HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-24-2001 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment•
•
MINUTE S
•
•
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MAY 24, 2001
Members Present: Chairperson Sidney Grant, Bob Capen, Willie Walker, Alternate No. 1
Charles Schoppe, Alternate No. 2 George Maltsberger
Members Absent: Ruben Salinas, Rod Rothermel
City Staff Present: Planning Director Doug Kneupper, Chief Building Official Debbie Wilmore,
Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, Planning Secretary Peggy Lee
I. CALL. TO ORDER.
Meeting called to order by Chairperson Grant at 7:00 PM.
II. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 22, 2001, MEETING.
Minutes approved as presented.
III. CONSIDER AN "EXEMPTION FROM EXTENDED USEFUL LIFE
REQUIREMENTS", OR "AN ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXTENDED
USEFUL LIFE AND TERMINATION OF USE" AND/OR "AMELIORATION
OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES" IN CONNECTION WITH AN
EXISTING NONCONFORMING USE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 520 SO.
16'~ STREET. THIS REQUEST IS BEING MADE PER SECTION 106-266(2) OF
THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE.
Chief Building Official Debbie Wilmore presented staffs report. Highway Transport is a
truck terminal located at 520 S. 16~' Street. On-site tank truck washing is performed at the
facility. Tank truck cleaning is a permitted use in Heavy Industrial Zones. However tank
truck cleaning at this location is considered a nonconforming use in a Light Industrial Zone.
Highway Transport is proposing to upgrade the current facility and in order to do so, must
comply with applicable nonconforming regulations. The applicant has submitted an
application for Exemption from Extended Useful Life Requirements for the nonconforming
use.
Public notification was mailed to 12 surrounding property owners. The city received four
favorable responses and no opposition. Two were returned undeliverable.
Staff s recommendation was to grant the Exemption with conditions.
A. PROPONENTS
Chairperson Grant swore in Greg Watkins, President of Highway Transport. Mr.
Watkins explained that Highway Transport is a tank truck operation, which delivers
Zoning Board of Adjustment • •
Minutes of May 24, 2001
Page 2
to customers locally and nationally, as well as Canada and Mexico. They have been
conducting the same business since 1983.
Chairperson Grant swore in Gary Reagan, Vice-President of Operations for
Highway Transport. He stated that Highway Transport had a wastewater discharge
permit from the City of La Porte and a permit from the TNRCC. Mr. Reagan
answered questions from the Board regarding their treatment process and their
ability to deal with unexpected spills.
Chairperson Grant swore in Joe Brown, of D.S.I. Mr. Brown has resided in La Porte
for 22 years with 20 of those years spent as Environmental Director for a trucking
company. Mr. Brown does environmental work for Highway Transport. He further
explained the treatment process utilized by Highway Transport.
B. OPPONENTS
No opposition was presented.
Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong described the Board's options at Chairperson
Grant's request.
1. Exempt the nonconforming use from an extended useful life and termination.
2. Exempt the nonconforming use and apply certain conditions as may be
necessary to ensure reasonable compatibility with surrounding properties and
uses.
3. Establish an extended useful life for the nonconforming use.
a) The useful life can be no shorter than five (5) years and not greater than
twenty (20) years.
b) The Board of Adjustment will use information provided by the property
owner to determine the investment into the property in question and the
length of time necessary to recover the cost of the initial investment.
4. Establish an extended useful life for the nonconforming use and apply certain
conditions.
Motion by George Maltsberger to grant an exemption from extended useful life and
termination for NCU01-001 with the following conditions:
1. Implement proposed changes in traffic flow to the site, as shown on site plan.
2. Relocate on-site truck parking, as shown on site plan.
3. Install new site fencing, as shown on site plan.
4. Install dust-free parking and driveway materials throughout the site.
5. Install new site landscaping, as shown on site plan.
6. Install new wastewater treatment equipment (meeting minimum city requirements).
Zoning Board of Adjustment • •
Minutes of May 24, 2001
Page 3
7. Existing parameters of the applicant's current Industrial Waste Discharge Permit
issued by the City of La Porte and Air Permit (Exemption #4689) issued by the
TNRCC shall not be expanded or revised without authorization of the issuing
governmental agency.
