Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-11-1993 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOVEMBER 11, 1993 Members Present: Chairman Deborah Bernay, Board Members Bob Capen, Charles Christensen, Willie Walker, Alternate Board Members James Zoller, Ruben Salinas Members Absent: Sidney Grant City StatT Present: Planning Director Charles Harrington, Chief Building Official Mark Lewis, 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. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST V93-002 WHICH SEEKS A THREE INCH VARIANCE TO THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE 1501, SECTION 5-700. THE VARIANCE HAS BEEN REQUESTED FOR 1305 BAYOU DRIVE. THE HOUSE WCATED ON THIS PROPERlY HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED WITH A FRONT YARD ENCROACHMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 2lh INCHES. THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE 1501, SECTION 11-606. Mark Lewis reported to the Board that Mike Chrisco (on behalf of Barrett Homes) is requesting a 3" variance to the 25' front setback requirement of the Zoning Ordinance, for a house located at 1305 Bayou Glen. The house is currently under construction. Mr. Lewis stated that due to what appears to be an unintentional error by the contractor, the house slab encroaches approximately 2~ inches beyond the platted 25' setback line. The encroachment, though small, is hindering mortgage financing on the home. Staffs opinion is that the house is in substantial compliance with all applicable zoning regulations and believes that granting this variance will not be contrary to the best public interest. Staff recommends granting the variance with a notation of the Board's action written on the property survey and deed records. Page 2 of 5 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of November 11, 1993 A. PROPONENTS Chairman Bemay swore in Mike Chrisco. Mr. Chrisco noted that the encroachment was very minor and asked the Board to grant the variance. B. OPPONENTS There were none. A motion was made by Charles Christensen to grant V93-002 subject to the following: The front building line for the tract in question shall be reduced by three inches. This change shall be noted on the property survey and deed records of this lot as follows: The front building line of Lot 13; Block 1, of the Bayou Glen Subdivision is 24 feet, 9 inches. This line has been established by Variance V93-002, granted by the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment on November 11, 1993. The motion was seconded by Bob Capen. All were in favor and the motion passed. III. CONSIDER SPECIAL EXCEPTION SE93-007 WHICH SEEKS AN EXCEPTION TO THE 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE 1501, SECTION 6-500. THE EXCEPTION HAS BEEN REQUESTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH A REAR SETBACK OF 7 FEET. THE BUILDING IS TO BE LOCATED AT 9700 SPENCER HIGHWAY. THIS EXCEPTION HAS BEEN REQUESTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE 1501, SECTION 11-605.2 Mark Lewis reported to the Board that the special exception being requested was for Lots 167-169; Block 10; Spenwick Place, Section ll. The address is 9700 Spencer Highway. The zoning is General Commercial. The exception is being requested by Mr. Gerald Garrie who is wanting to construct a new Page 3 of 5 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of November 11, 1993 commercial building. The special exception would allow a 7 foot rear setback instead of a 20 foot rear setback as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff has reviewed the request and recommends approval of the special exception subject to compliance with several conditions. Mr. Capen was concerned about maintenance (upkeep and mowing) of the back of the building and asked the Board to add this item as a condition of the exception. A. PROPONENTS Chairman Bernay swore in Mr. Gerald Garrie. Mr. Garrie told the Board that he needed this special exception in order to construct the building the way it was planned. B. OPPONENTS There were none. A motion was made by Bob Capen to grant SE93-007 subject to the following conditions: · The rear building setback line for Lots 167; 168; and 169 of Block 10; Spenwick Place, Section II shall be seven (7) feet. · The certified site plan for the facility proposed for this location shall include the following language: A rear building line of 7 feet has been established by Special Exception SE93-007, granted by the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment