Zoning Board of Adjustment

City of Galveston Department of Planning and Community Development P.O. Box 779 / Galveston. Texas 77553-0779/ Ph (409) 797-3600/ Fax (409) 797-3601 AGENDA ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING 4:00 p.m., Wednesday, August 8, 2012 City Council Chambers, 2nd Floor of City Hall 823 Rosenberg, Galveston, Texas A. Attendance B. Conflict of Interest C. Minutes: July 11,2012 D. Old Business and associated Public Hearing: 12Z-21 (7805 and 7809 Broadway) Request for variances from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29-107: Height and Density Development Zone (HDDZ) and Section 29-106: Development Standards regarding wall plane articulation and outdoor lighting associated with a Marina and Restaurant development within the Commercial, Height and Density Development Zone, Zone 1, (C­ HDDZ-l) zoning district. Property is legally described as part of Lot 516 (516-10), Tremble & Lindsey, Section I, Lease Tract, and part of Lot 516 (516-6), Trimble and Lindsey, Section 1~ in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Harry C. Schultz, Jr., % Shelmark Engineering, % Rhonda Gregg Property Owner: Schultz Partners, LTD E. Old Business and associated Public Hearing: 12Z-23 (2017 Saladia) Request for variances from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29-65 regarding setback requirements in a One-Family, Two (I F-2) zoning district. Property is legally described as the north half of Lots 13 and 14, Block A, Colorado Addition, a subdivision, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant and Property Owner: Mary Sandra Foster 12Z-24 (1313 54th Street) Request for a variance from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29­ 65 regarding setback requirements in a General Residence (GR) zoning district. Property is legally described as North 30.33, feet of lots 13 & 14 (13-4), Block 46, Denver Resurvey, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant and Property Owner: Tomasa Crear  12Z-25 (5305 Avenue K) Request for a variance from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29­ 65 regarding setback requirements in a General Residence (GR) zoning district Property is legally described as Lot 10, Block 21, Denver Resurvey, a subdivision, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Tegrity Homes % Steve Kimborowicz Property Owner: Verna Thompson 12Z-26 (5902 Avenue Q Yz) Request for variances from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29­ 65 regarding setback requirements in a One Family-Two (IF-2) zoning district. Property is legally described as a portion of Lot 24 (24-5), Trimble and Lindsey Section 1, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: JW Turner Construction % Mark Lealy Property Owner: Michael N. Zientek F. Adjournment Prepared By: a.~2~- Athena Petty, Planning Staff'Assistant Date Prepared: July 30, 2012 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA), PERSONS IN NEED OF A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING SHALL, WITHIN THREE (3) DAYS PRIOR TO ANY PROCEEDING, CONTACT THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE, SUITE 201,823 ROSENBERG, GALVESTON, TEXAS 77550 (409797-3510). MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL MAY BE ATTENDING AND PARTICIPATING IN THIS MEETING. S\PlanlllngIPI.nfHng O'VlSIQI1\ZBAlAgcndaslAgcndas 1210RO~ 12 do< ~@~'ifrgrry AUG 02 2012 l!:!J R~( CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE :; MEMORANDUM TO: Carolyn Sunseri, Chairperson and Zoning Board of Adjustment Members FROM: Pete Milburn, Urban Planner II ~. Department of Planning and Community Development \ ) ' '4' DATE: August 3,2012 RE: 12Z-21 (7805 and 7809 Broadway) Request for variances from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29-107: Height and Density Development Zone (HDDZ) and Section 29-106: Development Standards regarding wall plane articulation and outdoor lighting associated with a Marina and Restaurant development within the Commercial, Height and Density Development Zone, Zone 1, (C-HDDZ-l) zoning district. Property is legally described as part of Lot 516 (516-10), Tremble & Lindsey, Section 1, Lease Tract, and part of Lot 516 (516-6), Trimble and Lindsey, Section 1; in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Harry C. Schultz, Jr., % Shelmark Engineering, % Rhonda Gregg Property Owner: Schultz Partners, LTD The Zoning Board of Adjustment, at their regular meeting of July 11, 2012, voted to continue the above referenced request until the August 8, 2012 regular meeting. The applicant requested the continuance in order to allow more Zoning Board members to be present at the meeting. This was