HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-22-2004 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment•
Members Present:
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF JULY 22, 2004
Sidney Grant, Bob Capen, Rod Rothermel, Charles Schoppe, Alternate No. 1
Barbara Norwine, and Alternate No. 2 Bernard Legrand
Members Absent: George Maltsberger
City Staff Present: Interim Planning Director, Nicholas Finan; . City Planner, Wayne Sabo; City
Prosecutor, Clark Askins
1. CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Sidney Grant called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
2. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 24, 2004, MEETING.
Minutes were approved as presented.
3. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST XV04-008 FOR 1607 WILLOW VIEW STREET, FURTHER
DESCRIBED BY THE HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT AS LOT 7, WILLOW VIEW
SUBDIVISION, VOLUME 79, PAGE 46, ENOCH BRINSON LEAGUE, ABSTRACT NO. 5, LA
PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE APPLICANT, SHERMAN MOORE, SEEKS RELIEF
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY BUILDING (2 CAR GARAGE) 1,500
S.F. OF FLOOR AREA EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM 1,000 S.F. OF FLOOR AREA IN THE
REAR YARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 160-192(B) OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES.
A. STAFF PRESENTATION
Interim Planning Director, Nicholas Finan; addressed the Board. Mr. Finan stated that
due to an error, an agenda had not been posted for the meeting.. However, a notice of
public hearing had been posted. He suggested the Board conduct the public hearing, but
defer action on items until July 27t'' . This would allow time for an agenda to .be properly
posted.
Chairperson Grant stated the Board would receive public testimony for Variance Request
#VO4-008, but defer action until July 27, 2004, at 6:00 P.M.
City Planner, Wayne Sabo, presented staffs report for Variance #VO4-008. The
applicant, Sherman Moore, has requested : a variance to allow construction -of an
accessory building in the rear yard and to allow the. building to be 30' x 50', or 1500 S.F.
on property located at 1607 Willow View Street.
Staff determined the circumstances of the request. do not meet the provisions necessary
for a variance.
Mr. Legrand asked if the City had plans to initiate a change in the ordinance. Mr. Sabo
replied staff would soon undertake a review of the Development and Zoning Ordinances,
which would include review of the section under discussion in this. public hearing..
Additionally, a town hall meeting will be conducted on August P at the old Lomax City
Hall to receive public input with regard to a proposed residential large lot zoning district.
Zoning Board of Adjustment•
Minutes of July 22, 2004
Page 2
Mr. Sabo noted that public hearing notices were mailed to 10 property owners. The City
received four favorable responses.
B. PROPONENTS
Chairperson Grant swore in Sherman Moore, of 1607 Willow View. Mr. Moore described
his plans to replace the garage with a metal building to house a recently purchased R.V.,
as well as other vehicles and equipment.
C. OPPONENTS
There were none.
The Board discussed the merits of the request. Mr. Legrand posed an objection to Chairperson
Grant's comments about unique circumstances related to each request that contribute to the
Board's decision. Mr. Legrand did not feel the request represented a hardship and would rather
table the item until further ordinance review is completed. Chairperson Grant noted Mr.
Legrand's objection.
4. DISCUSS FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING VARIANCE
REQUEST #VO4-005 BY REFRIGERATED CONTAINER SALES, INC.
No action was taken.
5. CONSIDER STAFF PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD.
No action was taken.
S. ELECT VICE -CHAIRPERSON
No action was taken.
7. STAFF REPORTS
No staff reports.'
8. ADJOURN
Chairperson Grant closedthe public hearing and adjourned the meeting at 6:55 P.M.
Su miffed by,
egg
Planning Secretary
Approved on this day of , 2004.
01
Sidney Gran
Chairperson, ning Board of Adjustment
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF JULY 27, 2004
Members Present: Sidney Grant; Bob Capen, Rod Rothermel, Charles Schoppe, George
Maltsberger; Alternate No. 1 Barbara Norwine, -and Alternate No. 2 Bernard
Legrand
Members Absent:
City Staff Present: - Interim. Planning Director Nicholas Finan and City Planner Wayne Sabo
1. CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Sidney Grant called the. meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. '
2. -APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 24, 2004, MEETING.
Minutes were approved as presented.
3: CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST #VO4-008 FOR 1607 WILLOW VIEW STREET, FURTHER
DESCRIBED BY THE HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT AS LOT 7, WILLOW VIEW
SUBDIVISION, VOLUME 79, PAGE 46, ENOCH BRINSON LEAGUE, ABSTRACT NO. 5, LA
PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE APPLICANT, SHERMAN MOORE, SEEKS RELIEF
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY BUILDING (2 CAR GARAGE) 1,500
S.F. OF FLOOR AREA EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM 1,000 S.F. OF FLOOR AREA IN THE
REAR YARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE. PROVISIONS OF SECTION 160-192(B) OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES.
The public hearing for this item was held July 22, 2004. No further discussion was necessary.
Motion by Bob Capen to approve Variance Request #VO4-008 to allow construction of an
accessory building (2 car garage) 1,500 S.F. of floor area exceeding the maximum 1,000 S.F. of
floor area in the rear yard at 1607 Willow View Street.. Second by Rod Rothermel. - The motion
carried.
Ayes: Capen, Rothermel, Schoppe, Maltsberger, and Grant'
Nays:
Abstain:
4. DISCUSS FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING VARIANCE
REQUEST #VO4-005 BY REFRIGERATED CONTAINER SALES, INC.
In the absence of the City Attorney, Chairperson Grant asked this item be returned for
consideration at the next meeting.
5. CONSIDER STAFF PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD. .
The Board discussed the pros and cons of receiving recommendations from Staff.
Motion by Rod Rothermel to request staffs opinions and not request staffs_ recommendation on
matters pertaining to the Board. Second by Bob Capen.
Ayes: Rothermel, Capen, Schoppe, Maltsberger, Ond Grant
Nays:
Abstain:.