on November 11, 1993. Under the terms of this exception, the rear setback area is to be maintained as follows: · 6 foot, 6 inch wooden fence shall be erected along the rear property line. The owner of Lots 167-169 shall be responsible for maintaining both sides of the fence and shall keep it in a good state of repair at all times. Page 4 of 5 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of November 11, 1993 · The setback area shall be maintained in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance 1358 as a grassed area. There shall be no paving in this area. · The setback area shall be graded in a manner that will prevent storm water run-off onto adjoining properties. · There shall be no outside storage in this area. · Any lighting shall be hooded or otherwise arranged in a manner that will direct light away from adjoining properties. · There shall be no doors, windows or other wall penetrations within 20 feet of the rear property line except for passage doors if such are required as emergency exits by the City's Building or Fire Code. The motion was seconded by Charles Christensen. All were in favor and the motion passed. IV. STAFF REPORTS Mr. Lewis informed the Commission there would be a December Board of Adjustment meeting. Due to the Christmas holidays, the tentative dates are set for either December 2 or December 9. Board Members are asked to contact Mrs. Lee as to what date is best for them. v. ADJOURN Chairman Bernay declared the meeting duly adjourned at 7:24 PM. Page 5 of 5 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of November 11, 1993 Respectfully Submitted, Peggy Lee, Planning Secretary Minutes approved on the 9th Deborah Bemay, Chairman Board of Adjustment day of December . 1993. #A93-003 9602 BELFAST l " ~. CITY OF LA PORTE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEAL OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER1S DECISION ----------------------------------------------------------------------- OFFICE USE ONLY: Application No. :A1; - ~o1 Date Received: II!)!!'?' , ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant: ~d0~ ~ 3 c.J, F Name c;. . Address PH: '11/ -dJ.f96 I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized to act on my behalf in this matter. Owner*: 9;/:;~:::~m~~ PH: L/ 11-;)<19 t Address or the interpertation of Ordinance No. 1501. I am making located - A Site Plan of the property is attached. Also, I have listed the information requested below on the following pages of this form. ~ 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 must provide Authorization to act on tpe Owner's behalf. ______~~~_1~;~~__________________~~~~=~~~=______ OFFICE USE ONLY Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Yes ( ) / ~ / j /75 I I Applicant Notified of Date: y~) No ( ) I /;1 Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments: / ~q//6J~ Heeting Date: Board's Decision: Approved ) Denied Notice of Board Decision mailed to Applicant/Owner: .{' <' I PAGE 2 , 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: :;;::;;:;);=~~a~~~~ :P.~~42J ~ ~~ LU~ '9;'7. ~ ~5?'kJo };:) 6fL. -' ~ ~ J~~:-:' F HA a~L I :a-~J~, ~, ,r~.;, .LtJ.-&~ o~<::t- ~ /Lo.--ry<~ Q...() J cy-./.?{)~-U ~~ 1~~~ G,lfC.~Q/-~~cf~) ~f TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT: ~t> ~ ~ ,;;{~y...<?o ~~-" is l.L pPr~c~_~ Mc:.<71/ .~ ltc I' ~)~L ~~ , 4U hd.) ,;L I Wct-/v~ I ~, 0-.<.r.L 7;, ~.:tJc---: ~ t'AJ<TJd::o to A.--nuJ7~ ~ cf- ,0-,~ .-yy;~~~J~~ () GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST: . ~~~~--Jw~_bg~ ~J;-UZ~J.LoJ2, ~ r:19,~ GA:"_:",~_ ~ .-J~( ,o~i~' ~) Lv. ,f:7I~AU a~JdlrrnJ:~ ~~ M. u',(R, ~t ~ ~ ~ CLL-1DL=U ~_ ~ L 0 "g., ~ "-'---- :t1i0 ~, :~r'~::::12~~~C;:~H~:;;:::;: X/Ld ~'~ ~~- ..u-."~ l~ a.--.~ ..u. 'f' .~ l::::t~ . ' CED/1-'81 . ( ( ( ( ( I i '. ' '. I ( i ( i , ( \ \. ( ( \ l ( I \ , ;;J::; ;:;;:~~ ~U~ ~~ ~ ~~Lt/;;;:i~) zf..eu; ~ cir t.v ~ ~~. ~ 0#~,du~$~ \ ~ Ov ~J# ~qi-~ ~ \ fr~pv~~~~JJ ~. . ~J&~' ' tfU-/ ~, ) c;J1M 9. ;;Z;. . ~oaLO \ \ i \ \ \ \ \ ~. ..';'~'''':', '7"":', '~fED .~. ..::; "::-:", ,"?'. -..: ~~. ,,:;.:;,',! .~~:...."! ::Oi.~.!. ;t;J\>'ltt1 Ji,~ "" -- CITY OF LA PORTE .'. PERMIT APPLICATION FORM INSPEc"rION~ /L2..':~;?,6 ~f73 '- BUILDING L MECHANICAL *ELECTRICAL *PLUMBING *(SEE BACK OF FORM) =====================================================~~==================== ')VPROJECT ADDRESS: q&O) J5-e/ hc;t fLOT if,: >'sUBDIVISION ~ 1(1 k t::C0-: .:5eJ-:? )&sLOCK ~ r.,WNER 's NAME. _ _~ (/'/1 ~HONE I ~ADDRESS: F.xJ F&s+:M3 1.D''r'' !'Ii.