the first continuance of this case and there are no additional costs associated with the continuance. xc: Lori Feild Schwarz, AICP, Interim Director Department of Planning and Community Development S:lPlanninglPlanning DivisionlZBA\Staff ReportSI 12zb.112Z·21 I12Z·21 memo,doc IStaff Report 12Z-23 Page 1 I 12Z-23 (2017 Saladia) Request for variances from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29­ 65 regarding setback requirements in a One-Family, Two (IF-2) zoning district. Property is legally described as the north half of Lots 13 and 14, Block A, Colorado Addition, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant and Property Owner: Mary Sandra Foster "f109 Z " E XIS omngandLandUse: Zoning One-Family, Two (IF-2) Land Use Single-Family Residential Surround"102 Z onlO2 " andLandUse: North South East West Zoning One-Family, One-Family, One-Family, One-Family, Two (IF-2) Two (IF-2) One (IF-l) Two (IF-2) Land Use Residential Residential Residential Residential Property Owner Notification as of AU2Ust 8, 2012: Sent Returned In Favor In Opposition No Comment 25 Advertisement Date: July 26,2012 City Department Notifications: Private Utility Notifications: I Airport: Building Department: No Objection Pending AT&T: CenterPoint Energy: Pending Pending I ,i Fire Chief: No Objection Comcast: No Objection Fire Marshal: Police Department: Public Works: No Objection No Objection No Objection Texas Gas Service: Pending I I f ~ Background I I At the June 1, 2011 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, the Board approved case 11Z-25 requesting variances reducing the front yard setback from I5-feet to 12-feet and the rear yard setback from to-feet to 7-feet. The property was granted variances in order to complete the construction of a new home built through the CDBG disaster recovery program. Another t contractor began the construction of this home and requested the variances. However, the new home, as built, is encroaching the previously approved variance and the applicant is requesting an additional variance. As completed, the home encroaches the approved 7' front yard setback. I ,,f ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a variance in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for a new home constructed through the CDBG disaster recovery program. Prior to the completion of construction modifications were made, altering the location of the access stairs. The access stairs were relocated from the north side of the structure to the east side. IStaff Report 12Z-23 Page 2 1. Variance regarding setbacks in the One-Family, Two (IF-2l zoning district Please reference the table below for the required setbacks for single-family residential development in the One-Family, Two (IF-2) zoning district, per Section 29-65. The setbacks for the proposed new construction are also shown below: Zoning District: One-Family, Two (IF-2) Setback Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Required 12' 5' T Proposed T 5' T Variance Requested - the applicant is requesting variances from the following: • Front yard setback - from 12' to T. Applicant's Justification "Because ofdisability, I need access to the front stairs from my parking area. " CONDITIONS FOR A VARIANCE The Board of Adjustment may grant a variance under this Section only if the variance is not prohibited by Section 14.401.C. in Article 14, Administrative Bodies, and if the Board makes a determination in writing that all of the following are demonstrated: 1. The request for the variance is rooted in special conditions of the applicant's property that do not generally exist on other properties in the same zoning district. 2. Due to said special conditions, the literal enforcement of the strict terms of these Land Development Regulations would impose an unnecessary hardship on the applicant. I 3. The variance is not contrary to the public interest, in that: 1. It does not allow applicants to impair the application of these regulations for: a. Self-imposed hardships; b. Hardships based solely on fInancial considerations, convenience or inconvenience; or I c. Conditions that are alleged to be "special," but that are actually common to many properties within the same zoning district. 