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Minutes of July 27, 2004
Page 2
6. ELECT VICE -CHAIRPERSON
Chairperson Grant called. for nominations for Vice -Chairperson. Motion by Rod Rothermel to
elect George Maltsberger as Vice -Chairperson. Second by Bob Capen. The motion carried.
Ayes: Rothermel, Capen, Schoppe, Maltsberger and Grant
Nays:
Abstain:
7. STAFF REPORTS
Mr. Finan announced that Friday would be his.last day with the City. He will begin employment
with the City of 'Pearland on Monday. He thanked Board . Members for the opportunity to work,
-with them. The Board reciprocated..
Mr. Sabo reminded the Board of the town meeting that will be held on August 3`d at 7:00 P.M. at
the old Lomax City Hall.
Mr. Legrand inquired about the progress of the work on shipping containers. Mr. Sabo responded
that work is ongoing.
8. ADJOURN
Chairperson.Grant adjourned the meeting at 6:20 P.M.
Sub itted by,
Peggy
Plannin Secretary %�
Approved on this �CU day of .2004.
!Zoning Board of Adjustment
CITY OF LA PORTE
ZOrW BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST
Application No.: (5
OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $150:00 Date Received: 7-2.m? 0
Receipt No.: i 7/ tile
Note: This Fee is Non -Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision
,Applicant:
Name .
//92,3 �o '"C%l t /'e ft PH: r77 .S :$3/
Address
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
to act on my behalf in this matter.
Owner*:
Name
//92 3 S�vr S �iGG�c� PH: 532 —572
Address
I am requesting a Special Exception to Sect. of the City Zoning regulations Chapter 106
of the Code of Ordinance.
I am requesting this Special Exception for property located at /yo�3 �c7t&x.14vi/
Street Address
Legal Description
() Site Plan ( 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) 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 the Owner's behalf.
r
Date v11 Applicant's Signature
Office Use Only
Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached?; Yes No ( )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments:
Meeting Date: If — Z L' Applicant Notified of Date:. 7^24 -eq
Board's Decision: Approved () Denied ( )
Notice of Boards Decision mailed to ApplicantJOwner:
Staff Report August 26, 2004.
Special Exception Request #SE .04-007
Requested by: Anthony Martin/A&M Construction (Agent) .
Requested for: Texas Sports Bar and Grill; Tract 8C, .05510 acres; Tract 8A 1, .09954 acres
out of W.M Jones Survey A-482, City of LaPorte, Harris County, Texas
Location: 10003 Spencer Highway
Zoning: General Commercial (GC)
Backcround: The applicants are constructing a business "Texas Sports Bar and Grill
located at 10003 -Spencer Highway with a projected opening date in
September. 2004.. This project is adjacent to the Arbor Bay Apartments and
the La Petite. Academy (Day Care Center) to the West and a vacant lot to the ..
East.. The site fronts on Spencer Highway to the South.
The applicant submitted a Special. Exception request that. asks for a reduction .
in the standard. front yard setback. requirement in order to allow a constructed
fence along the Western portion of the site in the front yard setback, where it.
borders the Day Care Center, to remain.• The City's Code of Ordinances,
however, prohibits a fence being erected within the required landscape
portion of any yard or the front yard setback in the commercial. zoning
districts:
Staff analyzed the surrounding area and based upon site inspections and the
pictures. submitted by the City Inspectors, the following considerations are
noted. .
• As seen in the attached photos, the existing block containing the
project has an irregular front yard setback with the existing apartment
complex, front yard fences of existing facilities and the Day. Care
Center.
• The requested fence is already in place. Applicants state that their
understanding was that the fence was an extension of their approved
site plan; therefore, a permit, while required, was not obtained.
Applicants have agreed to obtain the necessary permits and. pay .
appropriate fees.
• The .front portion of the fence in question was an extension' of an
existing fence constructed in the side setback. .
Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004 Meeting
#SE 04-007
Page 2 of 3
• The project, while .appropriately zoned and permitted, is adjacent to. a . '
Day Care Center which has caused some concern among citizens.
• The existing fence, in its entirety, serves to separate the Day. Care
Center from the Sports Bar and Grill.
• The fence does not pose a threat to the sight triangle of departing "
motorists. .
The standard front yard setback requirement in General Commercial zoning
district is 201. It should be noted that if the applicant's request is granted, the
ZBOA will be determining the deviated or "reduced" front yard setback.
This exception is being requested under the terms , of Section 106-
191(b)(2)(a) of the City's Code of. Ordinances.
❖ . To deviate a front yard setback requirement where the actual front yard .
setback of any abutting lot does not.meet the front yard requirement.
An sis: 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. .
Regarding this request, the relief being sought is similar to the circumstance.
covered by the terns of the Special Exception Section.
• - Allow construction of a fence with a reduced front yard setback.
The issues to consider. are.. impact on neighboring property and the best
public interest. In the opinion of the City Stay, it does not appear that
granting the requested special exception wHI adversely impact the adjacent
properties. where such exceptions already exist, nor does it appear that',
granting this exception would be contrary to the best public interest : The
fence will serve to isolate facilities with vastly different uses and serve to.:
enhance the safety of patrons of both businesses.
Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004 Meeting
#SE 04-007
Page 3 of 3 .
➢ Section 106-191- (b) (2) (a), City Code of ordinances states that a
special exception may be granted- if ."Any exception from the front
yard requirement where the actual front yard setback of any abutting
lot does not meet the front yard requirement."
➢ Section 106-191 (b) (2) d. states "An exception where the ' existing
front yard setbacks of the various lots in the same block are not
uniform, so that any one of the existing front yard setbacks shall, for
buildings: hereafter 'constructed - or .extended, be the required:
minimum front yard depth:
Conclusion:,
The application merits review by the Board based upon the parameters
set by the Ordinance.
The Board may consider: :. .
➢ Granting the variance and.. allowing the current fence to remain in
place.
➢ Denying 'the variance :.and requiring the existing fence to be
dismantled. '
Appeals:
As per Section 106-196 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of LaPorte:
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.
I
FAIRMONT PARK _
EAST SEC. 11 `
F= N.S.
