The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-26-1994 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting ZBOA MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 26, 1994 Members Present: Chairman Deborah Bernay, Board Members Bob Capen, Willie Walker, Charles Christensen, Sidney Grant; Alternate Board Members James Zoller, Ruben Salinas Members Absent: City Staff Present: 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. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 28, 1994, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. With no corrections needed, Chairman Bernay declared the minutes approved as presented. III. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST V94-006, REQUESTED FOR 1512 EAST "E" STREET FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF A REAR PATIO AWNING WITH A REAR SETBACK OF 1WO FEET. Mr. Lewis informed the Board that 14 public notices were mailed and 2 replies were received in favor of the request; 1 returned undeliverable; none received in opposition. The applicant, Mr. Le Blanc, hand delivered 3 additional replies, all in favor of the request. Mark Lewis informed the Board that Variance Request V94-006 concerned a piece of property located at 512 East "E" Street that is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. The owners, Mr. and Mrs. Bobby Le Blanc are requesting a variance to the 20 foot rear setback requirement for through lots for the construction of a rear yard patio awning that will have a setback of approximately 2 feet from the rear property line. Page 2 of 3 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of May 26, 1994 Staff recommended approval of the variance request subject to the following conditions: · No portion of the awning shall be located closer than two feet to the rear property line. · The variance shall allow construction of an awning only. There shall be no enclosing walls. · The variance does not superceed any building code requirements. A. PROPONENTS Chairman Bernay swore in Bobby J. Le Blanc. Mr. Le Blanc asked the Board to grant approval of the variance request. B. OPPONENTS There were none. Charles Christensen made a motion to approve Variance Request # V94-006 with the following conditions: · No portion of the awning shall be located closer than two feet to the rear property line. · The variance shall allow construction of an awning only. There shall be no enclosing walls. · The variance does not supersede any building code requirements. The motion was seconded by Bob Capen. All were in favor and the motion passed. Page 3 of 3 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes of May 26, 1994 IV. STAFF REPORTS Mr. Lewis noted that a permit for a swimming pool had been issued to Dr. Reed Tolles. Dr. Tolles was granted a variance by the Board at the April meeting. v. ADJOURN Chairman Bernay declared the meeting duly adjourned at 7:10 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Peggy Lee, Planning Secretary Minutes approved on the 23rd day of June ,1994. Deborah Bernay, Chairman Board of Adjustment VARIANCE REQUEST #V94-007 ReQuested For: Pronerty Zoning: ReQuested By: Purnose of ReQuest: Background: lii=iIIIIIIIBIIBg! The south ~ of Lot 8 and all of Lots 9 and 10; Block 715; Town of La Porte, which is further described as being located in the 100 block of North 18th Street. (See Exhibit A) Business Industrial (B.I.) Ms. Cynthia Kohler, acting as agent for Mr. Gus Brieden, property owner. This variance has been requested for the purpose of allowing construction of a new, approximately 21,000 square foot business facility with side and rear building setbacks of ten feet. The request also seeks approval for construction of a 25 foot wide driveway. Ms. Kohler's company, Anchor Fumigation, is in the process of purchasing the tract in question from the current owner, Mr. Gus Brieden. Mr. Brieden has authorized Ms. Kohler to act as his agent in pursuing this request. The property in question is located within a Business Industrial (B.I.) zone. (See Exhibit B). B.I. zoning is primarily assigned to large, open, unsubdivided tracts. Most business activities specifically listed as Permitted in B.I. zones involve or