11. The variance will not have a detrimental impact upon: \ a. The current or future use of adjacent properties for purposes for which they are zoned; b. Public infrastructure or services; and I l I c. Public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. f 4. The degree of variance allowed from these Land Development Regulations is the least that is necessary to grant relief from the identifIed unnecessary hardship. , 5. The variance shall not be used to circumvent other procedures and standards of these Land Development Regulations that could be used for the same or comparable effect i (e.g., if alternative development patterns, alternative development standards, or other ! ! flexible measures in these regulations are available that would avoid or mitigate i l I. hardship without using a variance, then they must be used). ,t: 6. By granting the variance, the spirit of these Land Development Regulations is observed ! t and substantial justice is done. l !StaffReport 12Z-23 Page 3 APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BOARD In accordance with Section 29-112, any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board, or any officer, department or other Board of the City, may appeal the decision or action of the Board by filing a petition for the same in a court of competent jurisdiction, setting forth that such decision is illegal in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds for the alleged illegality. Such petition shall be filed with the Court within ten (10) days from the day the Board renders its decision, and not thereafter. The time period set forth herein shall be deemed jurisdictional. ATTACHMENTS ..A" - Zoning Map "B" - Site Plan "C" - Survey Respectfully Submitted, ~-L-\L Planner II Date Lori Feild Schwarz, AIep, Interim Di ector Date S:\PJanning\PJanning Division\ZBA\Staff Reports\12zba\I2Z-23\12Z-23 STF.doc \ f I I t II \ I i IStaff Report 12Z-24 Page 1 I th 12Z-24 (1313 54 Street) Request for a variance from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29-65 regarding setback requirements in a General Residence (GR) zoning district. Property is legally described as North 30.33, feet oflots 13 & 14 (13-4), block 46, Denver Resurvey, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: lW. Turner Construction Property Owner: Tomasa Crear XISf m2 Z E' . onmJ;an dL an dUse: Zoning General Residence (GR) Land Use Residential Surroun d'mg Z ' onmg an dLan dUse: North South East West Zoning General General General General Residence (GR) Residence (GR) Residence (GR) Residence (GR) Land Use Residential Residential Residential Residential Property Owner Notification as of August 8, 2012 Sent Returned In Favor In Opposition No Comment 36 Advertisement Date: July 26, 2012 City Department Notifications: Private Utility Notifications: Airport: No Objection AT&T: Pending Building Department: Pending CenterPoint Energy: Pending Fire Chief: No Objection Comcast: No Objection Fire Marshal: Pending Texas Gas Service: Pending Police Department: Pending Public Works: No Objection BACKGROUND The applicant was granted variances from setback requirements through (Case lIZ-55) for the front, side and rear yard setbacks in order to complete the construction of a new home built through the CDBG disaster recovery program. Another contractor began the construction of this home and was granted variances. However, the home, as built, is encroaching the original variances and the applicant is requesting additional variances to obtain the final Certificate of Occupancy for this home. As completed, the home encroaches the 10' front yard, the 3' side yard, and the 10' rear yard setback. Section 29-67(b), (1) states that there is a minimum of one (1) space of off-street parking required for a detached single-family residential use. As proposed, the new single-family construction on the lot does not provide an off-street parking space. However, the Zoning Board of Adjustment at their regular meeting of August 11,2011, (Case lIZ-55), approved a variance to omit the parking pad. IStaff Report 12Z-24 Page 2 ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting additional variances for the front, side and rear yard setbacks in order to complete the construction of a new home built through the CDBG disaster recovery program. Previously approved variances regarding setbacks Please reference the table below for the variances that were previously granted for setbacks in a single-family residential development in the General Residence (GR) zoning district, per Section 29-65. The variances that were granted for Case lIZ-55 are listed below: • Front yard setback - from 10' to I' • Side yard setbacks - from 3' to 1.7' • Rear yard setback - from 10' to l' • Parking Pad - a variance was granted to not provide an off-street parking space Zoning District: General Residence (GR) Setback Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 1 Required 10' 3' 10' Pro~osed I' 1.7' 1' Variance(s) Requested - the applicant is requesting variances from the following: • Front yard setback - from l' to 0' • Side yard setbacks - from 1.7' to 1.4' • Rear yard setback - from l' to 0' Zoning District: General Residence (GR) Setback Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard I f Required 1' 1.7' l' i Proposed 0' 1.4' 0' ! Applicant's Justification The new structure was built to the property line in the front and rear yards and encroaches the side yard an additional three-inches (3 ''), by Compass Pointe Homes. J. W Turner Construction has been given the house to complete and in order to complete the house will need the additional variances to complete the house. CONDITIONS FOR A VARIANCE The Board of Adjustment may grant a variance under this Section only if the variance is not prohibited by Section 14.401.C. in Article 14, Administrative Bodies, and if the Board makes a determination in writing that all of the following are demonstrated: 1. The request for the variance is rooted in special conditions of the applicant's property that do not generally exist on other properties in the same zoning district. I 2. Due to said special conditions, the literal enforcement of the strict terms of these Land i Development Regulations would impose an unnecessary hardship on the applicant. I 3. The variance is not contrary to the public interest, in that: i. It does not allow applicants to impair the application of these regulations for: a. Self-imposed hardships; It b. Hardships based solely on financial considerations, convenience or inconvenience; or c. Conditions that are alleged to be "special," but that are actually common to many properties within the same zoning district. I IStaff Report 12Z-24 Page 3 11.The variance will not have a detrimental impact upon: a. The current or future use of adjacent properties for purposes for which they are zoned; b. Public infrastructure or services; and c. Public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. 4. The degree of variance allowed from these Land Development Regulations is the least that is necessary to grant relief from the identified unnecessary hardship. 5. The variance shall not be used to circumvent other procedures and standards of these Land Development Regulations that could be used for the same or comparable effect (e.g., if alternative development patterns, alternative development standards, or other flexible measures in these regulations are available that would avoid or mitigate hardship without using a variance, then they must be used). 6. By granting the variance, the spirit of these Land Development Regulations is observed and substantial justice is done. APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BOARD In accordance with Section 29-112, any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board, or any officer, department or other Board of the City, may appeal the decision or action of the Board by filing a petition for the same in a court of competent jurisdiction, setting forth that such decision is illegal in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds for the alleged illegality. Such petition shall be filed with the Court within ten (10) days from the day the Board renders its decision, and not thereafter. The time period set forth herein shall be deemed jurisdictional. ATTACHMENTS "A" Zoning Map "B" - Aerial Map "c" Survey Respectfully Submitted, Date Lori Feild Schwarz, AICP, Interim Director Date S:lPlanninglPlanning Division\zBA\StaffReports\l2zba\12Z-24\12Z-24stf.doc I IStaff Report 12Z-26 Page 1\ 12Z-26 (5902 Avenue Q ~) Request for variances from the Galveston Zoning Standards Section 29-65 regarding setback requirements in a One Family-Two (IF-2) zoning district. Property is legally described as a portion of Lot 24 (24-5), Trimble and Lindsey Section 1, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: JW Turner Construction % Mark Lealy Property Owner: Michael N. Zientek E°tinIg Z ODlJ!g XIS ° andLandUse: Zoning One Family-Two Dwelling District (IF-2) Land Use Single-Family Residential SurroundOIDg Zo' nlDJtandLandUse: North South East West Zoning Planned One Family- One Family- Planned Development Two Dwelling Two Dwelling Development (PD) District (IF-2) District (IF-2) (PD) Land Use Travel Trailer Residential Residential Travel Trailer Park Park Pro'p~rty Owner Notification as of August 8, 2012: Sent Returned In Favor In Opposition No Comment 25 Advertisement Date: July 26, 2012 City Department Notifications: Airport: No Objection Private Utility Notifications: AT&T: Pending , I Building Department: Pending CenterPoint Energy: Pending Fire Chief: No Objection Comcast: No Objection Fire Marshal: No Objection Texas Gas Service: Pending Police Department: Public Works: No Objection No Objection ! Background At the August 3, 2011 Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, the