Ln
APAFZ rN1EN*S
Ln
i F
DA
` �,► - 'CAR
HIGHWAY
i Ai i
i t
jrAIRMONT PARK
,.•. SUBDIVISION 4 +•�
SPECIA
# SE 1 1 1
10003 SPENCER HIGHWAY
{ Y 1.
1 �• I
r:7iT J 7 r
�•
r a 1]
i
�'. .
20
i
I
OAF
.
/
1
O
V
�.
•
,I
�eeeMII
►eeee111*11
I
R
r
a r• e
•
PEN,
i�IIII
IIRIWWXr
l+L3.r'L'L7►•'-��7..�����I��
-u� r
��II�.1�-
�.
•ii' �ii,
0
it ••�
iGi7Gi iGiiGG
uu■ uuo
v.o uun
•r,i
$106-791 LA PORTE CODE
DIVISION 4. FENCING AND LANDSCAPING REQUEREM NTS
Sec.* 106-79L Front yard areas.
No fences, structures, grading, or barrier hedges shall be permitted. within any front yard
areas except in the case of large lot residential lots, or in the case of lots with a front yard
directly adjacent to the shoreline of Galveston Bay, as provided is section 106-792
Sec. 106-79% Large lot residential lots.
In the case. of large lot: residential lots, six feet perimeter fences are permitted as an
accessory use. In the: case of lots with a front. yard directly adjacent to the shoreline of
Galveston Bay, four feet front yard fences are permitted parallel and adjacent to the side lot
lines. However, such fences shall not be permitted oa- the fiont lot line directly adjacent to
Galveston Bay, and shall.only be constituted of chain link These exceptions. do not permit
structures; grading, or barrier hedges.
Sec..106-79& Fences in side and rear yards. -
Within side yards and rear yards; fences of not higher_than six feet excluding six-inch rat
boards and walls 42 inches high or less shall be permitted.
Sec. 106.794. Fences. and trees on utility easements
Fences or.trees-placed upon utility easements are subject to removal at the owner's expense
If required for the maintenance or improvement of the utility. Trees on utility: easements
containing overhead wires shall not exceed ten feet. in height.
Sec. 106-795. Maintenance offences.
Both sides of the fence must be.maintained in good'coadition by the owner of the fence.
Sea 106-796.- Barbed wire fences. .
Barbed wire fences shall not be permitted, used or constructed. except in industrial districts
or to control livestock as hereinafter -provided.
Sec. 106-797. Property line feaces.in industrial districts.
ProPY line fences is any industrial .district shall hat exceed eight feet in height except
that:
(1) Fences erected along a property line in common with a residential district shall be
subject to the provisions herein described in residential district fences; and
(2) Fences in commercial and industrial zones which are'primarily erected as a security.
measure may have arms projecting into the applicant's property on which barbed wire
CD106:88 {���
ZONING § 106-799
can be fastened commencing at a point at least seven feet above the ground, and such fence
shall not be erected within the required landscaped portion of any yard or the, front yard
setback of any commercial or industrial establishment.
Sec. 106498. Fencing and wall requirements for automotive wrecking, salvage
yards, junk dealers, etc.
(a) General requirement. Every automotive -wrecking and salvage-yarcMunk dealer/scrap.
shall be completely surrounded and enclosed by a solid fence
metal processor yard with the city
or wall which is at least eight feet in height.
(b) Construction; maintenance of fence or wall: Every fence. or ' wall herein shall be
constructed and maintained as follows:
(1) All fences shall be constructed of wood, masonry, corrugated sheet metal, chain ]ink or
provided, however, that any one ° side of an automotive
any combination thereof;
wrecking and salvage yardrunk yard/scrap metal processing yard shall be bounded by
it fence or wall constructed of only one of the above materials. -
(2) Chain link fences shall be constructed of galvanized chain link fencing with wood or
Metal slats or strips run through all links of the chain link fence.
(3) . All fences or walls shall extend downward to within three inches of the ground and
shall test plum and square. at all times.'.
(4) . All fences or walls shall be constructed in compliance with all applicable provisions of
the building code of the city
(c) Use of wall, door or building as part offence
or wall. Any part of a fence or wall required
by subsection (a) of this section may consist in whole or in part of a solid wall and door, or walls
and doors of any completely enclosed building on the premises, if such wall or door meets all .
construction requirements set forth in this section.
in the prescribed enclosure which are .
(d) Gates at openings in enclosure. Openings a salvage yards/junk
necessary to permit reasonable access to said automotive wrecking
yards/scrap. metal processing yards shall be equipped with a solid gate or gates, constructed
and maintained in accordance with the. requirements for a fence or wall set forth. in this
section. Such gates shall be closed and securely locked at all times except during normal
daytime business hours.
(Code 1970, § 12. 14(c)---(fl)
Sec: 106-799. Construction, maintenance of electric fences prohibited. .
It shall be unlawful for. any person owning or controlling any property is the city to
construct, maintain or permit to remain on such property any fence charged with electricity.
It shall further be unlawful for any person to cause any fence situated in the city to become.
charged with a current of electricity; to connect any such fence with a source of electricity or
to permit any fence under the control of such person to be connected under source
co
with a soelectricity.
ntrol. of the
In any prosecution under this section testimony that any fence
CD106:89
Supp. No. 4
A Meeting of the La Porte
Zoning Board of Adjustment A U G 19 2004
(Type of Meeting)
Scheduled for .. AP A L ' � NU t ►'"
August 26, 2004
(Date of Meeting)
to Consider
Special Exception #SE04-007
(Type of Request)
I have. received notice of the above referenced public hearing.
I am in FAVOR of granting this request for the following reasons:
-01e6 ekcvaNlba Cam. I a-
e,,xn:: oar- c�'Id�c� (�4%�I cam
e J r%ML%94 IS tyl� OWA•t PAWN
I am OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons:
CITY OF LA PORTE' RECEIVED
ZONA BOARD' OF ADJUSTMENO JUL 0 6 2004
VARIANCE REQUEST
Application No..
OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $150.00 Date Received:
Receipt No.:
Note: This Fee is Non -Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision
Applicant: � FROY
Name .