rely on trucking related activities. Typical classes of business activity permitted in B.I. zones include warehousing, wholesaling, and businesses providing support to heavy industry. (The last category would include as example, industrial contractors and machine shops.) B.I. zones are also normally located in "high profile" areas or adjacent to residential neighborhoods and serve to buffer these areas from heavier industrial activities. These are the factors that were considered when B.I. building setback requirements were established. Business Industrial setbacks are as follows: Front setback: Rear setback: Side setback: 50 feet 40 feet 30 feet Page 2 of 6 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 06/13/94 V94-007 The large setbacks are intended to insure adequate room for parking and for maneuvering heavy trucks. The property development controls (prohibitions against outside storage, lot coverage limits, landscaping, and screening) placed on B.I. zones are intended to maximize their ability to serve as buffers for thoroughfares and residential districts. Another Zoning Ordinance requirement that pertains to all industrial zones is driveway width. Due to the heavy truck traffic normally associated with industrial activities, driveways in all industrial zones are required to be at least 30 feet wide. The B.I. zone in which the applicant's property is located is somewhat a- typical. It is located in a high profile area and it does separate West Main Street from large Light Industrial tracts. However, rather than being comprised of acreage type parcels, the property within the zone is platted in typical Town of La Porte blocks. Individual lots are 25' x 125' and blocks are divided by 16 foot wide alleys. Further, many blocks, including the one containing the subject tract, have multiple owners. This can limit ability to "block up" property into larger parcels (see Exhibit C). It was recognized during the course of developing the City's Zoning Map that if B.I. zoning were assigned, lot size in this area would potentially cause setback problems for new development. It was felt, however, that it was important to buffer West Main Street from the L.I. zones located to the north and south. It was also recognized that if General Commercial zoning was assigned, the majority of existing businesses within the area would be rendered non- conforming. Additionally, the somewhat limited access that is available to this area would limit its viability as a retail district. For these reasons, Business Industrial zoning was assigned to this area. It was assigned with knowledge that variance relief from the Board of Adjustment might be necessary in order to develop within the area. Analysis: Zoning Ordinance Section 11-606 defines a variance as a "deviation from the literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance which is granted by the Board when strict conformity ... would cause an unnecessary hardship because of the circumstances unique to the property on which the variance is granted." Page 3 of 6 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 06/23/94 V94-007 This section further states: Except as otherwise prohibited, the Board is empowered to authorize a variance from a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance when the Board finds that all of the following conditions have been met: 1. That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the public interest. 2. 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 3. That by granting the variance, the spirit of the Ordinance will be observed. The first issue to be considered is that of public interest. The S.le. use classification assigned to the applicant's company, Anchor Fumigation, is #7342. This type of business activity is permitted not only in B.I. but also in General Commercial zones. As illustrated by Exhibit ~ the facility proposed is typical of small G.C. developments. As proposed, setbacks, parking, landscaping, and driveway width would satisfy commercial development criteria. The small size of the tract will preclude warehousing or trucking related industry from utilizing the site. There are, however, a number of B.l and G.e. businesses that