Zoning Board of Adjustment

ZBA Members Gerardo Arzate, Chairman Tim Harry, Vice Chairman Kyle Newton, Member Kirk Strahan, Member Priscilla Contreras, Member Anthony-Paul Rios, Member Norberto Brito III, Member (Alternate) ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY HALL, 411 W. 8TH ST. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – FIFTH FLOOR July 17, 2024 8:30 A.M. I. OPENING ITEMS 1. Invocation II. CONSENT ITEMS 2. Motion to approve the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting minutes for June 19, 2024. III. PUBLIC HEARING The Zoning Board of Adjustments board will hold a public hearing on the following items: 3. CASE FILE NO. 2024-12-V Open a public hearing to consider approval of the request of Oscar Trevizo, owner, for a variance from Section 14-7-5 of the City of Odessa zoning Ordinance to allow a carport to remain at a three feet (3’) front yard setback and from Section 14-7-13 (b) for said carport to remain at a zero feet (0’) separation from main structure in an GR, General  Residence Zoning District, Lot 11, Block 86, College Lands Addition, 1st Filing. (1418 N Jackson Avenue / Council District 3) IV. ADJOURN  ZBA MEMBERS Gerardo Arzate, Chairman Tim Harry, Vice Chairman Kyle Newton, Member Kirk Strahan, Member Priscilla Contreras, Member Paul Anthony Rios, Member Norberto Brito III, Member (Alternate) ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES CITY HALL, 411 W. 8TH ST. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – FIFTH FLOOR June 19, 2024, 8:30 A.M. I. OPENING ITEMS 1. Invocation II. CONSENT ITEMS 2. Motion to approve the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting minutes for June 7 2024. III. PUBLIC HEARING The Zoning Board of Adjustments board will hold a public hearing on the following items: 3. CASE FILE NO. 2024-11-V Open a public hearing to consider approval of the request of Tommy Kincheloe, owner, for a variance from Section 14-7-10 (a) of the City of Odessa Zoning Ordinance to allow an additional structure (carport) to be built 18% over the maximum lot coverage of 70% in an SF-3, Single Family-Three Zoning District, Lot 2, Block 10, Scottsdale West Subdivision, 1st Filing. (143 Conley Place / Council District 4) IV. Adjourn Be it said and remembered that at 8:33 a.m. on the 19 th day of June, 2024, there came on and was held a Zoning Board of Adjustments meeting in the Council Chambers, 5th Floor, 411 W. 8th St., Odessa, Texas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Gerardo Arzate, Chairman Tim Harry, Vice Chairman Kirk Strahan Kyle Newton Norberto Brito, III (Alternate) MEMBERS ABSENT: Anthony Paul Rios Priscilla Contreras OTHERS PRESENT: Maria Prieto, Planning Manager; James Reber, Senior Planner; Cheynna Torres & Gracie Rodriguez, Planning Technicians; Rebecca Muniz, Legal Assistant; Naira Enriquez, Senior Legal Assistant; Joe Tucker, Director of Public Works The minutes of the June 7, 2O24, Zoning Board of Adjustment Commission meet were approved, motion for approval being made by Vice-Chairman, Tim Harry, seconded by member, Norberto Brito III, with the vote being a unanimous "aye".  TO: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUBJECT: DOCKET NO. 2024-11-V Open a public hearing to consider approval of the request of Tommy Kincheloe, owner, for a variance from Section 14-7-10 (a) of the City of Odessa Zoning Ordinance to allow an additional structure (carport) to be built 18% over the maximum lot coverage of 70% in an SF-3, Single Family-Three Zoning District, Lot 2, Block 10, Scottsdale West Subdivision, 1st Filing. (143 Conley Place /Council District 4) Maria Prieto Presents: 19 Sent, 0 Protest and 0 Approved The property involved in this request is located at 143 Conley Place. This site is currently zoned SF-3, Single-Family Residence District-3, and is occupied by a single-family residence. The property is surrounded by residential development to the north, south, and west, with an SF-3-DR, Single-Family-3-Drill Reservation, zoning designation to the east. The applicant is Tommy Kincheloe, owner, and the purpose of the request is for a variance to allow a structure (carport) to be built despite the maximum lot coverage being exceeded by 18%, a total of 88% in lieu of the maximum 70% allowed. To allow the structure while exceeding maximum lot coverage, the applicants are requesting a variance from Section 14-7-10 (a) of the City of Odessa Zoning Ordinance, which states: The following criteria as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance are to be used by the Board of Adjustment in evaluating variance requests. The burden of proof in meeting each of these criteria is upon the applicant. A. The variance request is not contrary to the public interest. The proposed variance would not be contrary to the public interest. The proposed carport will have the same materials, color, and roof pitch as the principal building, consistent with the City’s new Carport Overlay Zone, and will maintain an 8-foot front yard setback. The new Overlay Zone allows a 5-foot front yard setback so the new carport will be in compliance with the required front setback. The City’s Zoning Ordinance under 14-7-10(a) sets a maximum lot coverage of 70% for an SF-3 zone which includes both buildings and non-permeable surfaces such as concrete. Without the back yard concrete, the total lot coverage is only 63%, but with the concrete covering the entire back yard around the swimming pool, the lot coverage is now 88%, 18% more than the allowable coverage in the Zoning Ordinance. However, because this concrete is decorative and not actually used to park vehicles in the rear yard, Staff believes this variance is not contrary to the public interest nor will the additional concrete be seen since it is fenced in to the rear of the house.  