291 -1,�71- CS �C1
Address Phone
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
to act on my behalf in this matter. .
Owner*: rC 0 � l h�
Name
Address . Phone
I am requesting a variance to Sect. of the City Zoning regulations Chapter 106 of the
Code of Ordinance.
I am requesting this variance for property located at
Street Address
Legal Description
() Site Plan () Minor. Development Site Plan
() Major Development Site Plan () General Plan
A Site Plan of the propertyis attached. Also, I have listed the information requested below on the
following pages of this form. -
a) 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 the Owner's behalf.
Date Applicant's Signature
Office Use Only
Site Plain and Authorization (if applicable) attached? ' Yes () No ( )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments:.
Meeting Date: Applicant Notified of Date: :
Notice to surrounding property owners- Date:
Board's Decision: Approved () Denied ( )
Notice of Boards Decision mailed to Applicant/Owner:
Now
Staff Report August 26, 2004
Variance Request #VO4-007
Requested by:.. - Mr. Leroy Marchan. (Property Owner)
Requested for: Lot 27, Block 8 of Fairmont Park East Section 1 A; Vol. 306, Pg. 69, W. M. Jones -
Survey, Abstract 482, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas.
Location:
3853 Pecan Circle.
Zoning;.
Low Density Residential (R 1)
Background:
Per the survey, this property was developed'for a single-family residence which included
a patio slab. constructed in the back yard setback The owner states that prior to
-construction of an additional room on the slab, the patio slab was extended in width, not .
depth The construction of the room was done without permit and the structure did not
conform to code.. On June 7, 2004, a City of La Porte violation was issued.
It was assumed that the patio slab, in its original state, was poured abutting the 16' utility.
easement within the property's back yard setback:' It was initially determined, however,
that the slab/room encroached into the easement. Additional survey work was done to
determine if the slab actually encroached or merely abutted the. stated easement. After.
uncovering. the pins and measuring distances,. it was determined that the slab and
corresponding room abut the easement. Prior to this hearing, the room was made to
conform to the building code.
Per City Ordinance 106-333 Table B. Page CD106.49 (supp. No. 9), foot note #3, 'The
minimum setback adjacent to any utility easement located in rear yard, shall be,
three feet. No portion of any building including projections of any nature' shall encroach
into any utilityeasement or vertical projection of the easement boundary."
This variance requests seeks to .allow the current patio slab and corresponding room to
remain within the Moot setback and abutting -to the 16' utility easement.
Analvsis:
Section 106-192(b)(1), in the Code of Ordinances, defines a variance as a deviation from
the literal provisions of.. the chapter, which is granted by the Board when strict
-.conformity to the . chapter would .' cause an unnecessary hardship because of the
circumstances unique to the property on which the variance is granted
Section 106-333. states. that any structure: -must remain. at least 3' from any and all
easements.
Except as otherwise prohibited, .the board is empowered to authorize a variance from a
requirement W. hen the board finds that all of the following conditions have been met.
❖ .That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the best public interest.
C
0
Zoning Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004
#VO4-007
Page 2 of 3
A.- That literal enforcement of the chapter 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 applicanfor property owner's own
actions;. and.
4# . That by 'granting the variance, the spirit of the chapter will be observed.
In determining if granting the applicant's request would be contrary to the public interest,
Staff recognizes that the development 'of the 'property may -create a problem with
adjoining properties..,
A survey of surrounding properties shows that this non-compliance with the ordinance is
not typical- to the neighborhood. The room was built without city permit and stands in
violation of city ordinance. In viewing the specific grounds for granting a variance, Staff
points out that the condition, as it exists, was the "...result of the applicaht or property
owner's own actions..." contrary to the provisions of Section 106-192.. Because of the
existence of the easement, we also find, however, "...unnecessary hardship because of
exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape topography, or other extraordinary or
exceptional physical situation unique to the property in question."
The ZBONs final consideration is whether granting of this request, observes the spirit of
the ordinance. Based on the facts noted in this report, the applicant's request would be
contrary with the spirit of the ordinance in that while. the rear yard is impacted. by the
utility easemeM the size and position of the room. was caused by previous or present
owners.
Conclusion:
Variance Request #VO4-007 which seeks a variance for allowing an existing room to
remain within. 3' of a utility easement contrary to Section 106-333 Table B. of the City of
La Porte Code of ordinances.. While a utility. easement does impact the rear yard, the
parameters for the requested variance do not, in.our opinion, appear to meet the
provisions established by Section 106-192. Variances...
.While recognizing the., circumstances. associated with' the property, the Board could.
-consider:
• Allowing the existing structure, put in at the owner's expense, to remain in place
(variance Wanted).
Directing the owner either remove the room addition or reduce the size of
room addition to comply with the 3' setback rule (variance denied).
Zoning Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004:
W04-007
Page 3 of 3.
Aoueals: As per Section 106-196 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of LaPorte:
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.
r
'�.
°;
EXHIBIT "L"
ARTICLE V. SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS
DIVISION 3. AREA REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 106-771. Yard requirements.
The following shall not be considered as encroachments on yard'' setback
requirements:..'
(1) . Chimneys, flues, belt courses, etc. Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills,
pilasters, lintels,- ornamental features, cornices,_ eaves, gutters,- steps, stoops,
and the like, provided they do not project more than four feet into any front or
rear yard., and two- feet into any side yard.
(2) Terraces, decks, patios, etc. Terraces, decks, patios,. or similar features,
provided they do not extend more than one foot above the height of the exterior
finish grade elevation,' or to a distance less than two feet from any lot line, or
encroach upon .any utility easement. Further, pools shall not be considered as
an encroachment on a front yard setback; provided that such' pools are located
in. a. front yard adjacent to Galveston Bay, and provided further that such pool
does not extend more than one foot above the exterior finish grade elevation, or
to a distance less than two feet from any lot line or encroach. upon any utility
easement..
(3)- Rear yards' only.. An unenclosed, 'attached. patio cover, awning, or canopy,
provided. that no portion of such patio covers, awnings, . or canopies shall
encroach into any utility easements, or. any vertical projection thereof, and
provided further that no portion of such patio covers, awnings, or canopies shall
be located at a distance less than five feet from the side property line or. three
feet from the rear property line, or any vertical projection thereof.