could make use of this type of facility. Some examples are contractors, shipping agents and print shops. If the variance is granted and the property developed, the proposed business will fall within both G.C. and B.l guidelines. Should the applicant's business relocate at some point in the future, there are a number of other business activities that could take place on the site. B.l zoning was assigned with the foreknowledge that setback relief would be needed in order to develop the Page 4 of 6 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 06/23/94 V94-007 small tracts located in this area. Based on these considerations, in staffs opinion, granting this variance would not be contrary to the best public interest. Regarding hardship, as noted in the applicant's request, the total size of this tract is 62.5 feet wide by 125 feet deep. If B.I. setbacks were enforced, buildable area would be restricted to an area 2.5 feet wide, precluding development of the site. While enforcing front and rear setbacks would permit a 35 foot deep building, it would preclude adequate on-site parking. The applicants, based on size and use of the proposed building, will be required to provide a minimum of 9 parking spaces. Strictly enforcing Zoning Ordinance requirements on this tract would impose a hardship by precluding development of the site. The hardship would result because of the unusually small (by B.I. standards) size of the tract. The final issue to consider is the need to preserve the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. As illustrated on Exhibit A, the proposed property layout provides the following setbacks: Front: 59 feet Side (south): 15 feet Side (north): 10 feet Rear: 10 feet This arrangement allows placement of a 2,100 square foot building on the property. It also allows room for all required on-site parking and landscaping. (Approximately 343 square feet of landscape area is required.) Operation of the business should not involve a significant amount of truck traffic. The proposed 25 foot wide driveway is in line with commercial standards and will be adequate to accommodate all normal vehicular traffic. As proposed, the facility will satisfy all zoning requirements except for setbacks. As noted, B.I. setbacks were established for the purpose of providing buffer areas and accommodating truck traffic. In this case, truck traffic is not a significant issue. Also, in this case there is no residential district abutting the B.I. zone. The zone serves to separate an L.I. district Page 5 of 6 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 06/23/94 V94-007 from West Main Street. In these circumstances, the proposed setbacks in conjunction with adequate landscaping, should provide an adequate buffer. Given these circumstances, granting the requested variance will preserve the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. In summary, staff in its review of this request has found the following: · Lot size and ownership patterns within this B.I. zone have resulted in small tracts that cannot be developed without variance action. · This was understood by the City at the time the zone was created. · Denying this variance would impose a hardship on the applicant by precluding reasonable development of the property. The hardship would be as a result of property size. · Development as proposed, would not be contrary to the best public interest, nor would it be contrary to the intent and spirit of the Zoning Ordinance. Conclusion This request satisfies all necessary ordinance prerequisites and is eligible for the requested variance. Therefore, based on the facts and considerations noted above, staff recommends granting variance request V94-007 subject to the following conditions: Minimum side setback shall be 10 feet. Minimum rear setback shall be 10 feet. · Minimum driveway width shall be 25 feet. Prior to permit issuance, a landscape plan for this site shall be submitted for review by the City's Director of Planning. · The date and specifics of this variance shall be noted on the certified site plan that is to be submitted prior to permit approval. Page 6 of 6 Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report of 06/23/94 V94-007 . This variance does not constitute a building permit nor does it supersede the requirement to obtain a building permit prior to developing this site. ADpeals: 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 Vernon'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. EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED SEPARATELY (SEE 11"x 17" SHEET) /" = /000; GO '~....'