Motion seconded by Willie Walker. All were in favor and the motion carried.
N. STAFF REPORTS
There were no staff reports.
V. ADJOURN
Chairperson Grant declared the meeting duly adjourned at 8:00 PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Peggy
Secretary, Zoning Board of Adjustment
A roved on this day of 2001.
Sidney t
Chairperson, Zoning Board of Adjustment
•
#SE 01-001
•
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST
FOR
1) REDUCED BUILDING SETBACK
2) REDUCED PARKING
EXHIBITS:
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION
STAFF REPORT
COPY OF ORIGINAL SURVEY (1996) (EXHIBIT A)
SITE PLAN SHOWING NEW ADDITION (EXHIBIT B)
PUBLIC RESPONSE(S)
,~
• CITY OF LA PORTE •
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT •
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST• ~
--------------------------------------------Application No.SEO/_-•--O:f.'
OFFICE USE_•ONLY: Fee.=._._.,550..00 Date Received: ~_. ,~_Q(._.
Receipt No.. _ D!o!l~s8
NOTE: This Fee is Non-Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision.
Applicant: ~'~f'U~~_ W.__ (~(~£~T7~' £~.Fc~1P~_-- _-..
Name ~ ~ ~
Address
I am .t a owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
.S_el~ ~.-___._____.__._~___.___.. to act on my behalf in this matter.
_-1~~
0 w n e r * : E'~e~JE ST ~ cv . G[J d^~9-TlFE~PFo~F'i~
--------•----~-•-~ Name-.__---._._-----------------
----f~- ~. ~ S~N~ _..~}«tFdU !~~' _. P H : X76 /~
Address • CR.( (~$1 l3- SD4--O~~y-
I am requesting a
Zoning Ordinance •~
property located a~
Special E~c,Geption
~~• am rest
Address
S, lob_~91(b)Ca~,)
to Sect. ~QS~ob ~9l(~ of the City
%Sting this Special Exception for
_ ._ s~ ~ n r ph .,~R~''~_
Legal Des ription
( ) Site Plan ~ ~(jQ 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) A1~1 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 the Owner's behalf.
~v- ~ o
_ w Date .
-~~~Ap~nt~ gn ure
OFFICE USE ONLY
Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Yes (~ No ( )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments: ~ - as - o./
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 except;ions may be granted for the following items only:
(1) The reconstruction of or addition to a building occupied
by a non-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 n,et 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 if the Board feels they are unnecessary
for the proposed use of a building or piece of property.
Please remember it is the Applicant's respon.siblity 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:
•
PAGE 3
TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT:
THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUEST:
--~-~---------- -__ ~e ~~ ~ ~ ~cd ~---~---~-~----.___.__._._.__-._
CED/1-'87
•
S.IOh-197. (b) (2) (b)
•
The rear lot set back is over 7 feetof the required limit. This^is
due to the lack of know.led~;e on the 20' requirement under t'a~ dAnsihv
I~t~nsity H9~ulations, section 106-3.33• The building extention was built
using the .fence line that had been establish ed about 30 .years ago. r~r
uarents;=Ha~e1 and.L.S. F7.anery, purchased the lots prior to the La Porte
annexation. They had placed a smal]. mobile home behind the building .
at 9406 Spencer and used it .for a rental trailer. They purchased a larger
mobile home and placed it o.n the lot fast of the property that they used
as their main residence. The smaller trailer was used for several years
then was removed and a fence was built using the line that was occupied
by the sma7_ler trailer. It was in direct .line with the fence to the neighbors
on the west side of 9405 spencer.
The fence clearly left a 10' easement for utilities. When I extended the
exhistins~ building I made the fence .line the back wall. Actually, the fence
was slihtly in from the 10' easement giving the easement more than 10'
so no later problems might arise. I was unaware that there is an additional
10' beautification easement. I am in aereement with the rules that we
should have beautification in~La Porte, Texas. I have not cut down any
trees or bushes in this building projedt. The five trees to the West. side
were not touched. I have actually built the extention around a full size
tree and allowed a limb to grow through a wall in an effort to save the tree.