Board approved case 11Z-60 requesting a variance reducing the front yard setback from 15-feet to lO.I-feet. The property was granted a variance in order to complete the construction of a new home built through the CDBG I disaster recovery program. Another contractor began the construction of this home and requested the variance. However, the new home, as built, is encroaching the previously approved variance and the applicant is requesting an additional variance. As completed, the home encroaches the approved 10.1' front yard setback. I t ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a variance in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for a new home I t ~ . constructed through the CDBG disaster recovery program. Prior to the completion of construction il ! ! t i IStaff Report 12Z-26 Page 2 modifications were made, altering the location of the access stairs. The access stairs were relocated closer to the front property line. Variance regarding setbacks in the One Family-Two (1F-2) zoning district Please reference the table below for the required setbacks for single-family residential development in the One Family-Two (IF-2) zoning district, per Section 29-65. The setbacks for the proposed new construction are also shown below: Zoning District: One Family-Two (IF-2) Setback Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Required 10.1 ' 5' 10' Proposed 4.6' 5' 10' Variance(s) Requested - the applicant is requesting a variance from the following: • Front yard setback - from 10.1' to 4.6' Applicant's Justification "CDBG house left unfinished by previous builder (Compass Pointe Homes) was constructed to encroach the front building. A variance is being requested to allow the egress stairs and landing at the buildingfront to remain in the setback. " CONDITIONS FOR A VARIANCE The Board of Adjustment may grant a variance under this Section only if the variance is not prohibited by Section 14.40l.C. in Article 14, Administrative Bodies, and if the Board makes a determination in writing that all of the following are demonstrated: 1. The request for the variance is rooted in special conditions of the applicant's property that do not generally exist on other properties in the same zoning district. 2. Due to said special conditions, the literal enforcement of the strict terms of these Land Development Regulations would impose an unnecessary hardship on the applicant. 3. The variance is not contrary to the public interest, in that: 1. It does not allow applicants to impair the application of these regulations for: a. Self-imposed hardships; b. Hardships based solely on fmancial considerations, convenience or inconvenience; or c. Conditions that are alleged to be IIspecial," but that are actually common to many properties within the same zoning district. ii. The variance will not have a detrimental impact upon: a. The current or future use of adjacent properties for purposes for which they are zoned; b. Public infrastructure or services; and c. Public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. 4. The degree of variance allowed from these Land Development Regulations is the least that is necessary to grant relief from the identified unnecessary hardship. 5. The variance shall not be used to circumvent other procedures and standards of these Land Development Regulations that could be used for the same or comparable effect (e.g., if alternative development patterns, alternative development standards, or other flexible measures in these regulations are available that would avoid or mitigate hardship without using a variance, then they must be used). IStaff Report 12Z-26 Page 3 6. By granting the variance, the spirit of these Land Development Regulations is observed and substantial justice is done. APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BOARD In accordance with Section 29-112, any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board, or any officer, department or other Board of the City, may appeal the decision or action of the Board by filing a petition for the same in a court of competent jurisdiction, setting forth that such decision is illegal in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds for the alleged illegality. Such petition shall be filed with the Court within ten (10) days from the day the Board renders its decision, and not thereafter. The time period set forth herein shall be deemed jurisdictional. ATTACHMENTS "A" Zoning Map "B" - Site Plan (case l1Z-60) "C" Survey Respectfully Submitted, p~~n p;.nn:r II ~-L-\L Date Lori Feild Schwarz, AICP, Interim Director Date S:\Planning\Planning Division\ZBA\Staff Reports\12zba\12Z-26\12Z-26 STF.doc