Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-27-1992 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 27, 1992 Members Present: Deborah Bernay, Charles Christensen, Sidney Grant, Willie Walker, Bob Capen Members Absent: All Present City StatT Present: Director of Planning Chuck Harrington, Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, Chief Building Official Ervin Griffith, City Inspector Mark Lewis, Planning Secretary Peggy Lee I. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order by Deborah Bernay at 7:04 PM. II. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO NEW AND REAPPOINTED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS A. ADMINISTER OATH TO BOARD CHAIRMAN John Armstrong administered the oath of office to Chairman Bernay. B. ADMINISTER OATH TO BOARD MEMBERS John Armstrong administered the oath of office to all of the Board Members simultaneously. C. ADMINISTER OATH TO BOARD ALTERNATES There were no alternate members present. ill. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 25, 1992, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING John Armstrong asked that the minutes be amended to reflect that he was in attendance at the meeting. With no other amendments or corrections necessary, Chairman Bernay declared the minutes approved. Page 2 of8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 IV. CONSIDER SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST SE92-OO2. REQUESTED EXCEPTION SEEKS TO ALLOW THE HEIGHT OF AN EXISTING FRONT YARD FENCE LOCATED AT 9626 CARLOW LANE (LOT 310; BLOCK 18; SPENWICK PLACE, SECTION II) TO BE INCREASED TO 6 FEET 9 INCHES. Mr. Harrington briefed the Board regarding the Special Exception Request. This request, if granted, would allow the existing front yard fence to be increased to 6 feet, 9 inches. The location of the property is 9626 Carlow Lane. At some point in time, the fence was modified or reconstructed without a building permit. The matter was brought to staff's attention by a complaint. There is an existing cbainlink fence located on the applicant's property. The height of the fence is approximately 5 feet 6 inches. An aerial photograph of the Spenwick area (taken in 1984) indicates that some form of front yard fence has been located on this property since then. Prior to January 30 of this year, the applicants constructed a wooden fence along the west face of the property. It is located immediately adjacent to the original chainlink fence which is still in place. The new fence is between 6 feet, 9 inches and 7 feet in height. In February, 1992, the applicants were given notice, by certified mail, that they were in violation of City Ordinance for failing to obtain a building permit prior to erecting the fence and for erecting a fence that is taller than 6 feet, 6 inch maximum height allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. After failing to take action to correct the violation, the applicants were issued a municipal court citation, with court arraignment held on July 15. This request was filed subsequent to the hearing at which time the judge, during the hearing process, postponed any legal action until this case could be presented to the Board. The request is addressed by Ordinance, Section 4-201.2 which states that a non-conforming structure (in this case, the front yard fence) can only be enlarged or extended in accordance with the provisions established for structures in the district which the non-conforming structure is located. This section also requires a Special Exception for the enlargement or extension of a non-conforming structure. The issue in this case, is the enlargement (increase in height) of a non- conforming fence. The applicant is not eligible to allow for a special exception to allow an increase in fence height in excess of 6 feet, 6 inches as measured from average adjacent ground. Staff found no basis of fact which would support granting the increased height and recommends the Board deny the request for the increased height. Page 3 of 8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 A. PROPONENTS Chairman Bernay swore in Dana Kay Murphy. Ms. Murphy stated the only reason she raised the height of the fence was because it was under water about one foot and she had dogs that were digging under the fence and getting out. In some places she measured the fence to be 6 feet, 6 inches and in other places it measured 6 feet, 9 inches. B. OPPONENTS Chairman Bernay swore in Robert Edwin Bryant. Mr. Bryant stated he is the immediate adjacent neighbor to the fence in question. He stated he was the one who filed the complaint and is totally opposed to the fence. There was an existing 5 foot cyclone fence in place which was constructed after La Porte annexed Spenwick. Mr. Bryant claims the fence is not constructed properly and feels that it will soon become an eyesore. The fence completely obstructs his view. Mr. Bryant requested the Board to deny the request. Ms. Adams was a proponent but asked to speak at this time and was recognized by Chairman Bemay. Chairman Bernay swore in Sharon Adams. Ms. Adams stated one of the reasons the fence was constructed was to keep the dogs from biting the neighbor children who sometimes