HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-27-05 Regular Meeting of the La Porte Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2005
Members Present:
George Maltsberger (Vice Chairperson), Bob Capen, Rod Rothermel, Charles
Schoppe, Alternate No. 1 Lawrence McNeal, and Alternate No. 2 Gilbert
Montemayor
Members Absent:
Chairperson Sidney Grant
City Staff Present:
Clark Askins, Assistant City Attorney; Masood Malik, City Planner; Peggy Lee,
Office Coordinator; Traci Koenig, Secretary II.
NOTE: Alternate No. 1 was a voting member in the absence of Sidney Grant.
1. CAll TO ORDER.
Vice Chairperson George Maltsberger called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JULY 28, 2005 MEETING.
Minutes of the meeting were approved as presented.
3. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO REAPPOINTED MEMBERS, SIDNEY GRANT (CHAIR),
BOB CAPEN, ROD ROTHERMEL, CHARLES SCHOPPE, AND GEORGE MAL TSBERGER.
Assistant City Attorney, Clark Askins, administered the Oath of Office to Bob Capen, Rod
Rothermel, Charles Schoppe, and George Maltsberger simultaneously.
4. CONSIDER SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST #SE 05-002 FOR PROPERTY lOCATED AT
405 BA YSHORE DRIVE, FURTHER DESCRIBED BY THE HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL
DISTRICT AS TRS 1B & 2B, BLOCK, 39, SYLVAN BEACH FIRST SUBDIVISION, lA PORTE,
HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE APPLICANT, KATHRYN AGUilAR, SEEKS AN EXCEPTION
TO THE STANDARD FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS REQUIREMENT FOR THE
PLACEMENT OF HOUSE AND TO AllOW CONSTRUCTION OF STAIRS AND PORCH IN
THE YARD SETBACKS. THIS EXCEPTION IS BEING SOUGHT UNDER THE TERMS OF
SECTION 106-191 (B)(2) OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES.
A. STAFF PRESENTATION
Staff report was given by Masood Malik, City Planner. The applicant, Kathryn Aguilar, seeks an
exception to the standard front and rear yard setback requirements regarding the placement of an
antique home and construction of stairs and a porch. According to a Staff inspection of the block
surrounding the property in question, the three existing homes were all found to be
nonconforming with the City Ordinance in regards to the yard setback requirements. The Staff
Report indicates that "the applicant's proposed setbacks for the subject house represent an
'average' of the various yard setbacks within the same block."
B. PROPONENTS
Vice Chairperson Maltsberger swore in the applicant, Kathryn Aguilar. The applicant spoke in
favor of the Special Exception request. She believes that the house will be a positive aesthetic
addition to the neighborhood, and presented a letter from John Black (Editor of the Bayshore
Sun) in support of that view.
C. OPPONENTS
There were none.
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Minutes of October 27,2005
Page 2
Motion by Bob Capen to approve Special Exception #05-002, which allows the proposed location
of the home and construction of stairs and porch upon City yard setbacks at 405 Bayshore Dr.
The motion was seconded by Charles Schoppe. The motion carried.
Ayes: George Maltsberger, Bob Capen, Rod Rothermel, Charles Schoppe, Alternate
No. 1 Lawrence McNeal.
Nays:
Abstain:
Assistant City Attorney, Clark Askins, read aloud from Section 106-196 of the Code of
Ordinances, which addresses Appeals.
5. CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST #VOS-OOS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 200 GARFIELD
BLVD. BEING LOTS 1-6, 11-16, AND ADJOINING ALLEY OF BLOCK 18, SYLVAN BEACH
FIRST SUBDIVISION, LA PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE APPLICANT, MARIO
NAVARRO, IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ERECT AN 8' HIGH FENCE AROUND AN ENTIRE
PROPERTY FOR SECURITY PURPOSES. THIS VARIANCE IS BEING SOUGHT UNDER THE
TERMS OF SECTION 106-192 (B) OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES.
A. STAFF PRESENTATION
Masood Malik, City Planner, gave the staff report and a brief Power Point presentation containing
pictures of the subject property as it currently exists. According to Staff, variance request # V05-
005 does not meet the standard criteria for granting of a variance, as outlined in Sec. 1 06-192;
however, the staff also noted that the Board has deemed it appropriate, in recent history, to
consider the matter of security when evaluating a variance request.
B. PROPONENTS
Vice Chairperson Maltsberger swore in the applicant, Mario Navarro. Mr. Navarro spoke in favor
of variance request #V05-005. Mr. Navarro claimed that the home will be a 'personal home' for
his family, and a vacation spot for his other clientele. He estimates that the home will be
occupied between two and three months out of the year, at various intervals. Because the home
will not be occupied year-round by anyone other than a groundskeeper, Mr. Navarro feels that the
addition of a new 8' fence will be beneficial to the security of his property. Mr. Navarro went into
detail about the type of fence he intends to construct around the property.
C. OPPONENTS
There were none.
Motion by Rod Rothermel to conditionally approve Variance Request #V05-005 for an 8' fence
surrounding the entire property at 200 Garfield, with the following conditions:
. Fence shall be constructed of chain link.
· An indigenous, fast-growing vine must be added to the chain link and fully cover it within
a reasonable amount of time.
· Fence shall contain stucco or rock pillars 2' in diameter at every 8'_9,' instead of
traditional pipe 2" in diameter at every 10'.
. Fence shall be well maintained.
Ayes: George Maltsberger, Bob Capen, Rod Rothermel, Charles Schoppe, Alternate
No. 1 Lawrence McNeal.
Nays:
Abstain:
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Minutes of October 27,2005
Page 3
6. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Masood Malik, City Planner, briefly updated the Board on several ongoing City projects, including
Fairmont Park East, Sec. 12, Underwood Business Park, and Texas Import Export Park.
7. BOARD COMMENTS
There were none.
8. ADJOURN
Vice Chairperson Maltsberger adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
Submitted by,
~~
Secretary, Planning and Development
Approved on this ~ 3 ~ay of ~~
~
/ ~;;~.~~~.
~hairperson, Zoning Boa of Adjustment
,20~.
#A06-001
APPEAL OF THE ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER'S DECISION
EXHIBITS
A. Staff Report
B. Location Map
c. Survey Map
D. Application
E. Documentation
Staff Report
February 23, 2006
Appeal of Enforcement Officer's Decision #A06-001
Applicant: Robert and Lori Drunckenbrodt, Property Owners
Location: 11315 North "H" Street
Le2al description: 5.0413 acre tract ofland out of Outlots 248 and 253 of the La Porte Outlots in the Enoch
Brinson Survey, Abstract No.5, Harris County, Texas.