(4) Front and side yard carporfs. Front and side'yard carpoits shall be permitted for
single-family detached homes subject to the following requirements:
a. ' Carports" in a required front or'side yard shall not be located closer than
five. feet from any front or side property line..
b. . Carports located on '"comer lots shall not be located closer than 25 feet
from an . intersection. This . distance . shall be measured from the
intersection of property. lines common with street right-of-way lines.
c. The maximum width of a carport located in..a required front or side yard
shall be 25 .feet.
.1 .
'Na
IM
RECEIVFI
. �. A Meeting of the La Porte.
Zoning Board of Adjustment
AUG %n4
(Type of Meeting)
PLA� NIt, y
Scheduled for
August 26, 2004
(Date of Meeting)
to Consider
Variance Request #VO4-007
(Type of Request)
I have received notice of the above.refecenced public hearing.
I am in.FAVOR of granting this request for the following reasons: .
ERE s No77ii�v was w.77i A oo:�rf e} r1i.� A s Lem &S
TAE �J%TiIW -0 404i7Tiv ei /fie lon+ rt PRffcri 4,,
i AR G e 'VE
I am OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons:
ZOACITY OF LA PORTE
G BOARD OF ADJUSTMEIS
SPECIAL. EXCEPTION REQUEST
Application No.:. ^UD
OFFICE USE`ONLY: Fee: $150.00 . Date Received: -o
Receipt No.:
Note: This Fee is. Non -Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision
Applicant: . • f
Name..
Address
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
to act.on my be..haalf-_in this matter:
Owner*: �P �('Clt C�tn {fYl�� ��
Name,
(lf1_C PH:
Address
I am requesting a Special Exception to Sectof the City Zoning regulations Chapter. 106
of the Code of Ordinance. (� - n
I am requesting this Special Exception for property located at �3 �IYY
q.
Street ddress
�Pn• J-. 'h'I Lrk 'rn I
Legal Description
Site Plan () 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
follow_ ing .pages of this form.
a) . 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 caner, he must provide Authorization to a t on the Owner's behalf.
D e .. Applicant's Signature
Office Use'Only
Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Yes ()'No (. )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments:
Meeting Date - Applicant Notified of Date:
Board's Decision:. Approved () -Denied ( )
Notice of Boards Decision mailed to Applicant/Owner:
Staff Report August 26, 2004
Special Exception Request #SE 04-008 _
Requested by: Jerry and Daun Lambert (Owners)
Requested for:
Hams County Appraisal District as Block 6; Lot 102, Spenwick Place,
Section 1, LaPorte, Harris County, Texas..
Location:
3234 Andricks Road.
Zoning; .
Low Density Residential (R-1)
Background:
Applicants are requesting a Special Exception to erect a fence in the front
yard setback: Applicants state that a fence existed when the home was
purchased but. that it was taken down. Upon application to replace the fence,
City inspectors informed them of the requirements of the Ordinance. Mr.
and Mrs. Lambert state that should they comply. with the ordinance, the
fenced portion of the front yard would only be 11 feet.
The applicant submitted a Special Exception request that asks for a reduction
in the standard front yard setback requirement in order to allow construction
of a fence in the front yard setback'where it borders even with the neighbor's
'
fence. The City's Code of Ordinances, however, prohibits. a fence being
erected within the front yard setback in the all. zoning districts except large
lot residential (greater than 1 acre) and lots directly adjacent to Galveston
Bay.
Staff analyzed the surrounding area.and based upon site inspections and the
pictures submitted by the applicant, the following considerations are noted:
• As 'seen in the attached photos, the existing block containing the
'residence has existing fences in the front yard setback (Photo F).
:
•. The requested fence would join even with the fence of an abutting
PAP' owner (Photos D and E).
• .:The front portion of the fence in questions was an extension of an
existing fence constructed in the side setback (Photo A).
The ' standard . front yard setback requirement in "residential zones, single
family detached is 25'.. It should be noted. that if the applicant's request is
granted, the ZBOA will be determining the deviated or "reduced" front yard
setback.. .
Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004 Meeting
#SE 04-008
Page 2 of 3
This. exception.. is -being requested under the terms . of Section 106-
191(b)(2)(a) and (d) of the City's Code of Ordinances.
❖ To deviate. a front yard setback requirement where the actual front
yard setback of any abutting lot does not meet ' ' the front yard .
..... requirement.
❖ An exception where the front yard setbacks of the various lots in the
same block are not uniform.
. An sis: 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.
Regarding this" request; the relief being sought is similar to the circumstance
covered by the of the Special Exception Section.
• Allow construction of a fence with a reduced front yard setback:
The issues to ' consider are impact on neighboring property and the best
public: interest.'. In the opinuon of the City Staff ; it .does not appear that
granting the requested special exception will adversely impact the adjacent
properties where...such exceptions already. exist, nor. .does it appear that.
granting this exception would be contrary to :the best public interest The
fence will serve to provide a uniform setback of adjacent properties and, as
stated .by the. applicant, enhance the safety of four grandchildren who do not
. have direct access to the rear yard:.
Section 106-191 �(b) (2)..(a); City. Code of ordinances states that a
special .exception maybe granted if . "Any exception from the front
yard requirement where.the. actual front:.yard setback of any abutting
lot does not meet the front yard requirement." ;
➢:.Section 106-191 (b) (2) d: states ."An: exception:where the existing
.. front yard. setbacks of the . various .lots in..the same block are not
uniform; so .that any one of the existing -front yard setbacks shall, for
buildings hereafter constructed or: extended; be the required
minimum front yard depth.
Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004 Meeting
#SE 04-008
Page 3 of 3
Conclusion: The -application merits review by the Board based upon the parameters
set by the Ordinance.
The'Board may consider:
➢ Granting the variance and allowing the fence to be constructed in the
front yard setback.
➢ Denying the variance thereby denying the construction of the new
fence.