agitated the dogs by poking things through the fence. Chairman Bernay swore in Dorothy Springborn. Ms. Springboard told the Board that she lives 2 doors down from Ms. Murphy. Ms. Springboard asked if front yard fences were allowed. Mr. Harrington stated that by Ordinance this is not allowed. Ms. Springborn stated she had resided there since 1969 and she recalls the chainlink fence being there for a number of years, however she could not recall whether the fence was constructed before or after La Porte annexed Spenwick. Ms. Springboard stated that the wooden fence obstructs her view of the street. Page 4 of 8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 Mr. Harrington stated 13 notices were mailed to adjacent property owners. Two (2) were returned in favor and none were returned in opposition. Mr. Armstrong reminded the Board that the notice given for this meeting was on the extension of the fence. A motion was made by Charles Christensen to deny Special Exception Request SE-92-oo2 and was seconded by Bob Capen. All were in favor and the motion passed. Chairman Bemay read aloud Zoning Ordinance Section 11-610 regarding procedure for appealing a determination of the Board of Adjustment. V. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST V92-003. REQUESTED VARIANCE SEEKS TO ALWW LAUREL INDUSTRIES, WCATED AT 780 SOUTH 16TH STREET (BWCK 833 AND 860, TOWN OF LA PORTE) TO CONSTRUCT lWO (2) NEW BUILDINGS. ONE WITH A FRONT SETBACK OF 30 FEET, , INCHES AND A SIDE SETBACK OF 5 FEET. THE OTHER BUILDING IS TO HAVE A SIDE AND REAR SETBACK OF 5 FEET. THIS VARIANCE ALSO SEEKS TO ALWW AN INCREASE OF ALWWABLE WT COVERAGE TO 47%. Mr. Harrington addressed the Board regarding Variance Request V92-003. The request is being made by Laurel Industries for the property located at 780 South 16th Street. The applicant is proposing to construct 2 buildings. The first building (building 1) will require a variance to the front and side setbacks. The proposed front setback is 30 feet, 6 inches and the proposed side setback is 5 feet. The second building (building 2) will require a variance to allow side and rear setbacks of 5 feet. The final component of the request deals with lot coverage. A variance to allow 47% lot coverage is requested. Laurel Industries manufactures antimony oxide, a chemical additive used in the production of finished plastic products. The applicant is now proposing to expand it's production facilities by constructing an 11,200 square foot building which will be utilized to house process equipment. The applicant is also proposing to replace two (2) existing "office trailers" with a new 3,075 square foot building. The second building will house offices, a laboratory and employee lunch and locker rooms. Zoning Ordinance Section 7-600, Table B establishes setback and lot coverage requirements for facilities located in HI zones. It should be noted that lot coverage is essentially based on roofed Page 5 of 8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 structure. Driveways and open parking/staging areas are not included in lot coverage calculations. Building 1 would require a setback variance of 45 feet at the rear and 25 feet to the side. Building 2 would require a setback variance of 19 feet, 6 inches and a setback variance of 25 feet to the side. H the complex is developed as proposed, it would require a lot coverage variance of 17%. Section 11-606 of the Zoning Ordinance empowers the Board to grant variances subject to the following conditions: · I. That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the public interest. · II. That literal enforcement of the Ordinance 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 · ill. That by granting the variance, the spirit of the Ordinance will be observed. The locations of the proposed buildings are based on the need to preserve maneuvering space and loading dock access for heavy trucks. Additionally, there is an electrical easement which extends onto the property and limits possible building locations. Based on the facts presented, staff has no objection to the locations proposed for buildings 1 and 2 and would recommend the Board approve the requested variances to the setbacks. The applicant is expected to address the Board regarding the issue of lot coverage. Larry Wilson, representing Laurel Industries, briefed the Board of the applicant's intent. He also noted that unlike chemical plants, the applicant would be producing fire retardant type materials which would not be highly volatile. Chairman Bemay swore in Jack Phillips. Page 6 of 8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 Mr. Phillips gave a presentation to the Board composed of general information of the company. Sidney Grant expressed concern about fireways and wanted to determine that future owners which may use the facility for other purposes would have adequate room for fireways. Larry Wilson stated that adjacent plant owners have expressed no dissatisfaction with the plans. Mr. Harrington informed the Board that 7 notices were mailed. One (1) was returned in favor. Mr. Harrington told the Board that staff recommends approval of the variance request contingent upon the following condition: The parking and landscape area along the 16th Street face of the property shall be developed in a manner consistent with the plan presented at tonight's meeting. A. PROPONENTS There were none. B. OPPONENTS There were none. A motion was made by Charles Christensen to grant Variance Request V92- 003 subject to the parking and landscape area along the 16th Street face of the property being developed in a manner consistent with the plan presented at tonight's meeting, with the final planting plan subject to the Director of Planning's approval. The motion was seconded by Sidney Grant. The vote was unanimous and the motion passed. Page 7 of 8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 VI. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST V92-004. REQUESTED VARIANCE SEEKS TO ALLOW AN INCREASE OF ALLOWABLE HEIGHT TO 150 FEET IN ORDER TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A TELEPHONE RELAY TOWER WHICH IS TO BE LOCATED IN THE 200 BLOCK OF HIGHWAY 146 SOUTH (LOTS 5-8; BLOCK 21; TOWN OF LA PORTE). Mr. Harrington provided the Board with the following information: The location of the variance request is the 200 Block of Highway 146 South. The request is by G.T.E. Mobilenet to construct a 150 foot radio telephone relay tower on this site. Under the present Zoning Ordinance, the maximum building height is 45 feet. Exceptions are made to this height limitation for "essential" services. The tower would benefit G.T.E. Mobilenet's cellular telephone service which is not considered "essential", however, staff feels that when the Zoning Ordinance was being prepared, an oversight was made by not taking structures for such purposes into consideration. After reviewing the request, staff feels that granting this request would not be contrary to public interest but feels that a literal enforcement of the Ordinance would create a hardship on this particular industry. Staff recommends the Board grant the variance request to allow the construction of the 150 foot tower. Notices were mailed to seven (7) property owners but no replies were received. Chairman Bemay swore in Shep Polland. Mr. Polland explains that in order to provide satisfactory cellular telephone service to their customers in this area, they must strategically place their towers. Mr. Polland requested the Board to grant the variance request. Sidney Grant asked if the tower would be located far enough away from the airport. Mr. Polland informed the Board that G.T.E. has applied with the FAA for their approval. Mr. Harrington noted that the staff would ask to see F.AA approval before granting the permit. A motion was made by Charles Christensen to grant Variance Request V92-004 for the construction of a telephone radio tower and was seconded by Bob Capen. All were in favor and the motion passed. Page 8 of 8 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of August 27, 1992 A. PROPONENTS There were none. B. OPPONENTS There were none. VII. STAFF REPORTS There were none. VIII. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was dilly adjourned by Chairman Bemay at 8:14 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Peggy Lee, Planning Secretary Minutes approved on the 24th day of September . 1992. Deborah Bemay, Chairperson Board of Adjustment SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST SE92-003 ReQuested For: Zonin2: ReQuested By: Bacqround: Analysis: !lllil!I""nI.jlll~ ................................................................................... ................................................................................ 2757 South Broadway which is further described as Tract 18-F of the Crescent View Subdivision (See Exhibit A). R-3 High Density Residential. W.J. Huber, property owner. Richard's Auto Repair and Used Car Sales is a legally established non-conforming use located at 2755 South Broadway. This business has been non-conforming since 1987 when the City, as part of a comprehensive, city-wide rezoning, designated this area as R-3, High Density Residential. Richard's is seeking to expand to the building and parking lot located next door. The address of this building is 2757 South Broadway. It is also located in the R-3 zone. Until recently, 2757 South Broadway housed the Huber Zinn Tavern. The tavern, while in operation, was also classified as a non-conforming use. The applicant's request, if approved, in addition to allowing Richard's to expand, will prevent any future taverns from opening at this location. Due to it's non- conforming status, Richard's Auto cannot expand at this location without first obtaining a Special Exception from the Board of Adjustment. Both Zoning Ordinance Section 4-201.6 and Section 11-605.2.a, subject to the following restrictions, allow the Board of Adjustment to grant Special Exceptions to enlarge or extend buildings occupied by non-conforming uses: 1. The use may not expand beyond the lot of record. 