~~ ~ ~ / STREET crT CONTRACTOR: iJ vh ~ 2 tJ J 5 f 4-4-?) e.-1I V.l--t1- I/p , ;) 7/ /(fl -47)- J.. ct.1h ~/S-j1 ZIP :;l: <.41 ~.' PH: ADDRESS: 1 \ <)t L~tt,--h CITY ,,757/ ZIP STREET ENGINEER: " DESIGNER: )oUILDING USE: HohL-L .f,n Df;'DOO VALUATION: ~ SQ, FOOTAGE: ~SCRIEE WORK: ( I ;;2., () >?'sTORIES: , //{; I /') c' e /1/I(f)j ""'/ I~ Hf...~ r:1.-o ;,.::J ~ 5 rq 'f"'i /~ j --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --FOR CITY USE ONLY-- OCCUP T.YPE FLOOD ZONE CLASS WORK .SQ. FT. r' .~..:..", ~KG' REQ .. CONsLTYPE USE ZONE ~ STORIES COMM. BLDG. PLANS ONLY - FIRE MARSHAL APPROVAL: ...D.~tE : .~ . .... . .J" -:;.-=-' . CHECKED/APPROVED FOR ISSUANCE BY: q~TE: . 1'J...<. h...<P.....{.I~ Ci!.\N.,f,:,.., At .,., ..t../"I:J /Ilv......),<./' SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1'XFL'fAF).,5 I;z.o9937) /) 1'\1:)1: "'L- Mddv/~r h.o"""~. r+ 1$ CL Huo.<:..oJ-t.. ",.,~...A~fv'r"-,I 4'"OYI.A... ===============================================;~~~~:=1~/i:1.(g2= PERMIT NO. PERMIT FEE S (ATTACH TO ACTUAL PERMIT) =========================================================================== ~ REV. 3-92 EXHIBIT A A:PERMITAP.ORG/DEPT. FORMS r, . II) lil o [J f;! g I\. ~ ~ z ~ H lil >< 0 ~ [J . Z [J- 8 ; \JI ~~ HZ 1100 \II ~e ..... 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ If ~~ ~ ., ~ ~" ~ 0:::: Cl 0 ~ ~ Cl 110 ~ rot~ ~ : Cl "I rot :I: ~ E-< S ~ o :> ~~ ~ H Q Cl t 0 ~ ~ \) o YIlt- [J ~I~ tl ~ VI ~ t ~ 110 ~ . ~ ~ 0 o z CI) 110 H Pt ~ is ~ .. ~ .~ o z ,/~' ~cf O".,fJ ---.... I II- jl. j~- o,z~l\ Z.I /"e.e- 11 ,0 ~ <y .t;' f/'.DO~'Y.ofJ ':-:- ( 10' ~..., 9602 BELFAST LANE / ,?:s"I5.L. {,' , ~ J.O-l ~ ~ () < t j ,if: A:sr ?:::>.Z~- If\. __ t. IQ'V.C, o...-? fT- . -I'~ ---~4 ~ ~~' cr ~ ~,'O~tll SURVEY OF LOT 27L BLOCK 16, SPEN\/ICK PU\CE. SECTION 2, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS SCALE: 1 "=20 I DATE: 3-27-89 SURVEY BY; J.E.n. DRAWN BY: J.E.B. FOR: JOHN STEAGAL PURCHASER: JOB NO. 26509 I 'Q ~ c;. IV ~, , ~ -.s () o lIi 'I- " ~ ~'11 )..:1-1 Cl ~ o ~ H H ~ ~ .I~ ,,, ( Q ~ rq ~4'---.- ~ ''- ,III ~ \ \) ~ ==sJ ., , In .., J, ,Jt-. ?p lJ 'i. 8.~ :-t- ()~ e '1-11-;,0/1" 30.2 I - ST01'(y' TIN -el-':>dF. ~ ~I t'l.~ ,'10v....cJ.: /-. Tt:>..s: " -'" ,-- -S" V.E:. t l"I i d; '--- .t!"AS-,- 71.:,7 #~{),J __ __ I ~p{l I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY CONFORMS TO THE CURRENT TEXAS SURVEYORS ASSOCIATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR A CATEGORY I B t CONDITIOtl :5 SURVEY. (?~~ Y fLL B/UY L. SHANKS REGISTRATION NO, 1821 SHANKS SURVEYORS 940 GEMIN I ~~.... I~.o(t?~..~l.~.. f~I.'~ ,0( Y" " t '." . ".1:-., [j(r'....;:"i' ' 'r .' J:: ',.J' ~ ,:.~... . . \* SJiLy'i:' ~iiAiil;s''''\ \"~""""'" ."J\ lllzi..'. ..:,.., "/..-$1.(' 'Oo:q. i~O<' ....Q, 3n"~""~() ~ I C"sij\:i--ll(. 488-8305 illll;III:lf_I_.II~I.j ~~??Uffr~tttttttt:)::rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrmr?~~:~:~:~:::::::::::::::;:::;:;;:;;;:.;.;.;. ..... ............................ ReQuested By: John and Carla Steagall, property owners. ReQuested For: 9602 Belfast which is further described as Lot 271; Block 16; Spenwick Place, Section II. Zonin~: R-1, Low Density Residential Under Anneal: Decision of the Building Official to deny a building permit for placement of a manufactured home to be located on the above described property. Bac~und: Mr. Steagall, on October 26, 1993, submitted the attached building permit application to the City (see Exhibit A). The purpose of the permit was to allow a manufactured home to be placed on the property located at 9602 Belfast. Initially, there was a question whether the home involved was a "modular" or "manufactured" home. Mr. steagall, at the City's request, provided a copy of the home's title. Staff then checked with the Texas Department of Licensing and Registration and fund that the home is titled as a H.D.D. Code manufactured home. Zoning Ordinance Section 5-600 prohibits placement of manufactured housing in all but designated M.H. zones. As the applicant's property is located in an R-1 zone, the building permit application was denied. The applicants, in appealing the Building Official's actions, cite the following factors: Page 2 of 6 Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 12-9-93 # A93-0Q3 . There are a number of existing mobile and manufactured homes in the Spenwick subdivision. . Modular homes have been discontinued and have not been manufactured since 1979. . The applicants intend to remove the wheels and tongue from the home and set it on a permanent foundation system (tripod bases). . Prohibiting this type of housing poses a handicap for property owners in the Spenwick Subdivision. . Other property owners are agreeable to placement of the home. . Placement of the home in conjunction with flower beds and landscaping will improve the neighborhood's appearance. Also included in the applicant's petition is a request that the Zoning Ordinance be amended by deleting the term modular home and replacing it with manufactured home. Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance is outside the scope of the Board's authority. The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are responsible for this type of action. The only issue to be considered by the Board is the applicant's appeal of the Building Official's decision. Analysis: Zoning Ordinance Section 11-604 grants the Board of Adjustment the authority to consider appeals of zoning related actions and determinations of the City's enforcement officers. Under the terms of this section, the Board may take the following actions regarding appeals. Decisions and determinations of the enforcement officer may be affirmed, denied or modified either wholly or in part. However, in order to either grant an appeal or modify the enforcement officer's decision, the Board must find all of the following ordinance conditions to be satisfied. · That there is a reasonable difference of interpretation as to the specific intent of the zoning regulations or zoning map, provided the interpretation of the enforcement officer is a reasonable presumption and the Zoning Ordinance is unreasonable. Page 3 of 6 Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 12-9-93 # A93-003 · That the resulting interpretation will not grant a special privilege to one property inconsistent with other properties or uses similarly situated. · 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 Comprehensive Plan of the City of La Porte. Although the applicants cite a number of issues in their appeal, the only items actually pertinent to the appeal are those which question whether or not the Zoning Ordinance is unreasonable or whether or not the Building Official's decision was unreasonable. Factors such as other homes in the neighborhood, type of foundation system to be installed, and landscaping plans are not to be used as a basis for the Board's ruling. The first issue to be considered is whether or not the Building Official's decision was unreasonable. As noted in the background section of this report, the applicant's property is located in a R-l, Low Density Residential Zone. The Texas Department of licensing and Regulation has, based on the home's serial number, determined it to be a H.U.D. Code manufactured home. Zoning Ordinance Section 5-600 prohibits placement of manufactured homes in R-l zones. The Building Official's decision tracks ordinance guidelines exactly and is, therefore, reasonable and proper. This leaves the question as to whether the Zoning Ordinance is reasonable. The next segment of this report will discuss state law, specifically the Texas Manufactured Housing Act. It is important to note that the Board is not empowered to take any action or make any interpretations regarding state law. Language used in the Zoning Ordinance was written to reflect and respect state law. The Manufactured Housing Act will be discussed only as it applies to City zoning regulations. The Texas Manufactured Housing Standards Act (enacted 1984) defines a H.U.D. Code Manufactured Home as "a structure, constructed on or after June 15, 1976, according to the rules of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, transportable in one or more body sections...and designed to be used as a dwelling..." The Act defines a Modular Home as "a dwelling that is constructed in one or more modules at a location other than the homesite...and which is designed to be used as a permanent residence when the modular components are transported to the homesite and are joined together..." Page 4 of 6 Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 12-9-93 #A93-003 The Act also states "the construction of modular homes and modular components which from an engineering performance standpoint, shall be substantially equivalent tOu.the Standard Building Code, the Uniform Building Code and the National Electric Code...." The definitions contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance reflect and respect the standards established in the Manufactured Housing Act. H.U.D Code compliance is referenced