Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9-2-93 BA MinutesBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT September 2, 1993 City Council Chambers A meeting of the Board of Adjustment was held on September 2, 1993 with the following members present: Chairman Jayne Eisen Vice Chairman Milton Bell Board Member Ron Lanier Board Member Charles Thompson Board Member Gerald Farha Board Member Kevin Fuller Board Members Absent: Board Member Howard Close (excused), Board Member Dee Richard Chavis (excused) and Board Member William Lucas Also Present: Stephen C. Richardson, Planning Director; Nicholas Karavolos, Planner; Tyrone Cooper, First Assistant City Attorney; Rick Bailey, Planning Technician; Jill Manning, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion to approve the minutes from the August 5, 1993 Public Hearing was made by Board Member Bell and seconded by Board Member Thompson. Motion carried 6:0. SWEARING IN OF WITNESSES PUBLIC HEARING 1) File #359-BA: Consider an application for a variance to allow an owner identification sign with a height of 65 feet. Regulations of Section 30-28 C. 3. restrict owner identification signs to a maximum height of 50 feet. A variance may be permitted under Section 30-37 E. 3., City Codes. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Scplcmbcr2, 1993 Public Hearing Mr. Richardson explained that the applicant, LaQuinta Motor Inns, Inc. requested the variance so that a new owner identification sign with a height of 65 feet can be constructed in front of their motel at 220 IH-10 North at Laurel. This sign will be constructed on the same base as the present sign. The City regulations restrict owner identification signs to a maximum height of 50' measured from the crown of the "street immediately abutting the property". The new sign as proposed will be 65 feet. Chairman Eisen opened the public hearing for comments from the applicant. Speaking in Favor Christopher Gilmore, attorney, with Wade and Gilmore Law Firm, addressed the Board as representative for LaQuinta Motor Inns. Larry Kingsberry with LaQuinta Motor Inns in San Antonio addressed the Board. Michael Johnson, General Manager of State Sign, Incorporated also addressed the Board and presented some photographs. Staff recommended approval of the request. The applicant states the recently completed freeway construction has resulted in partial sight obstruction of the 50' sign. A 65' sign would allow better vision of the sign by the traveling public. The applicant also states because of the realignment and change in elevation of the freeway, the height of the existing sign is no longer adequate since the motel relies on the sign to attract interstate travelers. Other owner identification signs in the immediate vicinity on each side of the freeway exceed 50' in height. The. McDonald's sign, immediately south of the subject property is 95' 10-314" measured from the base of the sign. The Chevron sign located on the west side of IH-10 at Laurel is 70' 11" measured from the base. These signs were built prior to the 1981 Zoning Ordinance and are therefore grandfathered. In 1984, the Texaco sign which is also on the west side of the interstate at Laurel is 87' in height. This sign was granted a variance by the Board of Adjustment in September 1984. Eighteen notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. None were returned in favor or in opposition. A slide presentation of the subject property was shown. Chairman Eisen asked if anyone present wished to speak in opposition to the variance. Due to lack of response, she closed the public hearing. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT September2, 1993 Public Hearing A discussion of signs, signage control, etc. followed. Vice -Chairman Bell said he was not in favor of the variance for this sign. A motion to table the application for a variance to allow an owner identification sign with height of 65' as stated in File #359-BA until further information is submitted (including various elevations) was made by Board Member Thompson and seconded by Vice - Chairman Bell. Motion to table the variance carried 5:0. (Board Member Fuller abstained due to a conflict of interest.) 2) File #36�BA: Consider an application for a special exception that would allow the existing 6. V encroachment of a residential structure across and into a 15' wide dedicated exterior side yard building setback (Section 30-25 B.1). A special exception may be granted under Section 30-37 (e) 2.(2). Mr. Richardson explained that the request for a special exception that would allow the existing 6.1' encroachment of a residential structure into the 15' wide exterior side yard building setback was for property at 7920 Bluebonnet. The applicant requested the special exception to the side yard setback because the location of the house was drawn incorrectly on the original site plan. Not until a sale contract was pending and the lot surveyed for this sale was the mistake discovered. The applicant has also applied for and received an encroachment permit from the City of Beaumont and utility companies because it is a joint utility easement and building setback. Chairman Eisen asked if the applicant would like to comment. Diane Zambardino was present and available for questions. In response to a question by Vice -Chairman Bell, Mrs. Zambardino said the construction of the house began in June 1992 and was completed in October 1992. Mr. Richardson told the Board the intrusion into the setback is 6.1' at its widest point and V at its narrowest and basically extends for a length of 31.7 feet. The variations are due to the shape of the house. The property is located at the corner of Bluebonnet and Sunflower. Staff does not feel the encroachment will be a detriment to the overall design and integrity of the neighborhood. Since the property is already constructed, it would prove a substantial hardship to the property owner to correct the encroachment because it would involve tearing at least that portion of the house down. Granting the special exception would not be contrary to the intent or execution of the City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan. k] BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT September 2. 1 "3 Public Hearing Thirty-one notices were sent to property owners within 200' of the subject property. No responses in favor or in opposition were received. Vice -Chairman Bell clarified that there was a 15' utility easement as well as a 15' building line and on the front of the property, there is 25' utility easement as well as a 25' setback line and a 10' easement across the back. He asked if the applicant had a building permit when the house was built and was it plotted like this on the building permit. Mr. Richardson replied that they did have a building permit and didn't know why it wasn't caught during inspections. A slide presentation of the subject property was shown. Chairman Eisen asked if anyone else would like to speak. Due to a lack of response, she closed the public portion of the hearing. The Board Members discussed the request. Board Member Thompson asked Mrs. Zambardino why the dimensions were so odd. She responded that the 114' was the property line to the lot adjacent in the back and that was the dimension that was taken rather than the correct one. A motion to grant the special exception to allow the existing 6. F encroachment of a residential structure across and into a 15' wide dedicated exterior side yard building setback as stated in File #360-BA was made by Vice -Chairman Bell and seconded by Board Member Lanier. Motion to grant the special exception carried 6:0. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED, 4