Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-25-1993 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 25, 1993 Members Present: Chairman Deborah Bernay, Board Members Charles Christensen, Sidney Grant, Bob Capen, Alternate Board Members Ruben Salinas, James Zoller Members Absent: Willie Walker City StatT Present: Director of Planning Chuck Harrington, Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, Planning Secretary Peggy Lee I. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order by Chairman Bernay at 7:00 PM. II. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 10,1992, ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING A motion was made by Sidney Grant to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by Charles Christensen. All were in favor and the motion passed. III. CONSIDER SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST #SE92-006 WHICH IS REQUESTED BY THE ZION HILL BAPTIST CHURCH, 430 NORTH 6TH STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO WAIVE THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT FOR 48 OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES AND TO ALWW THE 35 SPACE PARKING LOT WCATED AT THE DEWALT ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL, 601 WEST MADISON, TO SERVE AS REQUIRED PARKING. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS REQUEST WAS HELD ON DECEMBER 10, 1992. THE ITEM WAS, AT THAT TIME, TABLED WITH NO ACTION BEING TAKEN. Mr. Harrington reported to the Board that this item was originally brought before the Board on December 10, 1992. Zion Hill Baptist Church is proposing to demolish their existing sanctuary and replace it with a new building. A special exception was requested to waive the on-premise parking (required by the Zoning Ordinance) and to allow 35 off-premise parking spaces serve as the required parking. During the course of the December 10 Page 2 of 3 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of 2/25/93 meeting, questions were raised concerning whether or not the exception was necessary. After further review, staff determined that since the required percentage of on-premise parking cannot practically be developed, the Special Exception SE92-006 should be granted subject to: 1. The required parking for the proposed Zion Hill Baptist Church sanctuary shall be reduced to 35 spaces. 2. All required parking may be provided by the DeWalt School parking lot, subject to a formal written joint parking agreement between the church and school district being filed with the City. This agreement shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of Zoning Ordinance Section 6-600F. A. PROPONENTS There were none. B. OPPONENTS There were none. A motion was made by Sidney Grant to grant approval of SE92-006. The motion was seconded by Charles Christensen. All were in favor and the motion passed. IV. CONSIDER SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST SE93-001 WHICH IS REQUESTED FOR 507 EAST MAIN. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO ALLOW FOR THE EXPANSION OF BUILDINGS OCCUPIED BY A NONCONFORMING USE; MINI-WAREHOUSE STORAGE IN A GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE. SE93-001 is being requested for Bartco Enterprises, Warehousing, by Mike Stone, the property owner. The current property zoning is GC. The request would allow for the expansion of buildings occupied by a non-conforming use, specifically mini-warehouse storage. Staff reviewed the requirements necessary for the Board to grant a special exception and feels that this exception should be denied, instead recommending a zone change. Page 3 of 3 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of 2/25/93 Chairman Bernay swore in Mike Stone. Mr. Stone stated that when he first confronted the City regarding his request to expand a mini-warehouse storage facility, he was under the impression it was necessary for him to appear before the Board of Adjustment. After discussion among Board Members, it was determined that a zone change would be the route that should have been taken. A motion was made by Bob Capen to deny SE93-001 and to refer the item to the Planning and Zoning Commission to be considered for a possible zone change. The motion was seconded by Charles Christensen. All were in favor and the motion passed. Mr. Grant asked Mr. Harrington to keep Mr. Stone informed of any outstanding items or unexpected expenses which may need to be addressed. Mr. Christensen requested that Mr. Stone's application fee be refunded. v. STAFF REPORTS There were none. VI. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Board, Chairman Bernay declared the meeting duly adjourned at 7:40 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Peggy Lee, Planning Secretary Minutes approved on the 27th day of May , 1993. Deborah Bernay, Chairperson Board of Adjustment SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST #SE93-003 HAPPY CAJUN RESTAURANT Reouested For: Zonine: Reouested Bv: Pumose of Reouest: Back2round: .......... ............................................................................. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.;.:.".:.:.:.:.:.:.::~:::~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::~:::~:~:::::::::::::~:~:::~:::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 111~~II1.E~O~PtibdR!qUest: mSE9atiQQa Happy Cajun restaurant located at 129 North 10th Street and further described as Lots 27-33; Block 50; Town of La Porte (see Exhibit A). GC (General Commercial) Clinton E. Payne, property owner. To allow a covered patio which does not comply with the front and side setback requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 6- 500 to remain in place. The applicant has erected a covered patio at his restaurant. It was constructed without obtaining a building permit from the City. As illustrated on Exhibit A, the patio has a front setback of 11.1 feet from the front property line. Side setback (adjacent to the Polk street right-of-way) is 2.6 feet. Section 6-500 of the Zoning Ordinance requires structures to maintain a setback of 20 feet from a front property line. A side setback of 10 feet is required when a side property line abuts a right-of-way. After receiving notice from the City, (see Exhibit B) Mr. Payne, the property owner, contacted the Inspection Department and requested a building permit. Due to the setback encroachments, the Inspection Department refused to issue a permit. Mr. Payne is requesting this special exception to setback requirements so he can obtain a building permit. The alternative is for him to remove the patio. The City's letter to Mr. Payne is dated March 24, 1993. Due to other commitments, Mr. Payne would not have been able to attend an April Board of Adjustment meeting. The hearing was scheduled for May at Mr. Payne's request. Page 2 of 4 Zoning Board of Adjustment SE93-003 Analysis: Zoning Ordinance Section 11-605.2 defines a special exception as a specifically enumerated "deviation from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance." Section 11-605.2.b.3 allows the Board to consider "yard exceptions on comer lots." The Zoning Ordinance also requires the Board to grant special exceptions only: · "when...such exception will not adversely affect the value or use of adjacent or neighboring property." · when such exception will not "be contrary to the best public interest." Given the location of the patio on an "outside" comer of the property, value and use of adjacent properties is not an issue. The property to the north (across Polk Street) is a driveway /parkiog area for an auto repair shop. The southbound Highway 146 feeder borders the property to the east. The matter of the best public interest is at issue, however. Zoning Ordinance Section 1-200, in part, states: The zoning regulations and districts as herein established have been made in accordance with a Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of promoting the health, safety...and general welfare of the City.... They have been designed to lessen congestion in the streets...to prevent overcrowding of land... and to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation (complete text is on Page 1 of the Zoning Ordinance). Based on the preceding paragraph, staff, for the following reasons, does not believe this request to be in the best public interest. Page 3 of 4 Zoning Board of Adjustment SE93-003 Building setback lines (as measured from rights-of-way) have been established to promote traffic and general safety. The patio is in close proximity to the traffic lanes of a high traffic intersection. Even discounting possible hazard due to a traffic accident, the dust and noise generated by traffic hardly make an outdoor eating area in this location conducive to public health and safety. Finally, there is the issue of hardship. Exceptions and variances to Zoning Ordinance requirements should not be granted based on convenience or problems created by actions of a property owner. An exception to Zoning Ordinance requirements should be granted only when the applicant can demonstrate that strict enforcement would cause an unreasonable hardship. In terms of the Zoning Ordinance, a hardship would relate to an unusual property characteristic. In other words, is there a feature of the property that would prevent the property from being developed in a manner that complies with applicable zoning requirements. This is not the case with Mr. Payne's property. As shown on Exhibit ~ Mr. Payne's restaurant occupies Lots 27-33 of Block 50. The restaurant building sits on part of Lot 31 and Lots 32 and 33. The remaining property is developed as parking area. In researching this request, staff checked for adequate parking. Based on the restaurant's floor area (including the patio), 40 parking spaces are required by Ordinance. There are 40 designated parking spaces in the parking lot. Additionally, the tax roll indicates that Mr. Payne owns Lots 5 and 6 of this block. These lots are located across the alley from the restaurant. There is adequate property on the south side of the restaurant to accommodate a patio dining area. A patio on this face of the building could comply with setback requirements. A patio in this location would additionally be both cleaner and safer. Construction of a patio in this area would cause a minimum of disruption to parking. Additionally, displaced parking could be located on Lots 5 and 6. Based on these facts, there is no hardship involved in this case. Page 4 of 4 Zoning Board of Adjustment SE93-003 Conclusion: Anneal: Based on the facts of this case, it is staffs opinion that granting this request would not be in the best public interest and there have been no hardships presented as evidence. It is, therefore, recommended that Special Exception Request SE93-003 be denied. Any person or persons, jointly or severally, aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Adjustment, or any taxpayer, or any officer, department, board, or bureau of the City of La Porte may present to a court of record a petition for a writ of certiorari, as provided by Vemon's Texas Codes Annotated, Local Government Code, Section 211.011, duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition shall be presented to the court within ten (10) days after the filing of the decision in the office of the Board of Adjustment.