Avaeals:. Asper Section 106-196 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of LaPorte:
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.
Mr. and Mrs. Jerry Lambert
3234 Andricks Road
LaPorte, Texas 77571
(281) 542-1700
August 1, 2004.
Dear Board of Adjustments:
We are requesting a special exception to install a chain link fence in front and along one side of our
front yard with a -double swinging gate over the driveway.
When we purchased the house in 2000, a 3-fo6t-high wooden fence (See attachment: picture B #1)
existed on the property approximately 10 feet in from the street.. The city refused to turn on our gas
until we removed the fence because the gas company would be unable to read our gas meter, which
was approximately.12 feet inside the fence. They also said the. Fire Department would be unable to
get the fire engine to the house however, the driveway, 9'.54eet-wide, was open allowing access for
emergency vehicles or a hose to be ran to the house. The nearest water hydrant is two houses down to'
the east of us (picture E #4). . We were then told once removed, we had to reinstall the fence 25 feet in...
.from the culvert (see existing partial fence: picture A #2) which left us with only 11 feet of yard
inside the fence and 45 feet bf yard between the fence and the street. We can assuredly estimate that .
at least two thirds of the -homes in our neighborhood have fences around the perimeter of their front
yards. '
We would like to put up a fence because of our concerns for the safety of our four grandchildren
ranging in age from 17-months to 6-years-old. We keep our grandchildren every week. They play in
the front yard because our home is older and does not have a back door leading directly in. to the back
yard. Also the back yard is smaller and does not have a porch with shade or windows to keep an eye
on them because .of our home's layout. We are seriously concerned about neighborhood pets running
loose, strangers, and the traffic on our street; most often exceeding the speed limit of 30 mph: The
double gates across the driveway would remain unlocked allowing emergency vehicles access to our .
property at all times.
A sketch-and'supporting pictures are included with this request. . We would like to install the chain
link fence adjacent to our neighbor's fence at 3230 Andricks Road. Our fence would be 5-feet-high,
approximately 61 feet across including the double gates, 26 feet back on the west side of the house
and 20 feet from the street. This .will align the two fences and would greatly reduce our safety
concerns:
Please- consider our request to: install a fence on our property allowing ample room for access to the
house and utility meter. while meeting our family's need for safety., Thank you for your time and
consideration.
Sincerely,
The Lambert Family
J
I.
Alf pe,
..... ..... ;�00
7�_7 7,
ipn-
M&M, a,
*4
A4
N
IN
W
AZT',
-7-7
- _71C MAIN P''
ing partial fen #2 Exist
A�l A�l
-upused new fence (16** I#3
0in rront or
as meter)
'4�
4�
m
1106-791 LA PORTE CODE
DIVISION 4. FENCING AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
See.' 10.6.79L Front yard areas.
No fences, structures, grading, or barrier hedges shall be permitted within any front yard
areas except in the case of large lot residential lots, or in the case of lots with a front yard
;directly adjacent to the shoreline of Galveston Bay, as provided in section 106-792
Sea 106.79L Large lot residential lots.. .
In- the case of large lot residential lots, six feet perimeter fences are permitted a9 an
accessory use. In the case of lots with a front yard. directly* adjacent to the shoreline of -
Galveston Bay, four feet front yard fences are permitted parallel. and adjacent to the side lot
:.lines. However, such fences shall not be permitted on- the front lot line directly adjacent to
Galveston Bay, and. shall only be constituted of chain link These exceptions do not permit
structures, grading, or barrier hedges.
Sec..106-79L Fences inside and rear yards:
Within side yards and rear yards, fences of not higher_than six feet excluding six inch rot
boards and walls 42 inches high or less shall be permitted.
Sec. 106-7ft Fences and trees an utility easements.
Fences or,trees placed upon utility easements are subject to removal at the owner's expense
if required for the maintenance or improvement of the utility. Trees on utility easements
containing overhead wires shall not exceed ten feet in height.
Sec.:106-?9b. Maintenance of fences.
Both sides of the fence must be maintained in good condition, by the owner of the fence.
Sea 106-79& Barbed wire fences.
Barbed wire fences shall not be permitted, used or'constructed except in industrial districts
or to control livestock as hereinafter provided.
Sec. 106-797. Property lime fences in industrial districts.
Property line fences in any industrial district shall not exceed eight feet.ia height except
that:
(1) . Fences erected along a property "line in common with* a residential district shall be
subject to the provisions . herein- described in residential district fences; and
(2) Fences in commercial and industrial zones which are primarily erected as a security..
measure may have arms projecting into the applicant's property on which barbed wire
. EXHIBITC
D106.88
A Meeting of the La Porte
Zoning Board of Adjustment.
?tz. ,..? VIE,
(Type of Meeting)
AUG 1 4'.2004
Scheduled for
August26,2004 X- LAIJIN;.�`t;
(Date of Meeting)
to Consider
Special Exception #SE04-008
(Type of Request).
I have received notice of the above referenced public hearing.
I am ' FA OR o ting this request for.the following reasons:
a3eu-yi (A. Q. C
Ad&
City, State, Zip
.CITY OF LA PORTE0
ZO IG BOARD OF ADNSTME
VARIANCE REQUEST
Application No.: oil - caq
OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $150.00 Date Received:
Receipt No.: d D F, 8'
Note: This Fee is Non -Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision
Applicant: le hA e 1 I'(7ai1C151
Name -
� 5 . Ce3cre-et
Address Phone
I am the owner of the herein described property. 1 have authorized \I
to act on my behalf in this matter. 4 I _14 tlq ,.,
Owner*: 1gnj) lr ?Ye {
Name
1501 CeoLcr
Address Phone
I am requesting a variance to Sect. IV •-Iq 7— of the City Zoning regulations Chapter 106 of the
Code of Ordinance.
I am requesting this variance for property located at ,! rrnp t" ri NA Ietzit
Street -Address
ord Strut
Legal Description
0 Site Plan Minor Development Site Plan
(k) Major Development Site Plan 0 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) 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 the Owner's behalf.
n _
ate Applicant's Signature
Office Use Only
Site Plan. and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Yes() No ( )
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments:.