in the manufactured housing definition. The modular building defInition references the "specifications of the Texas Manufactured Housing Act" ie, the requirements of the Standard Building Code. The Manufactured Housing Act, states that "the installation of H.U.D. Code manufactured homes shall be permitted as residential dwellings in those areas determined appropriate by the City...." The Act, however, requires that cities accept modular homes in all areas or zones in which single family homes are permitted. The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council have determined the areas of the City deemed to be appropriate for manufactured housing. These areas have been designated as M.H. zones. This is in accordance with the requirements of state law. Modular homes are allowed in all of the City's Residential zones (including R-1 districts). This is based, however, not on a determination or distinction drawn by the City, but rather, on a mandate of state law. The City zoning regulations that deal with manufactured and modular homes were drafted to comply with state law. Since the City's regulations are in compliance with state law, they should not be considered to be unreasonable. The applicant also contends that modular homes are no longer manufactured. In researching this report, staff has found this not to be the case. When the legislature amended the Manufactured Housing Act in 1989, modular homes were included under the somewhat broader defInition of "Industrialized Building". Staff again checked with the Texas Department of licensing and Regulation regarding this issue. According to MrJames Henley, an enforcement officer in the Manufactured Housing Division, modular homes are still available. There are several companies located both within and outside the state that are certifIed to manufacture modular homes. Mr. Henley did say that the modular home concept has evolved somewhat. The modular homes currently being manufactured, when set up on a homesite, tend to resemble conventionally built homes rather than the manufactured homes. Based on the continued availability of modular homes and the clear distinction between modular and manufactured homes, the City's Zoning Ordinance regulations should not be considered unreasonable. Page 5 of 6 Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 12-9-93 # A93-003 The next criteria to be considered is special privilege. Granting this appeal would directly contradict very clear and explicit Zoning Ordinance provisions. It would set a standard for this property that cannot and should not be enforced for other properties. It would also be contrary to previous Board Decisions regarding similar matters. Granting this appeal would clearly grant a special privilege to the applicants. The final issue to consider is protection of the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. It is the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, as evidenced by the Land Use Plan, Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance regulation, to see the Spenwick Subdivisions re-established as a neighborhood of single family homes. Allowing a now nonconforming structure into the neighborhood would clearly run contrary to the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Conclusion: In reviewing this appeal, staff fmds the following: · The decision of the Building Official was in strict accordance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. The decision was, therefore, both reasonable and proper. · Zoning Ordinance regulations regarding manufactured and modular homes comply with applicable state law. As state law was used as a basis for local ordinance regulation, the Zoning Ordinance is not unreasonable. · Modular homes are still available. Modular housing is a type of housing that is separate and distinct from manufactured housing. The Zoning Ordinance is, therefore, reasonable in setting different zoning requirements for the two types of structures. · Granting this appeal would grant a special privilege to the applicants and to this specific piece of property. · Granting this appeal would be contrary to the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Page 6 of 6 Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 12-9-93 # A93-003 Based on the facts and considerations above, staff recommends that Appeal of the Enforcement Officer's Decision # A93-003 be denied. Appeals: As per Section 11-610 of Zoning Ordinance 1501: 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.