Present zonin2: Large Lot Residential (LL)
Land Use Map: Residential
Back2round:
The applicant is appealing the Enforcement Officer's decision to apply Code of
Ordinances Section 106-331 and Section 106-743, Breeding Kennels, to a proposed
development. Under DIVISION 2 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS of the
Zoning Ordinance, Section 106-331, Table A, Residential Uses, the breeding kennels,
private stock, limited to dogs and cats, large lot residential is a permitted accessory use,
subject to requirements of Section 106-743. Per Section 106-743 of the Code of
Ordinances, breeding kennels for dogs and cats are a permitted accessory use on lots in
excess of 43,560 square feet (1 acre) provided that all animals must be boarded in
enclosures located no closer than 100 feet from any property line.
The property is located at 11315 North "H" Street east of the ExxonIMobil pipeline
easement and west of Shirley Lane Subdivision. The property in question currently
contains the following:
. Residence
· Livestock turnout paddocks
· Eastside Barn
. Westside Barn
· Dirt road in the middle of the tract
The applicant has submitted a permit application to extend the eastern barn with a dog
run. As per copy of the survey provided by the applicant, the building setbacks for the
eastern barn/metal building are shown as 49' from side and 59'from the rear property
lines. The permit was denied based on Section 106-743 of the Code of Ordinances as
kennel must be no closer than 100 feet from any property line. In addition, the applicant
owns adequate land area on site to place the kennel in compliance with the current
regulations.
iXHlBnli
Board of Adjustment
2/23/06 - #A 06-001
Page 2 00
Analvsis:
The property owners/applicants claim that they maintain 14 acres of the adjacent pipeline
corridor located to the west side of this property from North H Street to North L Street
for livestock grazing. A copy of the lease signed in 1997 has been submitted in this
regard. Owners of the lease maintain and have right of control over the total amount of 19
acres, of which the applicant's property is 225'x900' and the pipeline corridor is
450'x1800'. The applicant is requesting that their property line be extended to include an
additional width of the pipeline corridor (450') to qualify for a kennel, per ordinance
requirements.
In describing the action of appeal, the Code of Ordinances states: In exercising the powers
set forth in Section 106-88, the Board of Adjustment may, in conformity with the provisions
of this chapter, reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement,
decision, or determination as ought to be made, and to that end shall have all the powers of
the enforcement officer from whom the appeal is taken. The Board must find the following
in order to grant an appeal:
a) That there is a reasonable difference of interpretation as to the specific intent of the zoning
regulations or zoning map, provided the interpretation of the enforcement officer is a
reasonable presumption and the zoning ordinance is unreasonable.
Current regulations are written in a clear manner which allows the enforcement officer to
understand the intent of City Council as it relates to the breeding kennels location. This
regulation has been in effect since the January 26, 1987 adoption of Zoning Ordinance
#1501 and the regulation has not been proven to be "unreasonable".
No reasonable difference exists regarding the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance.
Alternative remedies exist for the property owners in which they would be compliant with
the Ordinance, therefore the Zoning Ordinance should not be construed as unreasonable.
b) That the resulting interpretation will not grant a special privilege to one property
inconsistent with other properties or uses similarly situated
Current regulations are written in a clear manner that enables individuals to understand City
Council's intent. This enables Staff to provide the information to others and be consistent in
the enforcement of this regulation. This consistency in the enforcement of the regulation
ensures no "special privilege" to anyone property.
One of the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance is to eliminate and/or ameliorate
nonconformities. Typically, the elimination of nonconformities is addressed when property
owners decide to develop their property or expand their existing facilities. Granting this
request would give the appearance of granting a special privilege to the property owners.
Board of Adjustment
2/23/06 - #A 06-001
Page 3 of3
Conclusion:
Appeals:
c) The decision of the Board must be in the best interest of the community and consistent with
the spirit and interest of the City's zoning laws and the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
Staff believes the kennel (extension of the barn and dog run) would conflict with the
intent of the regulation and would not be in the best interest of the community or be
consistent with the spirit of the City's Zoning Ordinance. While the property owners
have presented a lease that provides the needed setback, the kennel could be viewed as
permanent while the lease is a temporary agreement.
The general intent and purpose behind the Zoning Ordinance is to promote public health,
safety, and welfare. The enforcement officer's decision in this case would be in the best
interest of the community and would be consistent with the spirit and interest of the
City's Zoning Laws and the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
Based on the facts and considerations noted in this report, Staff feels the enforcement
officer's decision was correct.
If the Board chooses to grant #A06-001, this action would allow the applicants to proceed
with the proposed addition as follows:
· Dog run (kennel) will be located at 49' from the west side property line.
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.
:,XHIIIT B
FNC. POST 0 COR.
OUTLOT 268
44.00'
OUTLOT 267
OUTLOT 269
1<;1)
/
Ol/t.. Lr;;..-# Ii
. L/q~,~f ~.
=> --'-"'=->-'-"".1'
~ BR.~j\N
N 0 C . ,"J''-:
[ , \,} ~ t'l,
'-.. ~.
FNO. 5 8" I.R.
o
lED
2005
49.0'
OUTLOT 252
~. 0 N
f)
5 Ul R V [ Y
OUTLOT 254
OUT 0
}U
RES
CITY COpy
F THE APPROVED PLANS
A?DIFIED; A NEW SUBMITrAI
.IL CiTY k HErmlRED PRiOR"
1 HE CHANGE OCCURRING
a
a
c::i
a
Q)
a z
a 0
c::i
a (I)
Q) -0
2:w
00
allX
- - :=l
(/)0
~ w
'" ::ED::
Z
c. a Oil::>
, " $)
il ~ a ::E
c a
e' (f)
<.
C
OUTLOT 249
R C
5 T
A
P.P.
'" OUT T 248
..
....
._____k.
.....
NO.
OUTLOT 247
~
:!Ii
!
(":l
PP
326.39'
244.00
FND. 1/2" I.R.
N89'S9',S"W 2660.23
'5
JAN-11-200B WED 11:07 AM
FAX NO.