The neighbor to the South has built a six foot fence that covers most of the
back of my building from his view. With me leaving the trees we have tried
to cover the back of our building as possible. If additinnal plants are
.,
~ JUN 0 6 2001
~l .
• n..
• •
necessary I am going to act accordingly. Most of the back property I own
that joins the back of the extention. There is, however, 20' that I do not
own that I share with a personal family residential lot. This home .is about
75' from the easement. There is very little conjestion and the aesthetics
is good.
Therefore, due to the tremendous cost of dismantling my building to comply
with this regulation I am askin? that ,you wave this requirement.
.~
i
'~~JUN062001
i
~v
• •
s.lo6-191(3)
The rubs for the number of parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building
size as shown in the directory of (SIC Codes) do not list 'Teen Club" is
~ti-~ss~~s#~ings .
We are not a drinking or alcohol business. Therefore, we should be considered
differently. Under texas Law 13, 14, and 15 ,year olds car.tt drive. Most
of our cus~o~Prs ire in this a.;e ~roiip. 9~~ of our business arrives by
parents droping off their children and picking them up at 12:00. The kids
b~e'doQ~ ~ 'u~,.
come in groups and rarely do they arrive in a s3.~ig cars A~ example,
1ast~Saturday we had 120 people come to our Teen Club and we only had 12
cars-in our lot. Friday night we had only 50 people and there was only one
car in our parking lot. When they become 1$ they no longer attend our club.
I~think that one parking space per 1,000 square feet of building should be
a logical number.
Therefore, I am asking that the panel accept this figure that is truely a
more realistic requirement than listing us as an adult establishment.
+.
~~~ o s 200
t
~y
• •
Staff Report ~ July 12, 2001
Special Exception Request #SE01-001 ~ ~ .
Requested bv: Mr. Earnest Weatherford of Vertigo.Nites Teen Club
Requested for: Lots 28,29; Block 2; Spenwick Place, Section 1
Location: 9406 Spencer Highway
Zonine: General Commercial (G.C.)
Background: Prior to City's annexation of this area in February 1984 the building located
. at 9406 Spencer Highway was used as a nightclub. This use continued until
the owner obtained a zoning permit from the city on April 12, 1993. The
zoning permit was issued for a teen discotheque known as "Vertigo Nites".
That use continues at that location.
The property consists of two lots that are both zoned G.C. However, based
on a May 1996 survey provided by the owner, we note that the original club
building, a mobile home and a travel trailer were located on Lot 28. On Lot
29, the survey shows three mobile homes along with adjacent covered
porches and a trailer addition. (See Exhibit A)
The survey identifies the existing club as a 37 X 60.5' (2,238 square foot)
building. The parking area for the club is located in front of this building;
however, the actual parking lot layout is not depicted on the survey.
The applicant has submitted a Special Exception request concerning to issues
relating to the site in question. The first issue under the request concerns the
location of an "unpermitted", addition made to the club building. The
addition was built without the issuance of a city building permit acid is
approximately 50' X 60.5' (3,025. square feet). When this addition was
constructed, the applicant removed a mobile home that was located behind
the club; however, the travel trailer shown on the survey remains in place
and the building addition surrounds this trailer. A hand drawn site plan
based on the applicant's field measurements shows the location of the
addition in question. (See Exhibit B)
• •
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2001
#SE 01-001
Page 2
Specific City Ordinance provisions relating to the construction of the club
addition were not followed. Those are identified below.
Ordinance Provisions:
• .New construction requires city review/approval and permits.
The addition did not have City permits.
A new addition requires atwenty-foot (20') rear setback from the
Low Density Residential (R-1).
The property along the rear (south) property line is zoned R-1. The
addition does not comply since it is located only eight feet (8) o, fJ'the
rear property line.
The second issue to be addressed under the applicant's request deals with the
required parking for a club. Staff has outlined ordinance requirements
below.
• Section 106-839 identifies minimum parking requirements based on
the occupancy use. The closest use in the table is eating and drinking
establishments. Under the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
Manual a~ club is identified as SIC #5812 -discotheques, night clubs,
etc.
Teen discotheques are not identified as a separate use in the manual
and the city's minimum parking requirements.
