~;~~ \
~I
~J
\~'J a•laM • .. „s ~ .
I ~ ; '~ .
! '•.i t
• i /r .
~ L ' 7 : ...
~~ 1 `j j •. '. t~ '.
i. E ` :''. r.:
I j .1 r. .f
1 = ~ -' 1
• • • i,l , y ~ ;•7
I. a ' ie
ar Ala .~e ~ ..
= iia a .1 ~ ~ ~ _:75..
~1 : r : /
' , L: J .. .I• .S iii ~ x
_ - •~~
~• '°. ~ •
~~ -n, v is e ;-~ r',. i.
,~, ~s~~. •1 ~id I ~c ti ~ rti• ~ •~---~°
p ~ z ~ +. a:
$ :; ~ "` --
~} 't c
- 4- s
' = s
.I :
s ~
:j a ~ e
lI f
R
:i ~ -
~i ~ ~ ...
• . ~ ~ ; ~ .. North ~ --~ .
.' I
'EXHIBI'T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
j y.l