....'.;I .~....~;,z"'~'8C"""" 81 LI BLOCK 715, LOTS S.~ 8,9 & 10 TO~~ OF LA PORTE ~ ~ ~ R-2 PUD LEGEND MH MANUFACTURED HOUSING R-I LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-3 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NC NEIGHBOR.HOOD COMMERCIAL GC GEiNERAL COMMERCIAL BI BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL PARK LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HI HEAVY INDUSTRIAL PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LI . . . ,':' EXHIBIT B I I - ] - ac ....,....,~. .... -.. - - .. ..... ~............. 81 LI BLOCK 715, LOTS S.~ 8;9 TOWN OF LA PORTE PUD LEGEND MH MANUFACTURED HOUSING. R-I LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-3 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL tW4i!%W!W NC NEIGHBOR.HOOD COMMERCIAL ;:~,'::~~, ."<frm?i:i$ GC GfiNERAL COMMERCIAL BI BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL PARK LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HI HEAVY INDUSTRIAL PUD PlANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT .~ ... . ... X:.:L:-,_ Ir': ... p .. I - I .. .. EXHIBIT B J, "" ~H .'^ '" CII~~ ~12 " Cl \I) \C 21 Kl 00 (\J ~13 '<t"'T \I) ~20 \I) C\J~ N (\j ~14 ...... lU \I) ~19 K1 IV \C15 10 l\]18 \I) N N \C16 \I) l\]17 \I) 125 cu 125 N \C 1 125 \I) !<l32 125 \I) N N \'J2 0 10 !<l 31 10 - N N <:> 1C3 f:.'<1. ~ t!J 30 10 (\J r:ro g}4 ~ !<l ~ 29 IC \C5 C(O' IC lIJ 28 691 \I) .:..... N \C6 C\l-1J lIJ 27 ~ 7'30.-< 125 \C7 fJ 7 ril lIJ 26 \I) (U ICe r3 B 'C \C 25 \I) (U 1C9 ~ 9 ., IC 24 ~n \I) '" N \CIO gJ 10 Xl Ie 23 o '-' \I) 1'(...) N ~11 1111 I(l IC 22 '" .....- ~ <fr1\ \G12 ~ 12 I(l IC 21 l50 \I) <:>('IJ (U 1C13 1313 r3 l<l 20 ? ~ ....; \I) N 1C14 ~ 14 II \\119 \I) N \C15 Sl 15 II g}18 \I) cu ~655 ~16 ~ !a ~17 125 \I) N lOll ~r o 32A \D 166 c:> -0011 266 (') Ie 1 125 \I) Kl31 125 \I) CIJ N l<l 2 \I) ~30 \I) N (\j l<l 3 \I) l<l29 lG cu ~ 4 C> \I) ~28 :c .... (\j ~ 5 0 ~27 \I) 0 \I) C\J I~ <Ii lG 6 ~ \I) Ie 26 714 \I) ...... N 0 (U \'J 7 J \I) IC 25 I(l ~Cl (U (\j \I) e C>~~ \I) \'324 \C (U 10) I\J \I) 9 C\J- ~ l{l23 \I) CIJ .0...... N ~ 10 '" ~ 22 tT> ("l 12'5 <'l 125 ~\ ~: I as I ~ 11 ~ ~ \ ~ I :~ es I j es \ 33 il ~11c 13\]f 15 16 17 18:19 20 21~ 33 ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ 25 25 2:l 33 TRACT IN QUESTION BLOCK 715, LOTS S. 1/2 OF 8, 9 & 10 TOWN OF LA PORTE ' !<l12 .gp..l N fJ13 \I) N \C14 IC IC 15 \I) I\J Kl16 v's IC N '-.J. \U t3 20 lfJ m 19 \I) (U \Ci8 \I) (U t!J 17 \I) N ADAMS STREET I- W W ~ l- V) \{) 1 125 6 IC 32 125 \I) (U lfJ 2 lQ 31 If) (\J Ie 3 le 30 \I) (\J IC 4 t!J29 "0 10 N \C 5 1C28 \I) cu l\]6 1C27 \I) <Ii IC 7 .... le 26 ...... /() S? 0 N l\] 8 0 IC 25 \ \I) \ . Or, (U \I) 9 ~<[ ~l<l24 0<[ lG I\J \ IG 10 g" 1{123 00 \I) 000 N Klll C\J~~ lG22 c:: ~ .q- \I) N 1{112(\J~""; Kl211uo",,; \I) (U l<l13 IC 20 \I) ru \'314 Ie 19 \I) N l\] 15 leI8 lG !!3 16 125 6lC17 125 Ie I I- CO ~ I I- ~ o z ~EST POLK STREET Ie 1 If) (U \I) 2 Kl lU \I) 3 \I) (U (\l \I) 4 715 \I) \I) (U lU N Ie 5 l<l \I) 125 (\J IC 6 If) \I) N (\,l lG 7 -~~32 \I) \I) lU N .s. \I) N If) OJ \I) N \V, MAIN ST. Kl13 \I) CU Kl14 Kl \GIS \I) (\J \G16 \I) 125 (U I- W W ~ l- V) lG1 125 III l\J l<l 2 \I) CU ~ 3 \I) -0001 (\j ~ 4 ~ ~5 689 \I) (\J lG 6 III (\J l<l7 125 \I) (\J l<lS -0008 \I) (\I ~9 III 125 N l<l1O \I) flJ l<l11 ":0010 \I) (\J Kl12 If) 125 IV 1C13 If) CIJ '!~ lU 14 :;:Inl l{l Kl15 -0013 \I) l\J Kl16 125 \I') N :c l- f'.. ~ I I- ~ o z If) 1 125 II) CIJ (U IC 2 \I) CIJ \I) 3 If) lU IV II) 4 If) lU (\J \I) 5 -0001 \I) N CIJ II) 6 III flJ (\l \I) 7 716 If) N IV 10 8 \I) N (\J Ie 9 \I) N \G 1U If) 125 (\J 33 25 25 25 25 11 12 13 14 15 c' u E (j( G (l'I -0 11 v M .... CD ~ ~ lD6. l,c EXH1B1T C \G 20 ~ 19 IC 18 Kl17 \G 2: \G 2i ~ 2: l<l2. II'> 1 (U Kl1i lG1" II) (\J If) CIJ If) l\J \I) (U \I) (\J \I) (\I It) I\J If) C\J It: (\. \I Q ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE APPOINTING MEMBERS TO VARIOUS BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES, OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; CONTAINING A REPEALING CLAUSE; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: section 1. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Fire Code Review Committee of the city of La Porte, for the term beginning .on the effective date hereof, and expiring on May 30th of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been dully appointed and qualified: District 2 Richard Browder 1997 District 3 Tom Hayes 1997 Mayor Emery Farkas 1997 section 2. The city Council of the City of La Porte hereby appoints the following members to the City of La Porte Planning and Zoning commission, -for terms expiring May 30, 1997, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: District 2 Charles S. Engleken, Jr. District 3 Eugene Edmonds section 3. The City Council of the city of La Porte hereby appoints the following members to the La Porte Area Water Authority, for terms expiring May 30, 1996, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: position 4 James Sweeten position 5 Jerry Bramlett section 4. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the City of La Porte Electrical ORDINANCE NO. 94- r'"!"z:""",' PAGE 2 Board, for terms expiring May 30th of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Chairman Bob McLaughlin 1996 position 1 Terry Groff 1996 section 5. The city council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Airport Advisory Board for the City of La Porte Municipal Airport, for terms expiring on May 30th of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been dully appointed and qualified: position 3 Deborah Rihn 1997 position 4 Mike Miller 1997 section 6. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointments to the Board of Adjustment of the City of La Porte, for terms expiring on May 30th of the year indicated, or until their successors shall have been dully appointed and qualified: position 1 Dr. Deborah Bernay 1995 Bob Capen 1996 Sidney Grant 1997 willie Walker 1995 Charles Christensen 1996 Ruben L. Salinas 1997 James Zoller 1995 The city Council of the City of La Porte hereby confirms the appointment by the City Manager, of a member of the ~~ position 2 position 3 position 4 position 5 Alternate 1 Alternate 2 section 7. ORDINANCE NO. 94- PAGE 3 civil service commission, for a term expiring May 30, 1997, or until his successor shall have been duly appointed and qualified: Member: Robert Swanagan section 8. The City council of the City of La Porte hereby makes the following appointment to the Southeast Texas Housing Finance corporation Board, for a term expiring on May 30th of the year indicated, or until her successor. shall have been dully appointed and qualified: Director Patricia Muston 1997 section 9. If any section, sentence, phrase, clause or any part of any section, sentence, phrase, or clause, of this ordinance shall, for any reasons, be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance, and it is hereby declared to be the intention of this City council to have passed each section, sentence, phrase or clause, or part thereof, irrespective of the fact that any other section, sentence, phrase or clause, or part thereof, may be declared invalid. section 10. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed to the extent of such conflict only. section 11. The city council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the city council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the ci ty for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Article 6252-17, Texas Revised ORDINANCE NO. 94- PAGE 4 civil statutes Annotated; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subj ect matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. section 12. This Ordinance shall be effective from and after its passage and approval, and it is so ordered. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 23rd day of May, 1994. CITY OF LA PORTE By: Norman L. Malone, Mayor ATTEST: Sue Lenes, City Secretary APPROVED: ~ ~;J/'~~ Knox W. Askins, city Attorney