P. 02
CITY OF LA PORTE
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APPEAL OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER'S DECISION
Application No..:
OFFICE USE ONL V: Fee: SJ SO.OO Date Recemd:
Applicant:
~bert -r Lori ~rLt,-1l4wfo~&+
Name
-1J3\S p.)+. Si-. Wor-fe
Address
PH: ~'l'1"f"..3??/ti'
I am the owner of tbe herein descnDed property. I have autboriud y
Y to act on my behlllf in this matter.
Owner.: 1eb U. -\- ~ lor\' 'J) Y'U~.Jo roo.e+
1\ ~,~ AJ. f{.~8~. u.-P.,.*, 11' PH: ~~/-1./7("3?1'"
Address 5-pfl-?'I:!J
$. Jofr 331 ....
I am appealing the decision regarding Dr the interpe.rf:ation of Sect. of
. the City ZoDing rqulatioDS Cllapter 106 of tile Code of Ordinances. I am making this
appeal ill regards totheptopcr1yl~atcd at: n t.o+.$ af/r"'~3 L-PrJr-l~ f)u,-f /rJ:s
11~5 A/./I'.5rJ-. tt..Iirrr! 9' 1
Street Adckess Legal Description
. iCe Plan
) Major Deftlopaent Site Pia
( ) Minor Dcwelopment S.te Plan
( ) General Plan
A Site PIu of the property is Btt8daed. Also, I have ~ the iDformation requested below
on the foJIowiag pages orthis form.
a) .AU fJads co~ the matter tbat has led up to this request.
b) The type of relief I am seeldng (setbarkst lot coverage, de. >- .'
c) The graunck upGn whic:h I am lDaldngthis request.
* Happlicutis NOT the OW11m', he!!!!H provide Aut:horizatiD"~to acto the Owner's
behalf. .
/- 1~-1>(, 74~ C. .
Date Applieutt'l Signature
OFFICE USE ONLY ./
Site Plan lad Authorizatioll (if applicable) a.ttached? Yes (~ No ( )
Date trlUlSm.itted to the Board of Adjustments:
Meeting n.:
Appliamt Notified of Date:
Board's Decision:
Apprwed ( )
Demed ( )
Notice of Board Decision uWJed to AppIic:antJOwuer:
.=:XHIBrr tl
AU:acbment
FACTS RELEVANT TO TIllS MATTER:
Robert and Lori Dmckenbrodt are currently, and have been the owners of the property located at 11315 N. H. St.
(La Porte Outlots), located in La Porte, Texas since September, 1996. The property is 5 acres, fenced. The property
contains a residence, livestock tumout paddocks and two barns: (1) on the cast side of the property and (1) on the
west side of the property.
Additionally, owners Robert and Lori Dmckenbrodt maintain an unlimited term Lease on the adjacent pipeline
corridor located on the west side of the property from N. H. Street to N. L. Street (14 acres) for livestock grazing
from ExxonMobil Pipeline. Owners have maintained this lease since 1997. A copy of this Lease is attached.
TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT:
Owners along with their 13 year old daughter raise and show Golden Retrievers. We are seeking permission for a
variance which would allow us to modifY the bam on the west side of the property to accommodate owners an
additional number of privately owned Golden RetrieVers to be housed for training and show. In this request, we are
asking that we be awarded a variance extending the property line on the west side of the property to include the
pipeline corridor property which is approximately an additional 500 feet wide added to the west of our property line.
In this modification, we would be erecting outdoor kennel runs onto our existing barn to provide shetter, in addition
to an exercise area for the dogs.
GROUNDS FOR THE REOUEST:
The fact that owners maintain and have right of control over the total amount of 19 acres in La Porte, of which the
residence property is approximately 225 feet wide x 900 feet in depth and the pipeline corridor is approximately 450
feet wide x 1800 feet in depth, owners are requesting that their property line be extended to include .the additional
width of the pipeline corridor (approximately 450 feet) which would then allow them to qualify for a Kennel
License according to Zoning Code 8-106.743. Due to the fact that owners maintain a total of 19 acres. Harris
County Appraisal District previously awarded owners an Ag Exemption applied to 4 of the 5 residence acres. for
agriculture grazing. Additionally, this has been acknowledged by the City of La Porte by way of the reduction in
property taxes assessed on 4 of the 5 acres. Therefore, both Harris County and The City of La Porte acknowledge
the total of 19 acres in the custody and control of owners.
Granting of this variance will cause no problems or nuisance issues for any property located to the west of owners
property as the contested property distance on the west side of our proposed kermellocation is approximately 550
feet to the nearest private property line.
We appreciate yom taldng your time and your consideration in this request and we look forward to hearing back
from you in the very near future.
Robert and Lori Druckcnbrodt
11315 N. H. Sl
La Porte, Texas 77571
281-471-3776
I'
PERMIT APPLICATION A/J / r->
.. {/~ /y~
gDOZ Ii~VY of La Porte ~q,
o:J/I/~J _ . r Established 1892
3~
281-470-5073
Address:
"'Electrical
*(See back ofform)
Projed ADdress: ~ / (' ;V( h/ ~ :z 2/j 2i ~ ;;;63
Subdivision: ~ 0 t/T kp Block: .
Owner'.Name: ~ /---r -b ..J"'/4 2Lid~e: ~. 70/. 577 c:
//3/.5 M:);/ /-~ ?7~7(
C"lty Zip
*Ph.rmbing
ContractOr:
.>' ~,.-?1 tE"
Street
~~r
Phone:
~/?J;;
s~
Engineer: /2 ~
'BuiIdingUse: ~C?~/:? C,
Address:
city
Zip
Sq. Footage: fI: Storiesp
~ ~ !3<J,e..tJ 6....J
Descnbe Work:
.Dei) ~QrJ
For City Use Only .6~NO "&o/Ul.l 4( Dol '
Flood Zone X . 'Class Wo~ urJ Sq. Ft.
Use Zone L L fI: Stories / ParIqng Req. .d--
Valuation:
Occupancy Type a
Construction Type_I/'
Taxes
HeAD
Residential 'driveway tie-in fee:
_6-
~
/.
Plan Check Fee: ----> <3 -
S:\CPShare\Inspedions\BldgPC%JIIitAppI02505.doc
Permit No.
Permit Fee
604 W. Fairmont Pkwy. · La Porte, Texas 77571 · (281) 471-5020
=xHIBIl ~
"
/.