Meeting Date: Applicant. Notified. of. Date: `
Notice to surrounding property owners- Date:
Board's Decision:' Approved () Denied ( )
Notice'of Boards Decision mailed .to Applicant/Owner:
-Staff Report.. August 26, 2004
Variance Request #VO4-009
Requested W . Seial Dimple Patel (Property Owner), Bobby Grisham (Agent).
Requested for:' . A Commercial Reserve 1, Block 1,1.3214 acres (57,560 sq.ft.) situated in the Johnson .
Hunter League, Abstract No. 35, La Porte, Harris County, Texas.
Location: 908 S. a Street (Proposed hotel/motel site)
Zonin: General Commercial (GC)
Backnround: The City of La Porte received a development .plan for proposed hotel and suites to be
located at the northwest corner of S. a -and West "G" Street. The developer /owner is .
proposing 61 rooms in a 4 story hotel building. Total height of the proposed building
with roof top/ridge -exceeds the maximum of 45 ft. permitted per Code of Ordinances.
The plat of the subject property has already been approved. Access to the proposed
facility will be off West "GI"'Street, barring access. to SH. 146 due to narrowness of the
commercial reserve along the Highway.
Per Section 106-443, Table B, commercial area requirements, the maximum height for
all permitted or conditional uses in General Commercial (GC) is 45 feet. This variance
requests seeks to allow a relief of the maximum height- limit.
Ana sis: Section 106-192(b)(2), in the Code of Ordinances, defines a variance as a deviation
from the literal ' provisions of the chapter, which is granted by the . Board when strict .
conformity to the chapter would cause an unnecessary hardship because of exceptional
narrowness, shallowness, shape, topography: or extraordinary or exceptional physical
situation unique. to the property on which the variance is granted
The subject.tract is 1.32 acre (51,560 NA) with floor area ratio or lot coverage approx.
30%. As per plan, the vertical distance of a building measured from average elevation of
the finished grade of the structure to the highest point of the roof exceeds 45 ft.
Except.as otherwise prohibited; the board is empowered. -to authorize a variance from a
requirement when the board finds that all of the following conditions have been met:
That the. granting of the. variance will not be contrary to the best public interest.
❖ . That literal enforcement of the chapter 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
❖ That by granting the variance, the spirit of the chapter will be observed.
Zoning Board of Adjustment
August 26, 2004
#VO4-009 -
Page 2 of 2
Conclusion: -
In determining if granting the applicant's request would be contrary to the public interest,
Staff recognizes -'that the development of the property may not create a problem with
adjoining properties. Adjoining properties have similar use. In addition, .a survey -of
surrounding - properties. -shows that this proposed development is - typical to the
commercial entities especially, to lodging industry. Coordination with the La Porte Fire
Department showed no safety related issues.
The ZBOA's final consideration is whether granting of this request, observes the spirit of
the ordinance. -
The developer/owner of proposed hotel/motel has submitted letters from the City of Deer
Park and Chamber of .Commerce' showing strong support for the projects aurently
operated there. A letter from the Southtiust Bank shows credibility towards carrying out
this proposed venture in LaPorte. The applicant's request is based solely on the current
shape and location of the property. In addition, the developer is :unable to take advantage
of the driveway. off State Highway 146. The visibility and marketability factors play a
major role in a successful business. Under the circumstances, .compensatory measures
should be considered to make a project economically feasible
Request #VO4-009 seeks a variance for the applicant to build a 4 story hotel with
required parking spaces and landscaping exceeding maximum height of 45 feet. The
building heights usually exclude penthouses containing mechanical equipment such as air
conditioning or elevator equipment . and church spires, water towers, radio, and cellular .
antennas, etc. The parameters for the requested variance, given the shape and location of .
the.. property and the economic feasibility . issues involved may meet the provisions
established by Section 106-192. Variances.
While recognizing the circumstances: associated with the property, the Board could
consider:
• Allowing the project 4 stories with a height of 60 feet, exceeding the maximum
height limit, (variance.granted).
• -Should the Board. deny the variance, the.maximum height limit of 45 feet shall
be observed:
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 theillegality. 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.".
-1'a:Is . .. -
x,
.—
•i
7+.14P
. •�Mtw
J.
. � i ! • • ors '
i ii si► sit W. "F" STREET
i + y
N.T.S.
fp—dW -
BEST WESTFRN
LA PORTE INN i
mamma
�r
ev sR. T
f►
■
W. „G" STREET
1 �'a
BLANK OR •
AMERIC
s � -
j� a �
i
11
1
Uses (SW Cade V
Zones
PR
NC GC
Kennels, breeding (0279) *
* C
Unlisted uses, similar to uses listed'
above C,
C C .
L Refer to chapter 10 of thisCode.-(Must be at least 300 feet from church, school ae' hospital.)
Sec. 1064A% -interprets n and enforcement
Property uses, accept as provided for by section 106-441, Table A,. are prohibited and
• constitute a violation of this chapter. .
Sec. 106-443. Table B, commercial area ropirementa -
-
(a) . Table B. commercial area requirementL
Rokundal
MU&Mmt
Mutimuat Fw+d
Arudmmn
Ybrd
Landscaping : A&i urns Set mis
SetbarA Maamrrm
Requbvd Lai . Pim .
rim Height .
Uses s CourvPI.S. e. 47
it a
R-3 uses 6'Xi Density Intensity Regulations Specified In Table B. residential area .
' requitement+
section 106-M
CR Comm. Recreation
Dist4 all permitted or :
Conditional
NC Neighborhood .. 696 .50% . 20-10-0
20-10-10 45
Comm:: all permitted of
conditional
GC General Comm all .. 6% 40%- 20-10-0 ..
20-20-10 45
permitted or omditional.
