Opinion ID: 1134395
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Defendants' purchase of lot formerly owned by plaintiffs; preparation of plans for proposed house; hearing on application of variance.

Text: On December 3, 1975, defendants purchased that lot from the Alexanders. Before doing so they filed an application for a variance from zoning code requirements relating to setback lines. With their application defendants were required to submit a complete set of plans for the house which they proposed to build on that lot, showing not only its location on that sloping lot, but the details of its construction, including front, side and back elevation views. Those plans showed, among other things, the proposed basement, with daylight windows, and the proposed garage  all below the main living area. Defendant Dale LeTourneau testified that before purchasing the lot he was aware of the building restrictions and that he met with the plaintiffs and showed them a picture from a builders' magazine showing what we wanted to build, but that plaintiffs rejected the picture and asked us to have a set of plans drawn. Defendants then had a set of plans prepared by a Mr. Rogers, a building-designer who was not an architect. Mr. Rogers prepared plans which he believed to be in compliance with the building restrictions. Those were the plans submitted by defendants with their application for a variance. Mr. LeTourneau also testified that prior to the hearing on the variance he took those plans to plaintiffs' home where they examined them. It also appears from the tape record of the hearing on defendants' application for a variance that plaintiff Norman Drulard appeared at that hearing and that he stated, on the record, that he went over the plans and we have no objections to the proposal, other than to suggest that the garage be set back further. Plaintiff Norman Drulard testified, however, that although defendants had shown to him a picture from a builders' magazine, the house as built by them was not in accordance with that picture of the house. He also denied that defendants showed plans to him prior to the variance hearing or that he examined them at that hearing. He also testified that the only thing discussed at that hearing was the location of defendants' proposed house on the lot with reference to the street line. He admitted, however, that he could not say that no one showed [him] any building plans prior to the time the excavation started for the construction of the LeTourneau house.