.{
ZONING
~ 106-744
. (h) It shall be unlawful for any person to leave, stand, orpark a commercial motor vehic1p..
pole trailer, semitrailer, shipping container, trailer, truck (other than a light truck as defined
herein), or a truck tractor on any property zoned for residential use. Boats or recreational
vehicles parked. or stored in a rear yard. are not subjected to the restrictions imposed by this
section.
/(i)) No accessory uses or equipment except fo~ air conditioning structures or condensers may
~cated in a required side yard except for side yards abutting streets where equipment is
fully screened from view.
9-~ 1~-'742 nO'ft....~ti~ livestoc~
(a) Domestic livestock (cattle, horses, hogs, sheep, goats, chickens, and geese) are a
permitted accessory use on lots in excess of 43,560 square feet, provided that all domestic
livestock as defined above be restrained no closer than 25 feet from property that is not devoted.
to the keeping of domestic livestock, and provided further that said domestic livestock be kept
in a concentration that is less than or equal to: ~
-
(1) Two cows per acre.
(2) Two horses per acre.
(3) Two hogs per acre.
(4) Two sheep or goats per acre.
(b) In any event, the total for the above referenced grazing animals (i.e. sheep, goats, hogs,
cows, or horses) shall be cumulative. In the event of fowl, no specific concentration is
established herein, but in no event, shall the cumulative concentration offowl besuclias.to
create a health hazard. The requirements of section 34-126 et seq. shall apply in any event.
CITY COpy
(c) The keeping oflivestock or fowl for the purpose of breeding for sale, whether engaged in
as a primary or accessory activity, shaiI be considered a conditional use as specified by section
106-331, Table A.
v/ Sec. 106-743. Breeding kennels (dogs and cats only).
Breeding kennelfS' for dogs and cats only, are a permitted accessory use on lots in excess of
43,560 square feet, provided that all of such kennels are licensed according to section 14-~1 et
seq., and any amendments or additions thereto. Provided further that"all ~als must. be
boarded in enclosures located no closer than 100 feet from any property line. The requirements
of section 34-126 et seq., and any amendments or additions thereto shall apply in any event.
\
Sec. 106-744. Bed and breakfast.
(a) A bed and breakfast shall be operated by resident homeowners.
(b) A bed and breakfast shall conform to the requirements of section 106-334.
(c) Parking shall be provided in accordance with the requireme~ts of section 106-839.
CDI06:83
:;':"0.
.-
#SE06-001
SPECIAL EXCEPTION
FOR
11318 NORTH 'P' STREET
LOT SIZE AND LOT WIDTH IN THE
LARGE LOT DISTRICT
EXHIBITS:
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION
STAFF REPORT
EXHIBIT A - AREA MAP
EXHIBIT B - SURVEY MAP
EXHIBIT C - SECTION 106-416, LL LARGE LOT DISTRICT,
SPECIAL REGULATIONS
CITY OF LA PORTE
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST
Application No.:
OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $150.00 Date Received: ;2 1r~e
Receipt No.: C:;'d.'" I
Note: This Fee is Non-Refundable Regardless ofthe Board's Decision
./
IftCEl/ltD
072.
PIA IIr'. VOg
. '1'/ VlllIe
D[Pl:
Applicant:
fj D.J\ 'U e.. Pu [(aLA
Name
I\~\~ N.P,~ LaPDrt -w-r107{ PH: zgl~411-4~'g()
Address
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
to act on my behalf in this matter.
Owner*:
Name
PH:
Address
I am requesting a Special Exception to Sect. lq \ ofthe City Zoning regulations Chapter 106
of the Code of Ordinance. , 1"2 ^ \ /) (Ll
I am requesting this Special Exception for property located at V I ~ IV. r. ~\ .
JJLS 3U r1 31J ~ ~ 3U ~ lCLPD~itw~s
Legal Description
( ) Site Plan
( ) Major Development Site Plan
( ) Minor 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 ofreliefI 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 behalf.
.z1. ku/J?
ate
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:
Frankie Periou
11318 North P Street
La Porte, TX 77571
To Whom It May Concern:
I respectively request consideration for two exceptions from the Board.
1. Less than I acre
2. Less than 90 feet
My residence is 11318 North P Street in Lomax. My husband, Bobby, passed away April
9,2004. As a result, it has become increasingly difficult to maintain the yard and
pasture. Frequent mowing of both areas presents an undo hardship, both financially and
physically. As I get older, I know the task will become even harder. I am looking at the
future as well as the present.
I would like my daughter and son-in-law to build their home on the property. As you can
see from the attached documents, they have a separate drive coming in from P Street. I
would like to keep my fenced yard. It is a chore to maintain, but the grandkids enjoy the
yard.
If my family lived behind me, I would be able to grow old in the last home Bobby and I
shared. I do not want to be forced from my home or to live with one of my children.
They would be close, but not too close. I do not want to give up my home. I firmly
believe my place is in my own home.
The spirit of the ordinance would not be broken. The exception will not adversely affect
the value or use of adjacent properties. The rural character of the District will remain.
When I die, it will revert back to the original 1.86 acres. The property would be intact
with the family. Our original intention was to keep it in the family after we were gone.
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration with this matter.
Sincerely,
~~~C 4t
Frankie Perioli
Staff Report
February 23, 2006
Special Exception Request #SE06-001
Requested by: Frankie Periou, Property Owner
Requested for: Lot Size and Lot Width requirements in the Large Lot District
Location: 11318 North P Street
Lee:al Description: TRS 311A, 311B, & 311 C, La Porte Outlots
Zonine:: Large Lot District (LL)
Back2:round: In October 2005, the City of La Porte formally accepted recommendations
on regulations and boundaries governing the creation of a Large Lot Zoning
District. All of the properties previously zoned Low-Density Residential (R-
1) and Medium Density Residential (R-2) in the former Lomax area are now
classified as the Large Lot district. The Large Lot proposal has been
submitted as a method to keep the area rural in nature and as a protection of
the privilege to own and keep large animals. In addition, there was a fear that
animal grazing or breeding activities would be lost if normal residential were
allowed.
The City of La Porte Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 establishes
Objective 9.2a to create a Large Lot Residential Land Use Designation
(District). On August 3, 2004, a town hall meeting was hosted by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Staff at the Lomax City Hall.
All citizens were invited to attend. The Commission heard input by
residents interested in creating a large lot, large acreage, and
suburban/rural type of development district. Hearing overwhelming
support, the Planning and Zoning Commission directed that a Committee
be formed to study issues with creating the District and start a review of
zoning regulations of the area.