Outside -sales . or ser, MA N/A . 544 '
Same -as N/A
vices
pimple
:. :.• . `. ..
use
Outside storage N/A N/A 20.1"
Same as See • section
Principal, 106-4"(b)
use .:
FTeeataadiag am-prem-: :. See. -article VII o[ this chapter .
lees signs
BY CHOICE HOTELS - -
City of La Porte
604 W..Fairmont Pkwy
La Porte; .Texas 77571
�281) 471-5020
Dear City 6f La Porte Planning & Zoning Department:
.I arni writing in regards to our Variance Request for the land located on the comer of West G Street and
8m Street We "are requesting to build an all new Holiday Inn Express Suites with 6.1 units. Per our
drawing we need a height variance to build this project 4 stories with a height of 61 feet
With the current shape and location of the property, we are n64'able to takeadvantage:of the driveway
from Highway 146 to benefit our usable space for:thin H6tel. Due to City planning and traffic on
Highway 146, we can not use this driveway as an entrance to the hotel; an access route from. Highway
146, nor does it benefit visibility or building area. Our land is 53,706 sq. feet with a budding footprint of
17,115 sq. feet. The shape of land does not allow us to build a feasible hotel using 3 floors; required
parking spaces, and landscaping.`Without this fourth floor we would only be able to have 42 units
which would make this project :eicafly unfeasible and Holiday Inn Express franchise unattainable.
Our hotel is intended for business travelers and engineers visiting the. City of La Porte working from
Monday — Friday. Without these additional roans to service these guests our hotel will not be able to
maintain the necessary. occupancy;.level'required to keep up with fixed costs.
Our drawings show a site.plan with a very aesthetid biing.facing Highway. 146 with half stucco and
half.brick design.. This property with its constnkt on arid' ."Ign will help attract and retain many guests
visiting the. City of LaPorte. The .hotel will be can 'all..suite property, supplying business travelers and
industries with the necessary amenities and c�rlference spat e.,currently r by the city.
Also, attached with this variance request are letters fio n key meriiiier .af the City of Deer Park, where
we currently own and operate the Comfort Suites and Best Western. --in beer Paris; we help support the
Man' :grouting industries by providing travelers with.the best service possible::=
With this hotel'we plan to both benefit the City of La Porte and its growing i.ndustrHe; by providing a
quality hotel. This hotel with its Holiday Inn Express franchise and experienced owners and operators
will help grow the City of La: Porte in both tax revenue and the long term .prospectus for La Porte.
Thank you for your time and consideration: -
sincerely,
Dimple Dhiru Patel.
1501 CENTER ST.
DEER PARK, TX 77536 ,
PHONE 281-930-8888 FAX 281-930-8883
TOLL FREE 1-800-481-7094 -
email managerfludeerpark.com
www.csdeerpark.com
----------
.....-I.i...l.i... . OM Ar Y/'llrC .1.ni.0AMale ♦n,n
"COMMUNITY OF OPPORTUNITY"
SHARON McLEAN
President
July 30, 2004
Ms. Sejal Patel
Comfort Suites. -
1501 Center Street
Deer Park,.TX 77536
• i
DEER PARK
ACCREDITED
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
CHAMBER of;COMMERC[
O► THE OMITBB STAr
Dear Sejal:
I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to extend you an enormous thank -you! I have witnessed your
community commitment first hand and would like to convey my sincereappreciation for your ongoing
support.
With everyone these days being in a constant state of "time poverty" days I'm very grateful for your
sacrifice of time as well as the professionalism you display in all the projects you undertake.
Deer Park is truly blessed to have individuals such as you who. are willing to "give back". Volunteerism
is'the life-blood.of every successful project and so. essential for a community to, thrive.
It is a pleasure to have you; Best Western — Deer Park Inn, -and Comfort Suites actively involved in Deer
Park. -You have been good neighbors, and have added, so much to both the beauty and economic base of
the community.
I look forward to a long-term partnership and working with you on future projects.. If ever I can assist
you, please feel free to contact me at 281-479-1559:
Sincerely,
Aharon McLean
President
110 CENTER STREET /.DEER PARK, TEXAS 77536 / TELEPHONE (281) 479-1559 / FAX (281) 476-4041
WEBSITE ADDRESS: www.deerpark.org. E-MAIL ADDRESS: infoGdeerpark.org
•
Office of Mayor
WAYNE RIDDLE
CRY -of
DEERVARK
(281) 478-7241
FAX: (281) 478-7218
August 2, 2004
To Whom It May Concern:
P. O. BOX 700 -
DEER PARK,TEXAS 77536
The City of Deer Park. feels. very. privileged that Ms. Sajel Patel
chose to construct the Comfort Suites Deer Park located at 1501
Center Street within our community.
A. Patel, Owner and Operator of the Comfort Suites, offers her
support of. our community . atmosphere by offering a first-class
business operation. Under" her careful direction' the Comfort
Suites offers an excellent service to our local residents with their
special- needs, as .well as,. other visitors to our community.. _
The Patel Family is a true testament to their dedication to the
hotel business .as.ekhibited by the .Best Western Deer Park Inn Et
Suites located at 1401. Center Street, owned by Ms. Patel's Father-
-in -Law,. Mr. Dhiru Patel, as well as, the hotel facilities owned by
the Patel family .in the City of LaPorte.
Ms: Sajel Patel's facility is top-notch and a good testament to the
types of businesses that Deer Park welcomes to our community.
In commum spirit,
ti
SoutbTrust. Bank Amur
P.O. Box 998
La Porte, TX 77572
(281)471-4400
August 2, 2004
Re: Dimple and Sejal Patel / Patel family banking relationship with SouthTrust Bank
To Whom it May Concern:
Dimple and Sejal Patel have been excellent customers of SouthTrust Bank since July, 2002;
additionally the Patel family has had a relationship with SouthTrust since 1996. The Patels have
been extremely successful in the motel industry. We presently have a significant loan relationship
with the Patels secured by real estate. This loan, as well as all previous loan obligations and
deposit accounts, has been handled in an exemplary fashion.
We consider the Patels to be of the .utmost character and feel very fortunate to have them as
valued customers of SouthTrust Bank. .
We are also excited .about the Patels'.possible venture in the La Porte market and our potential
involvement -as well. Should you have any additional questions feel free to contact me at (281)
817-3011.
Sincerely,.
Ronald D. Harris
Vice President