HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBOA Minutes 1981-09-22 Regular[l
I �_J
J
MINUTES Of A MEETING
FRIENDSWOOD BOARD OP ADJUSTMENTS
September 22, 1981
The Friendswood Board of Adjustments met in a meeting on Tuesday September 22, 1981 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall with the following members present:
E.Dykes -Acting ChairmanH.TaylorR.NelsonH.Whitaker
With a quorum nrPsent and Chairman Bruce ·roster absent, the Board nominated a acting Ch.airman for the meeting.
MOTION: (Nelson) to nominate E. Dykes as Acting Chairman for the meeting. Second: Taylor Vote: UNANIMOUS FOR MOTION CARRIED
The Chairman called the meeting to order
SETBACK VARIANCE -Lot 10 block 5 Glenshannon Subdivision
Mr. Blaine Ballard was not present for the meeting to state his request. However, the Board discussed his case and chose to act on it.
The structure at 1115 Glenshannon Ave. has been started. Th.e slab has a 5 1 2 11 setback at the left side of the lot, which is 4 1 10" inside the side setback line. The Council has reviewed the encroachment into utility easements. After discussion, a motion was made.
MOTION: (Nelson) to grant the.request if 20' can be obtained as a distance between homes where the setback variance incurred if the slab has been poured and if the owners of lot 9 except the provision. Second: Taylor Vote: UNANIMOUS FOR MOTION CARRIED
A motion was made for adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
�--'-� ..
secJitr��
The meeting was then turned over to John Olson, City Attorney,
who introduced Bob Mcconnel, an associate member of his law firm.
Mr. Olson discussed procedures and statutes which provide for a
Board of Adjustment (1O11.A -1O11.J). He distinguished beh1een
the duties of a Board of Adjustment and a Zoning Commission. A
Zoning C_ommission serves to reco111mencl to City Council adoptions or
changes in zoning ordinances. They have no authority other than to
make recommendations to City Council, and are usually not involved
in court cases and law suits.
A Board of Adjust1nent is a quasi-judicial body. It is the final
authority as far as the city is co1,cerned and can be involved in
court actions. The Board of Adjust1nent serves three functions:
1)It allows _the granting of variances from the terms of an
ordinance when it can be shown that there is undue hardship
involved, etc. A variance usually covers situations not
thought of during the writing of the ordinance (exceptions
to the general rule). The variance should be consistent
with the general scheme of the zoning ordinance or master
plan of the city.
2)It grants special exceptions (not as prevalent as variances).
A special exception exists when an ordinance states that if
certain conditions are met, a variance will be granted.
Special exceptions are planned for. Lot size is the 1nost
typical example of special exception provisions.
3)It considers appeals. Statute provides for an official 1:0
implement the terms of zoning ordinances, usually a building
official (who grants permits, etc.). This administrative
official insures thai: all building plans comply with codes,
ordinances, etc. If someone disagrees with his interpreta
tion of the zoning ordinance, he may appeal to the Board
and the Board will be the deciding official. The appeal
should be similar to a couri: hearing. Once the Board has
decided a case, the applicant may appeal to a district
court in the county. (This also applies 1;0 variance and
special exception cases.) The courts generally will not
-2-
I
-I
On a variance, the court will see if there was substantial
evidence in the proceedings to support the action of the Board.
If so, the court should uphold the Board's decision. It can
accept more evidence in order to .make its determination.
A variance cannot change the zoning classification; it is
only for cases of undue hardship upon a property owner. Opinions
of neighbors or other people do not constitute substantial
evidence.
asked for an explanation of public interest.
Public interest is that whicl1 Council determines is in the best
interest from the standpoint of health, safety, and welfare (this
does not mean popular opinion).
To grant a variance, there must be some evidence of hardship.
It cannot be a self-imposed hardship. Economic hardship, standing
alone, does not constitute undue hardship.
asked about liability on the part of the
Board for a decision it makes regarding the granting of a variance.
Mr. Olson explained that the Board probably would not be subjected
to liability as a result of granting a variance; however, if a
variance was refused, and denial was found to be arbitrary �r
capricious, there could be damages leveled against the city·,'. The
Board should always try to determine that a hardship really exists
for a determination of variance; for example, in cases of accidental
encroachment over set-backs, etc., where construction has already
progressed (deceit not included) .. The lllelllbers discussed hypothetical
situations which would or would not be considered undue hardship,
as well as past instances where variance decisions were made.
asked ��at the extent of liability would be for
poor judgement (on the part of the Board). Mr. Olson explained
that lie did not think the Board could expose themselves to liability
by the granting of a variance.
Decisions of the Board should not be precedent-setting; that
is, a decision for one area or one situation may not be the same as
for another situation. Decisions should be consistent, however.
-7-