The Large Lot Committee met monthly from September 2004 to March
2005. Meetings were open to the public and residents attended throughout
the process. Flyers and other informative letters were sent to property
owners within the proposed District. Input throughout the process was
considered. On March 5, 2005, the Committee reached a 70% consensus
to formally recommend regulations, boundaries and a zoning change to
create the Large Lot District zoning classification. The Planning and
Zoning Commission heard the matter in a workshop on April 21, 2005,
and taking the Committee's recommendation, directed Staff to conduct
another public meeting to present the recommendations to the public. This
hearing was completed on June 9, 2005.
Board of Adjustment
February 23, 2006
#SE 06-001
Page 2
Analvsis:
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a few workshops for the
proposed Large Lot Zoning District, and discussed citizen's input gathered
during the Town Hall Meeting at the Lomax Elementary School. The
Planning and Zoning Commission, during its September 15, 2005 meeting,
held a public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding creation of a
Large Lot District and consider additional regulations for the district and
forwarded the Large Lot Committee's recommendations to City Council
for approval. A summary of the final proposed changes from the
Committee is attached at Exhibit C.
The applicant would like to build another house on the subject property.
Per Section 106-238 of the Ordinances, one principal building is allowed
per lot. In this case, the property needs to be subdivided into two lots. To
The Ordinance requires a minimum lot size of one acre and lot width of 90'
in order to develop in the Large Lot district. Issues involving minimum lot
size and minimum lot width are as follows:
Section 106-416(a) - Minimum lot size is 1 acre (43560 sq. ft.). The total
subject property is 1.86 acres. With the proposed subdivision, one lot will be
approx. 1.35 acres and other lot, with an existing house, will be 0.5 acres;
creating a nonconforming lot.
Section 106-416(b) - Minimum lot width is 90'. With the current proposal,
the existing house has a lot width of approx.140'along North 'P' Street. The
proposed lot will have a width of approx. 48' along North 'P' Street, creating
another non-conformity.
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:
a. that one or more lots located in the same block as the subject
property are not uniform in terms of shape and/or size so that any
further subdivision of the subject property cannot be in accordance
with the regulations governing the District;
b. it can be demonstrated that the subdivision will not circumvent the
spirit of the District regulations, or particularly, the rural character of
the District; and,
c. granting the special exception will not be injurious to the value or
enjoyment of adjacent properties within the District.
The applicant's request is based on Section 106-191 b (4) of the Code of
Ordinances, which states the following:
Board of Adjustment
February 23, 2006
#SE 06-001
Page 3
Conclusion:
Appeals:
. To deviate from the minimum lot size or width requirements in the large
lot district.
Given that there are several economic and infrastructure issues associated with
the proposed changes as approved for rural Large Lot district. The applicant cited
some personal reasons for this particular request. Provisions of Section 106-191
provide the flexibility/ relief for these development challenges. The
parameters for the requested special exception may meet the provisions
established by Section 106-191 of the Code of Ordinances.
After review of Section 106-191 b (4), this Special Exception would not be
contrary to the public's interest and will not adversely affect the value or use
of adjacent properties. A subdivision of this nature would not resemble a
conventional subdivision plat due to the fact that it forms only two lots, one
additional residence, and stays within the spirit of the Large Lot District.
The application merits review by the Board based upon the parameters set by
the Ordinance. The Board may consider:
~ Approving Special Exception and allowing the subdivision of
property as follows: a) lot with existing house to be 0.5 acre with
140' width, and b) lot for future home to be 1.35 acres with only 48'
width.
~ Denying Special Exception and allow the provision of Section 106-
416(a)(b) to remain in place.
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 CA., Local Government Code Section
211.011, duly verified, settingforth 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 Aqjustment.
..N. -
+E'
~Htlfl A
U"".VI.V""'....IIt.
(1/3 18) No fZ. T H
..(- FIR slaw ~
. :.
~.~
~ ~~~:../t" ;~" (g", ~.D.W.)
~~: ':.'::~'.'t
{ ~-k-), . . r'"
WEST . .....8.8f~:s!~.?,\,#." 1"
lflI
PAt:T01=
VDL'. ", ,
Pta '36.5"'
p .f).c..
.
III (l
,J \S
q II
~ !
'" rz. .,.
tgt=
Vt:J(.." '"
Pi.. -.'- 4-
. E A S ,""'4','Sft'6?J'
PAlL, DF VO(...4>ltPl..364-
lIDl'!:: l1nloc:at:ed FiPeune right-of-..y -S8IIInt in fAVOr of 1. Pipe Line
~, Z1lCl:Irdld in Vol... 7937, Page 209 ancJ Vo1,- 8081, hge 458,
D.It.R.C. (Does not visibly affect: thb property.)
TEXAS LAND .
COORDINATORS, IN
P.o. .. 1117. PuiIIncI. nc 77_
(2I11117.ISIS
11." 99122428
OIl.: 11 - 22- U
"""1 28200
., JOBI '1 -Z;J7-gg ~
1'318 North Avenue P
IUYU
61,
,.......,..., - """ -. -.....,............,-.. cI
Ille ,...., ....., ...... ..-.,., _1Ile...... ......... _ II
................... -...r J . ~l~Ac""""""""_"",,,,,,,
..-01)'---..__......_...__...
· --....,.. 'J9_ __.. -....... L.-........
Ilalor: n.............., -..- _... "*...-..,.
.. "'" _'lion.... ...111. ............,_ -.....H.ll.D.t
~.I.A. 485487 0930 J 11-6-'6 zone~
~" t.~
:'\ \ .
\ I . c.. ~ t. .
fXHIlIT H
Subdivision VI LL Large Lot District
Sec. 106-416. Special Regulations
LARGE LOT DISTRICT REGULATIONS
(a) Minimum Lot Size:
(b) Minimum Lot Width:
(c) Minimum Yard Setbacks (F.R.S.):
(d) Maximum Height of Primary Structure:
(e) Minimum Site ArealUnit:
(f) Maximum Lot Coverage:
(g) Accessory Buildings:
(h) Maximum Height of Accessory Buildings:
(i) Accessory Building Setbacks:
G) Number of Accessory Buildings:
(k) Placement of Accessory Buildings:
(1) Number of Animals:
(m) Detached Garage:
(n) Carports width:
(0) Equipment Storage:
(P) Exterior Storage:
(q) Shipping Containers:
(r) Street openings:
(s) Driveways(12'):
(t) Driveways(20'):
(u) Driveways(General):
(v) Public Utilities(water):
(w) Public Utilities (sewer):
(x) Fire Hydrant(coverage):
(y) Fire Hydrant(placement):
(z) Animal Breeding:
(FFA & 4H)
1 Acre
90 L.F.
25-15-5
45 feet
1 DU/ A
40%
5000 S.F.
35 feet
10' property line
20' other structures
Up to 40% coverage
Rear & Side Yards
Sec. 106-742
6'(rear) ofPri. Bldg.
