04/05/2022 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

in this program in various locations and had never been asked for a form board survey until recently while building in Paris, so this is a newer practice for them. With these locations in particular they had already built and had inspections on the foundation and framing before the form board survey was requested. Ms. Ruthart also stated that the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs runs the Home Program and it is their motto and goal to build the home back in the same footprint or as close as possible to the footprint of the old house, so that has attributed to their confusion with the setback requirements. No one else spoke in favor or opposition of the request. Ms. Alsobrook declared the public hearing closed. Motion was made by Larry Walker, seconded by Chris Fitzgerald to approve the 6'4" variance to Section 9-501(1) of the Area Regulations to allow an 18'8" front yard setback versus the required 25' setback based on the following staff recommended findings of fact. Motion carried 5-0. Motion was made by Larry Walker, seconded by Chris Fitzgerald to approve the 1' variance to Section 9-601(1) of the Area Regulations to allow a 4' side yard setback versus the required 5' setback based on the following staff recommended findings of fact. Motion carried 5-0. Staff Recommended Findins of Fact: 1. The request for variance is harmony with the general purposes and intent of Zoning Ordinance No. 1710, as amended, and will not negatively impact the protection for the adjacent surrounding property. 2. The request is to permit the reconstruction of a residence is not applicable with regard to a non -conforming use due to it being permitted by right in the SF -3 District. There was a previous structure recently demolished on the property under the City's Home Program and it was built in the same approximate location as the demolished structure. There are special or unique conditions of restricted area and physical feature for the new slab that was constructed prior to the form board survey now existing on the subject parcel of land. This is not generally applicable to other parcels of land in the same zoning district. This has caused an unusual and practical difficulty to be in compliance with the provisions sought here to be varied due to general contractor not fully in sync with its sub -contractors schedules and thereby resulting in an unintentional result of not meeting the front and side yard setbacks. 4, The hardship sought to be avoided is the result of (a) the applicant's own actions (self- imposed or self-created although unintentional), and (b) an economic or financial hardship would result from being required to move the new home from where it is currently constructed. 5. The provisions of Zoning Ordinance No. 1710, and its amendments, that are sought to be