2. The exception, if granted, may not serve to prevent the return of the property to a conforming use. Page 2 of 2 Zoning Board of Adjustment Special Exception Request #SE92-003 3. The Special Exception must not adversely affect the value and use of neighboring property or be contrary to the best public interest. The subject tract is described in the tax roll as "tract 18-F". The tract presently occupied by Richard's Auto is described as "tract 18-B". The tracts are contiguous and both are owned by Mr. W J. Huber. Although the tracts have individual descriptions, they are noted in the tax roll under a single, combined listing. Staff has checked earlier editions of the tax roll and found tbis property to have been described in the same manner for several years. Under these circumstances, the combined tracts constitute a single lot of record. The applicant's request therefore, satisfies the first ordinance condition. No building additions or modifications are proposed for the tract under consideration. Richard's proposes to utilize the existing parking lot. The building is to be used for incidental storage. As there are to be no changes to the property, granting this exception would not serve to prevent a return to a conforming use at some time in the future. Finally, regarding the value and use of neighboring property and the ''best public interest", as noted earlier, the non- conforming use established for 2757 South Broadway is as a tavern. Should tbis exception be granted, the use will change to auto repair and sales. This is a business that will primarily operate during normal Monday through Saturday business hours. As such it would appear to be more compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood than a tavern whose peak business hours are during the evenings and weekends. Conclusion: The requested Special Exception satisfies Zoning Ordinance prerequisites and is eligible for approval. Recommendation: Based on the facts of tbis case, staff recommends approval of Special Exception SE92-003. ~ ~M ~ . ~~ 234\ HUBER" ::SS"I0-"-"-"-"-" 1P..306, I ZINN ~ '~~ I \1, I 1 N".~ 10.3 . ~ U~~'~.~~ ~'J ~ ~~ ,~~L 10.3 ( ~__IT~~,f"~" _-+4 ,I /7 J / ' ,\ \ I fit; /5 /4 j~ 2805 / / \ \ I \ 7' if /9.5 J.r '-301 ~ . r 239\ 233 / V./. 303 '1---1 ((0 A ~'JiA n r.,. Gi"r~ /5 i+-, -~ ASB I(} I . . i:l' ~ \. 2BI7 / Nn /~ 11\ ~:<; 33F' c r I c} CS 7 ~. ,17"if-...:. B \--- \ 2.~/~ ,1--1') ? <:.. 1 1~823 306 ~ /" 8 ~224 &.e 222 . " 34D~ ~ ~ eto . / "--. '\-'''( ~ . ~ -K::--/. - - ~ e:-- L- "- "- tr -H~-YSH; 1~1- [~~"- __ ~ (~ rr ( .(~ ~~ ~OU\ /5'A/~ ~ I / . 12 /L!-.---J ~~~Y _ ~~ L~ 1 0 Q n 310 [3OB) 304 c.-.-> /. ~11"f l~ V ( rr h '\ LJ ,- ,v ( I c- ~ .. = - --~-==<, ,/}1J Be 137! 36 ...... 'IQ ::u.c ~ 10.'tF! I I I I r-- B.7 r ll'H_1 ~ l:SlJ""'l~.' DR. f;,~~~u~- . ) C ~ 1 \ I :)Q I _J) ~ 9.8 -+- >- <( ~ Cl <t 0 a:: , to 9.\ y l / 4 \ RICHARO'S A/JTO REPA/~ 8 USEO CARS 20 2/ 122 I , 219 - ) ~\ EXH\B1T ~ /) 8.7 r-- STAFF REPORT Staff Report Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Schedule 9-17-92 Staff has prepared a Planning Schedule for Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of Adjustment meetings. This schedule covers meeting dates from the present through the end of 1992. A copy of the schedule is attached. New schedules will be prepared on a quarterly basis. Copies will be provided to all Board and Commission members as they are prepared. City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission/Zoning Board of Adjustment Planning Schedule - September thru December, 1992 Sept. 3 5:00 P.M. Sept. 9 5:00 PM. Sept. 17 6:00 P.M. Sept. 24 7:00 P.M. Sept. 25 5:00 P.M. Oct. 1 5:00 PM. Oct. 7 5:00 PM. Oct. 15 6:00 P.M. Oct. 22 7:00 P.M. Oct. 30 5:00 PM. Nov. 5 5:00 P.M. Nov. 9 6:00 P.M. Nov. 19 6:00 PM. Nov. 25 5:00 PM. Nov. 26 Dee. 3 5:00 PM. Dee. 14 6:00 PM. Dee. 17 6:00 PM. Dee. 24 DEADLINE: submittal subdivision plats for Sept. 17, Planning & Zoning Commission DEADLINE: submittal for Sept. 24, Board of Adjustment meeting Planning & Zoning Commission meeting - Council Chambers Board of Adjustment meeting - Council Chambers DEADLINE: submittal Rezoning and Special Conditional Use Permit Requests for Oct. 15, Planning & Zoning Commission DEADLINE: submittal subdivision plats for Oct. 15, Planning & Zoning Commission DEADLINE: submittal for Oct. 22, Board of Adjustment meeting Planning & Zoning Commission meeting - Council Chambers Board of Adjustment meeting - Council Chambers DEADLINE: submittal Rezoning and Special Conditional Use Permit Requests for Nov. 19, Planning & Zoning Commission DEADLINE: submittal subdivision plats for Nov. 19, Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Public Hearing and consideration of items from Oct. 15, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Planning & Zoning Commission meeting - Council Chambers DEADLINE: submittal Rezoning and Special Conditional Use Permit Requests for Dee. 17, Planning & Zoning Commission. Note: submittal deadline moved forward due to Thanksgiving holiday THANKSGIVING: No Board of Adjustment meeting. Should Board action be necessary, a special meeting will be called for an alternate date DEADLINE: submittal subdivision plats for Dee. 17, Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Public Hearing and consideration of items from Nov. 19, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Phnning & Zoning Commission meeting - Council Chambers CHRISTMAS EVE: No Board of Adjustment meeting. Should Board action be necessary, a special meeting will be called for an alternate date.