Max.25' Front/Side Yard
Sec.106-741(h)
Sec. 106-773
Not Allowed
Asphalt/open ditch
First 40' dust free
First 20'x20' dust free
Service 1 Residence Only
Tap public ROW only
Tap public ROW only
<500' from residence
Public waterline only
Conditional (Requires
SCUP from the City)
~XHtIlT C
#V06-001
VARIANCE
FOR
BUILDING INDUSTRIAL (BI) YARD SETBACKS
1800 BLOCK OF SENS ROAD AT NORTH 'L' STREET
EXHIBITS:
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
STAFF REPORT
EXHIBIT A - AREA MAP
EXHIBIT B - SITE PLAN
EXHIBIT C - HARRIS COUNTY RIGHT-OF - WAY
ALIGNMENT MAPS
EXHIBIT D - SECTION 106-522, TABLE B,
INDUSTRIAL AREA REQUIREMENTS OF
THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES
CITY OF LA PORTE
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
VARIANCE REQUEST
Application NO.~: (c -00 (
OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $150.00 Date Received: \. '2: . 2ODl,
Receipt No.: S-O.., ~
Note: This Fee is Non-Refundable Regardless of the Board's Decision
Applicant: pj)u.,~ ,"AS1~<tN ~ (~U'-f t-JOc-.",a
Name
Sf, O"t. Sf~Cb(l.. iJ~'1
Address
-z.g, CJ~o-g75o
Phone
I am the owner of the herein described property. I have authorized
to act on my behalf in this matter.
Owner"':
\).X>cS1 ~-r~oN
Name
f~~~
&<<1l. ~cJ:l.. Au,", ~ &ll{b 1 ~17511
Address
'Z~19~o\a~
Phone
I am requesting a variance to Sect. of the City Zoning regulations Chapter 106 of the
Code of Ordinance. n
I am requesting this variance for property located at ~bJ~ -K'A'ri:) .
L ~treet Address 1. ,
\. ~ 104 A4U:- T ~ rlDN\ tNOCA-t. 'Oa.6&.S4:)IJ ~~\K;I( APhT~ 'N e G
./ Legal Description
rl" Site Plan
( ) Major Development Site Plan
( ) Minor 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 ofreliefI 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 ho. on to ct on th
l-Z'l...D5
Date
Office Use Onl~
Site Plan and Authorization (if applicable) attached? Y es ~ No ()
Date transmitted to the Board of Adjustments:
Meeting Date: '2 ~ Applicant Notified of Date:
Notice to surrounding property owners- Date:
Board's Decision:
Approved ()
Denied ()
Notice of Boards Decision mailed to Applicant/Owner:
2
A variance is a" deviation from the literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance." The City's
Board of Adjustments may NOT grant a variance that does not meet all ofthe following
conditions:
1) The variance must not be contrary to the public interest.
2) Literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance must result in a hardship. This hardship
must be unique to the property in question. Property that is undevelopable due to its
unusual shape, narrowness, shallowness, or topography constitutes the primary example
of hardship. Hardships that are financial in nature or due to the owner's actions cannot
be granted.
3) Granting the variance must not violate the spirit ofthe Zoning Ordinance.
4) No variance that allows a use that is prohibited within the Use zone in question may be
granted. For example, a variance allowing a commercial use in a residential zone is not
allowable.
Please remember it is the Applicant's responsibility to prove that a variance will meet the
above conditions.
Ifthere is not adequate room on the remainder ofthis 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 RELEV ANI TO THIS MATTER:
PRtJ/?tE;t:ry 15 A /.3w4 At.J!-f '\\Lf WAPEtJ c.-cf4}EYL
~tG:t >i-rJ~ VltJ~ ~(It 8 .P(20PEJ2--N IS Cort(lt;JTUf
l~9 I> tit? ; Ot~ f-J-o W t Vt::: /L / W i11-I IJI-E /I11rZ12-J ~ CD UrJ1'-(
5'tA/S ~M lJ(rlYf Or;- ("J,6'f ~tJAJDE(Y7NA'11()N OF Ar?:JN.-fJ(
.?f20P~1 (lLvf 1--0'/ W/~ &€ o~){>1 122F, DttfJ
AtJO ) f 1Z,t;4' A~t.(.. .-ru-e112 ?tJrL~tA.YI PLJ>)J~ ~ 1U
1/t-f::.f A '36 f1 5rtGT(DI\) r~ 1tft FllU- LbJ&r1I oF'
W~S, 7{()f ( 5 tNS pfeo(\TT~G-E)
SEE I)VJ&- /~1*-1J-rr1'- /03 tw. 13
J ~1,fr /~ (VI --102- ((.E~ e
SHEf /I 7f ? 0 f)r 0 r g tJ F J1I( ;-I--A(L{L) <; C.tJ () Nr{ ,OJ BU C.
INrf2i1STtWcruq Ot,oAf21f1J&v/j
!rf N)[)!17~tI 0 rrUt (?,..I 0;011/"/-1 ~~t~j;<~A!()VJ[[f:-NcflOAcJkj
/1 r-r /!1frp f;?of~!J ffr/JftlI!5 piC f)lt()T!..l Or flit t-I/(
to e I f1I II tP77--KIL 0 ( MU7 0 tV
.