The original building and recent, unpermitted addition makes the
building size approximately 5,263 square feet. The required parking
for SIC #5812 is fifty-six (56) spaces. The parking formula is four
(4) spaces minimum plus ten (10) spaces per 1,000 square feet of
club area. The parking for the original business/building could have
remained as is; however, the addition made by the applicant requires
deficiencies to be addressed based on current requirements.
With the club building and manufactured homes on site, the
applicant is unable to meet this requirement. The applicant feels
that his club is unigue since it is a "teen club" and he caters to
young adults who are often younger than the driving age. In
addition, he states that his business does not serve alcohol.
• •
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2001
#SE 01-001
Page 3
Analysis: The Code of Ordinances defines a special exception as a specified
enumerated deviation from zoning regulations. The Board is empowered to
grant a special exception when it finds the following:
• Granting the exception will not adversely affect the value, or use of
neighboring property.
• Granting the.exception will not be contrary to the best public interest.
De.n`/
'm.o~'on ~- r~a.b c~
~. ~ r ~-u bah
~~~~ ~eS J
p en, ed-~
The Applicant's request is based on two specific sections of the ordinance.
The first request is based on Section 106-191(b)(2)(b) which states the
following:
To deviate the rear yard requirement where the actual rear yard setback of
any four or more lots in the same block does not meet the rear yard
requirements of these regulations.
Staff is not aware of other deviations on four or more lots within the same
block and the applicant has not provided evidence to this e, f,~ect. Based on
city regulations, the granting of such a yard requirement deviation should
not be granted unless the basis for the exception is substantiated.
e secon request is based on Section 106-191(3) which states the
~ - ~~-~~
~ ~ ~'1N' ~l~ c..
(i4-!t.' ayes )
~p~ces
c~,~,1.~1~-~I~ e ~.ls~; P-e-
~q/LS
e~n~d~~
following:
To waive or reduce off-street parking requirements when the board finds the
same are unnecessary for the proposed use of the building or structure for
which the special exception request applies.
The applicant's use of the building (teen discotheque or club) is unusual.
Tlie applicant has requested the board consider one (1) space per 1,000
square foot of building instead of ten (10) spaces per 1,0000 square feet.
This would mean the applicant would need to provide nine (9) spaces rather
than fifty-six (56) s aces.
• •
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2001
#SE 01-001
Page 4
Conclusion: Based on the facts outlined in this report, staff believes the request for a rear
yard exception should be denied since evidence supporting the eligibility
was not provided. Also, it does not appear that granting the requested special
exception under Section 106-191(2)(b)(2) would be in the interest of the
public interest and could adversely impact the adjacent properties.
In regards to the second portion of his request, staff feels the teen club use
does vary from an adult club and may deserve some consideration by the
board. However, we would recommend improving the parking lot to a dust-
free, striped surface in consideration for a reduction of the off-street parking
requirement. It does appear that the granting of the .requested special
exception under Section 106-191(3) would not be contrary to the best public
interest or adversely affect the value and use of adjacent or neighboring
properties.
Based on the facts and considerations noted in this report, staff suggests the
Board consider only granting part of the applicant's request under Special
Exception #SE01-001.- Staff suggests the following conditions be made as
part of the approval of #SE01-001.
• In exchange for a reduction of required off-street parking spaces the on
site parking lot be improved to a dust-free, striped lot.
• Identification of the Special Exception information (permit number, date
of passage and any conditions) be noted on the minor development site
plan that must be submitted to the city prior to approval and issuance of a
building permit.
Appeals: As per Section 106-196 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of La Porte:
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 may present to a court of record a petition for a writ of
certiorari, as provided by V.T.C.A., 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 days after the filing of the decision in the
office of the Board of Adjustment.
Co.~c. pv.rs'T.
~•
. . • C,~ ~ h1 aY ~ Q 9 6 . S u h•Vey
T
s/B `/. R. ~ ~orc. n/w ' . ' • ' ' • • !e nlc. v/w '~ • F..S s.
C // _ •
• i
.
~ .,.
:
.
s- ~ : r _
. .
'
2.5
,pvi ~d i.sy C:i1c
- -
. Z
V
L/isleS~gC ~ ,/
Sa2F~Gf -
.
