Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeals
	Agenda Request
Agenda Of:	APRIL 30, 2008	Agenda Request No:		II-B
Initiated By:	Leticia Garza, Administrative Manager	Responsible Department:		City Secretary
Presented By:	Glenda Gundermann, City Secretary	Department Head:		Glenda Gundermann, City Secretary
		Additional Department. Head (s):		N/A
Subject / Proceeding:	Minutes Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeals Meeting march 26, 2008 Minutes Approve
Exhibits:	Minutes march 26, 2008
Clearances			Approval
Legal:	N/A		City Planner:	N/A
Recommended Action
Approve the minutes of the March 26, 2008 Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeals meeting.
Exhibits

STATE OF TEXAS	§
COUNTY OF FORT BEND	§
CITY OF SUGAR LAND	§

CITY OF SUGAR LAND

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALs MEETING

wednesday, march 26, 2008

The City of Sugar Land Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeal convened in a regular meeting open to the public and pursuant to notice thereof duly given in accordance with Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, as amended, in Sugar Land City Hall within said City on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 5:00 o'clock P.M. and the roll was called of the members to wit:

James Lord, Chairman

Kathy Huebner, Vice Chairman

Nancy Porter

Deloise Holmes

Harish Jajoo

Sean Burnett, Alternate

E.G. (Bud) Friedman, Alternate

Robert Dunham, Alternate

QUORUM PRESENT

All of said members were present with the exception of Mr. Deloise Holmes who was absent.

Also present were:

Ms. Sabine Somers-Kuenzel, Director of Planning

Mr. Jim Callaway, Executive Director of Community Development

Joe Morris, City Attorney

Leticia Garza, Administrative Manager and

Members of the Planning Staff

CONVENE MEETING

Chairman Lord convened the session, open to the public, to order at 5:05 o’clock P.M.

Workshop

BOARD POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

Chairman Lord introduced review and discussion on the proposed recommendations regarding the variance process and development of board policies and procedures.

Director of Planning Sabine Somers-Kuenzel, stated that in 2006, a taskforce was created to review specific development related issues resulting in two projects. The first project recommends development code options to strengthen certain regulations and the second creates a system and process by which the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeals can be guided.

The city contracted with the IPS Group to research these projects and make recommendations on the process to allow the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeals to better deal with future variance decisions; the report was completed in December 2007, some of the recommendations do not directly involve the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Dr. David Pugh and Ms. Jane Kee, both consultants for the IPS Group discussed the general nature of the recommendations and elaborated on the items that directly impacted the board.

Ms. Jane Kee stated that the purpose of the project was: 1) determine whether a better definition for variance existed, 2) review policies and procedures from other boards, and 3) review the special exception provisions. The deliverables for the projects were to provide a written summary of findings, and make suggestions for rules and procedures.

The project was researched extensively through the Texas Local Government Code, chapters 211, 245 and 43, special exception language, Texas legislation, land use attorneys and cities that were considered comparable to the City of Sugar Land in size, economy and progressive planning policies.

Regarding granting of variances, the Texas Government Code, Texas case law and the surveyed cities gave little guidance; a vague set of rules set out by the Local Government Code states variances can be granted when they are “not contrary to the public interest, and which, because of special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice done.” This interpretation is made more difficult by the lack of concise definition of important terms, such as: unnecessary hardships, public welfare and the spirit of zoning regulations.

Many cities are unable to completely define “public welfare”. The code states that the granting of a variance must not be injurious to the property or improvements of the district and neighborhood. Public welfare is related to the surrounding property in question. Defining public welfare is imperative in order to ensure that the people surrounding the property are not negatively affected by a variance and both the applicant and the neighborhood are provided with equity without granting any special advantage to any of those involved.

Ms. Kee stated that the “spirit of zoning regulations” was not clearly defined by their research and should instead be considered an interrelationship between the city’s comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinances and variances. Special conditions should always be tied or related to the physical conditions of the land. Hardship should not be created knowingly by the applicant.

Ms. Kee listed a number of recommendations; creating a variance application that defines terms that best meet the needs of the city and the community. This will prove helpful in setting a standard by which the applicant and staff can understand each other’s responsibilities. Consider adopting a formal, court-like setting when hearing request and appeals, including the swearing in of applicants and testimony. Recommendations include creating and adopting guidelines for board operations, continuing annual training of board members, creating an annual report for the Zoning Board to use for historical and educational purposes. Consider replacing the use of special exceptions with an overlay.

ADJOURN

There, being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Friedman, seconded by Ms. Huebner moved that the meeting adjourn. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned, time at 6:35 o'clock p.m.

James Lord, Chairman

Glenda Gundermann, City Secretary

(SEAL)