3
TYPE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT:
I ArA rzfo ufST\Nv ~ ((GON~- rU~t2-... <;)Y)(S
S\fl ()~~~L\ fl9-ll- N\t-rOO~T'i "/0 GE ~JrfrJ
10 AO'-1,-{J1-7AJI tJb A'\A>>w 0rYL f1..ru-~~otJAi%~
A/V) . A VLlAt- rr2c TJ5l.I> LV-j C; 0 U t.f v? eN &\ J f ~11 A ~ V
~I L~ ~tN S'{b2f" 170 . (.;f ~ If' L( 0 N bLl tf (2.rloPacr1 ~
THE GROUNDS FOR THE REQUESTS:
W rf1f -n-f-t /-0 f5 t> F- 3?J.~ t)~ V(~ LYf 620p&try
~p~ A,,.(l--=t1t~ ~)fV1e.Cty\~rifr CJ:F- -utt GtJ(l.rzkA.1.J SET
'B~L1t.f 1 (~jJ)Jl!JI ~0,JA.f3tA/ ~tAL/) otJ T#/j
it4fEtTi ~y -rA~N (I A /2-2 PI Jj~f' u:rr
JlrJ () ~IIG~c;ritJu- <>0(!-;,AL1L} DF 10 IT Of AL
["60 f1 F~N(. 4DF~ML) I fit11 iff! w-!I1-f-
of'/Vf 3 0 Pr OE U '> Af2IF) .p t2<J Per2;Cf. 13=/-1 j
~[51 W/l,{., A)(Jf ;lO(t52..5~ /J.PF~ 6Jr112tAJ)
?-1).'T<,f?..o WJO!)} fr f t20 (131.XLE ~ /:J.> T/fff t. ~61fJc.5>
ArtE f1'lu0t Le~ ~ .~N LH-' ~ "
S:\CPShare\INSPECTION DIVISION\Slandard Forms\ZONING BOARD V ARIANCE.doc REVISION 10/21/03 RYC
Staff Report February 23, 2006
Variance Request #V06-001
Reauested by: Dudley Masterson & Larry Hogan, Property owners.
Reauested for: Waiver from the Business Industrial (BI) building setbacks.
Le2alDescriDtion: TRS SA, SA-I, SF, and TR 10,1.3204 acre tract out of the Enoch Brinson
Survey, Abstract No.5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas.
Location: 1827 Sens Road at North 'L' Street
Zonin2: Business Industrial (BI)
Back2round: The subject property is a "L" shaped comer lot frontage along Sens Road at
North 'L' Street. The property presently retains Business Industrial (BI)
zoning designation, as currently depicted on the City of La Porte zoning
map and as described in the City Ordinance, Chapter 106. The abutting
zoning designations are Business Industrial (BI). As per Section 106-522,
Table B, Industrial Area Requirements, the building setbacks in BI zoning
districts are: front- 50', rear- 40', and sides- 30'.
Currently, Harris County is undertaking the widening and acquisition
phase ofSens Road 300' north of"H" Street to State Highway 225. As per
Harris County Public Infrastructure Department, the Engineering
Division's right-of-way (ROW) alignment maps show a 38 foot section
requirement for the full length of the west side along Sens Road. The
applicant's property is approximately 160'deep as per HCAD information
and survey (copy attached). Once the right-of-way condemnation of the
adjacent property is fulfilled, the subject tract will be 1.1264 acres and
only 122' deep. In addition, a ditch along southern property line
encroaches approximately 19' into the applicant's property, rendering the
width oflot to be 81' to the east along North 'L' Street.
With a loss of 38' of depth and compliance with the current setbacks of 50' -
40' -30', the applicant is unable to build a reasonable and architecturally
sound building on this property. Taking into consideration the depth of the
lot (122') and subtracting setbacks totaling 90'(Front 50'and Rear 40'), only
32' of developable area is left. The applicant is requesting a waiver on the
prescribed setbacks to enable him to develop the property setbacks as: front-
40', rear- 20', and sides- 20'.
Board of Adjustment
February 23,2006
#V06-00 1
Page 2 of3
Analvsis:
Based on the City's Zoning Ordinance, minimum yard setbacks for BI
property are: front - 50', rear - 40', and sides - 30'. The intended
development of an engineering office/shop would not meet all required
setbacks. The owner is asking for a variance on these setbacks citing shape,
topography, and physical situation unique to the property. This variance is
being requested under the terms of Section 1 06-192(b )(2) of the City's Code
of Ordinances.
The Code of Ordinances defmes a variance as: 'a deviation from the literal
provisions of this chapter which is granted by the board when strict
conformity to this chapter would cause an unnecessary hardship because of
the circumstances unique to the property on which the variance is granted.
Except as otherwise prohibited, the board is empowered to authorize a
variance from a requirement of this chapter when the board finds that all of
the following conditions have been met.
a) That the granting of the variance will not be contrary to the public
interest;
b) That literal enforcement of this 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
c) That by granting the variance, the spirit of this chapter will be observed.'
The Board must decide if the applicant's request for reducing the building
setbacks to front- 40', rear- 20', and sides- 20' is justified based on the
exceptional narrowness (122' property depth) or shallowness of the
subject tract fronting Sens Road and whether granting this variance will be
contrary to public interest.
Board of Adjustment
February 23, 2006
#V06-00 1
Page 3 of3
Conclusion:
Appeals:
The highest and best use of this property is recognized as Business Industrial
due to nearby light industrial uses. The 122' lot depth is exceptionally
narrow when placed in the context of Business Industrial zoning districts. It
would seem reasonable and within the spirit of the zoning regulations to
reduce building setbacks which are adjacent to the area proposed for
widening ofSens Road and a ditch along North "L" Street.
Based on the facts and considerations noted in this report, the Board is being
asked to consider the applicant's variance request #V06-001 thus allowing
building setback as Front 40', Rear 20', and Sides 20'.
While recognizing the circumstances associated with the property, the
Board could consider:
. Allowing the construction of proposed development with reduced
setbacks of: front- 40', rear- 20', and sides- 20' (variance granted).
. Allowing the building setbacks in business industrial zone to remain:
front- 50', rear- 40', and sides- 30' (variance denied).
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.
.,.
..
..-
.:. -.
a II
&
~
-.:a
-
-1
J 1827 SENS RD.
" ~... -- ..
);_,:-"i _
, f. . . ,'"'
. . ~ .. .*.. <
c.....k
~HIBn A.
~~
I 7
F~;g @
J:~r. =::t
~ . H~;I~ ~~~
l~~~~
!~ pi!"
I I ~~!i
.. ...
ill
..
~
~
i
~I
I .
1:1
i
I
I"
V>
~ ::J:
" ..
<; '"
Z 0
<; 3
-< g
o
~
~
C!.o~~
.. !2
"
,
I I I
ilis~
~Ii~!