~ 28 ~• 29
~
N
N •
• ~ ~ Q
aiw . .
9
~..r
//1 ' w
~ c.s• ~
i, ~ ~
;BAP/CX ~/~NEER M ~ ~ . 8 •'
~o
~d
~ ..
W •
Go
s ' N
~ a
~
~ P
W .a
4 •
. ~ B.~' v 0
8 • 6.i' ~ M .~
d ~ V
p
t ~
t
1~ • .. :
~ N ~.2
• •
l ~ •~ 0 -'
. LovMe o .
~ ~ ~p•
~ ~ d •~.vc.• : p
~ .~.o•
.
.
3 ; ~ • PoRt.l ~9. S' ~
~ i
• ~0 ° , ~s•r'' '
a l /a. ~
~0 TR.~~ceR ~
Al
~~N ~ `~B~~A6
f M ` ~.
..• /• 6 ~r
~` f ~ .
fsie ~ ,.•: Yo.-urea iry Es..s r:.. - --'` c~x.~.~o s.~~ ~1•.00~~ .. - - _` ~
/R - ~~ ~~_~.-
G ~~// ~ F~~ WES -
T /30.00 H
~;.. ~..._ SET ~~/.
/.
- ~- - - - - - ~ - _. -' _ - -
:.
. ~ I
• ~
~~ , .
/~
/.
,
ti.
i •?'F
'
~ ~
~
o
a
`4. h
of ~• '', ~ •r
Z
v
v
2
a ~a a .
~~ w
ee
. ~;
a 240
w
0
s~
. ~.~~.~.~~ ..rte/ye'
w ~ /f 2/ o F ~i/
• v
N
I rov- ~ !~+o
., s •09
• •:.~~~•. ~.. ~ : e .
6Z ~ ~ ~ 8Z
99doy~s pra r.ar) ~ Q
/~ ~ ,
- - . ~ ~~i.7 6ai pj.nA' , 9Z
'~
^ ~ ..~
/ n w` w /r
~ ~
~1
v
t
k, , t 9 //~J _.. . S7 // ~,
~gL 1~S `• ao"_ 's'aa ' ,'00' F/ - 1S'Q-'~ ~ri~r ~ /~ .>.,, ,aF t ~-~
•s it/a . •~~'. o> . ... w+io •s~e> o • ~ /,.
. ~~ ~ w
a
~~ ~ ~~ ~ .
•
M ~ ~ ski oyq OrJWJar~O o
b: J•a ~ ~.- ~~ ~ ~•• yw.wa
1 , . L'P9 ~ ~ ~ .
s ~ ya~iryl
• ~. •si
' , g •fS .
f 'G/ .; hrsrod ;
oo+~°?' ~
. , si'
• •
~~~ I~'~D
• 3
A Meeting of the La Porte •
PLANNING
Zoning Board of Adjustment
. (Type of Meeting)
Scheduled for
J~v ~;..~001
(Date of Meeting)
to Consider
Special Exception #SE01-0Ol
(Type of Request)
I have received notice of tt~e above referenced public hearing.•
I am in FAVOR of granting this request for the following reasons:
I am OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons:
Name lease print)
Si ture
~ ~~~
~~~~~
~; ~~~~ y
~o
~~.
o rv
~l05 ~l,~~s o,~~~~
Address
.City, State, Zi
!~U 12
~ N ~ ~~ ~ ~v~ ~~~~~y
~~- ~ ~ ~
~~~ ~ ~ ~
~ .
~ ._ _: .. w~ v~ ~ .
:H~~
~~
IM~N`5 ~~v ~~~
~~ -
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ fl ~ ~~~~ N~~ ~~~ . ~-~
~~ ~ .
~ (~ ~ q I~
~~w' ~ 1~~'~Ocv A-~,c~ i ~ hn IU - ~ ~2 ~ I~ v' - ~
.-,
~ ~
I`~~c~-.C~ rn:
. ~ ~ ~ ~,
P ~ ~ ~ a ~L o ~A ~ ~ ,~ ~o~ ; ~~ ~ s -~~ ~~ ~ S
~jv i ~. ~'O N' ( ~1vE ~T,o Vg~ ~~~ ~ ~~,~