'I.
t,_z_
~~
I '
QQl
..~
~~~
88
iii II!i1till
"h 11'1 2,j
~I; i~lqji
hi .5 ~ II;
i!i i;1111;
iii In11!1
I" I~~ III
il; !II i'I'1
Ila i!~
Ii p, E
I
I
I!
~
.
~~
;
;<1
Gi
:r:
Oz 6
"'0 -n
~~"'~
mo~~
~,,(f)>
G) ';<1 C
::J:::IiOG)
::;;",>z
~ >-l0;;::
" -<;<1 m
~ ~ m :::j
. 01 ~ ;;::
~ >
-0
en
m~
ill
m
II!
n~
SlIll"1W5rW 15U2'
Z
-n
m~::J:
z~?O
G)::O;<1
~?5(j;
m-lO
::O$g
2mz
~~::;!
--u-g
~?iiffi
O-lC
z;;::o
m
z
-l
Iii UiiU
1111 i=
illlh II
I !lll;
J I",
II l~
I n I!
I Ii !
II! I
I II I
.1
I
JJu~
J'!G ---;lj
'Ihr ~
I .r
!
I
IJ!l.
u~h
"'J~
il!JI
~ ~ r
" ;;, 1l
i '- ~ '?:.
'td'ct-~
1-?o<;'.-o '2
0-
! ~~Q 't
~~ ~~
I '0
l'
II
\ IJH.
19. ~ UIJ~
~ ~ .~l.
?' r i .'r
~ ~ ~I j
';.- 't- I
-1"" <{!;, I
""<.1' '12..
<;2.
96
S-
19.0l
~,'%
1kiJ!
01:}
"k.<{;:,
oU'~
f <;2.
tin
nth
iff .
I. J
I
NBe051'5f'E200::,!_C._
if ~
"
n
~PI
fi ~
~
1 u ~~
~~~
u~
""~
~~~
~i~
~ ~
ill i!lum i
ll~ J ~~iU "
~ i "Ill H
i:! !mil ~~i
ull!!! III
I!l tll, d~
I.' h1a ~Jl
Jil H. iil
I~' III Iii
iil ill :I!
lil ili ti!
~., I'
~~2
~.~
~
~
~"~ t
~~
~~ ~ 3! m
N
-< 8 ~ 'fi
~~ ~ 52~~
:;;;:0 " GJ-<~
rri~~~ ~~05
~~tE~ ~~8
~:C;:o~ z;:o~
~~~~ ~~::;I
~ -<:;dO:;:: <m-u
~ ~m 52 cn~:ii
I 01~ -< i5~C
~ Z iii ()
." Z
en -<
\
m~
III
m
l~!
II!
!i ~!; Ij I.
JUlfi11
I,. ill II
I III",
I 'lIP
I xi;
I II Ii
I IE .
I Ii r
II I .~
J Ii i ll'
:~r:
.. ~f
BW
P1;l,...t>:>o
I I 1 ~ 1
ll:~~~;;
o.~::"'-~
~~ '-'&
.
rIW I
-(aU!- ~
"'"J~ I
I< in~! I
I
FlEl.OCRrn DRIVE
VOL 15(oo:C~~~.)H.C,M.R,
<:1
'tJ
~'5-
lI'1R
1k1n
C)~
't~
U'~
~
l--C
I
I
J
'II!!
-I:JI=-
;~I'.
f,n
r
i
~
l
rII'I
ta Ji
'r U
Ij rl
f
"
~
~
~
~ i' G
~ ~ ~~ 1-
Fi ~f n ~
PS ~~~
-~~I ~;-JBi-
~ I ~
13 I ~
I i
I
lJ
~I
~5
~\
b~
I t't
U'~
L ~
I
rIH~
-Jafl:-
ih-
ili ~~
r
~
~
j
.
a.=
g~ '""',;-;;-=_.-::..-:::::------_._-
slfi __ \'tlL 15~ pc. 33 ~IVE
i - ~-~:~~~.;~r===-----~~--~:-..-==--------m.==
I ----
I
I
I
I
ZONING
~ 106-522
and city council may require that efforts to reduce the potential noise impact be
undertaken. These efforts may include screening, landscaping and site planning
techniques. '
COrd. No. 1501U, ~ ACart. B), 9-23-96; Ord. No. 1501-AA., ~ 6, 3-23-98; Ord. No. 1501-BB, ~ 5,
9-15-98; Ord.. No: 1501-II, ~ 5, 3-27-00)
Cross reference-Sexually oriented businesses, ~ 90-31 et seq.
Sec. 106-522. Table B, industrial area requirements.
. Ca) Table B, industrial area requirements.
Minimum
Yard
4Min,im1/.rrr Maximum Setbacks
Lanc4paping Lot F.R.S.
Requirements Coverage 1.3,5
Uses (percent) (percent) (feet)
B;I ;b~iness~industri~ park; 6 50 5.0-1~-3g
all'permitted or. conditional
Ll' light induStrial district; 6 70 20-10-10
all permitted or conditional
ill heavy industrial district; 6 30 50-50-30
all permitted or conditional
Loading docks N/A N/A 130-130-130
Outside storage
N/A
N/A
20-10-5
Shipping containers
On- and off-premises free-
standing signs
6
N/A
50-50-30
See article VII of this chapter
!
Adjacent to
Residential
Minimum
Yard
Setback
F.R.S.
2.5
Maximum
Height
(feet)
(feet)
50-40-30
45
30-50-50
45
100-150-150
456
Same as
principal
use plus
130 ft.
N/A
Same as
principal
use
Section 106-
444(b)
100-150-150
367.8
See article VII of this chapter
Freestanding on-premises
signs located in controlled ac-
cess highway corridors
(b) Footnotes.
1. A minimum. landscape setback of 20 feet will be required adjacent to all designated
conservation areas. Buildings, parking areas, loading docks, outside storage, and
refuse containers will not be allowed in such setback areas. These areas are to be
landscaped with trees, shrubs, and ground cover, with a planting plan required to be
submitted and approved by the enforcement officer. Required landscaping must be
maintained by the property owner and/or occupant.
2. No buildings, parking areas, loading docks, outside storage,' or refuse containers will
be allowed in such setback areas. These areas are to be landscaped with trees, shrubs
and ground cover, with a planting plan required to be submitted and approved by the
enforcement officer.
Supp. No.4
CD106:69
aHfBIT D