B. Special conditions exist for the applicant that do not generally exist for others. Staff believes that because the additional lot coverage is for decorative concrete and not for actual parking of vehicles, that in reality, the real lot coverage is only 63%, within the allowable 70% lot coverage in the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, this acts as special circumstance and Staff supports the variance request. C. A literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship. A literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would restrict the applicant from building a carport to store their vehicles. The fact that the applicant is complying with the new Carport Overlay Zone and all other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Staff supports the request as submitted. D. The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed, and substantial justice is done. Staff believes that the spirit of the ordinance is maintained. Staff’s analysis of this request is that the applicant’s request to exceed maximum lot coverage by 18% will not create any hazards or hardships to surrounding properties to light, air, or open space. It complies with all other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and therefore, staff supports the request. Low traffic volume in this residential street should not be a hindered. The planning staff has no objections to this request as presented. The Planning Division recommends APPROVAL of the variance, subject to two (2) condition of approval: 1. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the carport. 2. That the variance only applies to this request, and that any further requests to increase the lot coverage beyond 88% shall require a new variance application. Staff is here for any questions. At this time Ch a i rm a n , G e ra rd o A r z a t e , t u rn s t o fellow m e m b e r s for qu e s t io n Norberto Brito III, questions Maria "If the concrete in the pool area, does this not mean he would not need a variance? Ms. Prieto states "Correct". As Chairman states "pool is covered as to why we are doing this variance pertaining to city ordinance"? Ms. Prieto replies correct with a comment of "pool being exempt from property, the variance would not be required as making the lot coverage 63%". Mr. Norberto Brito III, member, as states not counting decorative in the equation would be under the total Lot coverage which would not be require for this variance. As Mr. Arzate, chairman, comments as part of the lot coverage this is considering a part of, right? MS. Prieto replies per zoning ordinance pool is not to be counted as part of the lot coverage. As this decision was ran through the director, as suggested continuing with variance in case any other issue arise due to ordinance. As the current ordinance states a 70% of lot coverage for the zoning SF-3, Single Family Residence District-3.  As in the future this issue would suffice as a reasoning should another issue of lot coverage arise pertaining to swimming pools. Mr. Newton, member, ask if the concrete is considered a part of the calculation? As Ms. Prieto states yes, as to which Mr. Newton ask the 88% is considered with the Concrete. As Mr. Newton states why exclude the decorative concrete when concrete is a part of that number. As Ms. Prieto states decorative concrete is to removable, not permanent. Mr. Newton states as all concrete is removable. As paved concrete is already set is considered Permanent verse pavers. Mr. Harry, Vice Chairman, states "Giving them (citizens) more trouble than what should be by going through a variance and adding is what is concerning. As the Carport Overlay Zone was supposed to help, so, this keeps variance from being added on as little as putting a carport over the top of a little driveway already in place". Ms. Prieto states running this through the Director as suggested the variance continues in case issue arise pertaining to the swimming pool however the ordinance does not specify swimming pool being a part of Coverage surface under the zoning ordinance. Mr. Harry, Vice Chairman, ask the amount asked of customer to move forward with a variance? Ms. Prieto states $200. At this time Gerardo Arzate, Chairman, ask if any other questions from members, hearing none, opens the meeting to public for discussion for or against the case file. Owner, Tommy Kincheloe, approaches the podium stating his name and address being 143 Conley Place. As he begins to thank the Zoning Board for listening to his request, as the property owner. Conversation between staff and board has help resolve some of his answers he had for the board. When the Carport Overlay Ordinance passes, this made several owners relieved as himself as his area was built in the late 1970's and early 1980's. A few homes of an older generation was not adequate sizing or regulation that they have now. Garage not being large enough to fit a standard truck in this generation and as older homeowners-built pools in most areas in that neighbor who not realizing the new standards. When adding an amenity such as a pool or shop, creates new challenge with arise in Carports. The older homes did as well pertain smaller lot(s) as they are able to build a carport with the instance the lot not containing enough lot space per ordinance. As many new owners would choose "Carport over Pool" as owners pool was an existing structure for when the home was bought. As hearing the new conversation being the pool pavement not being a permanent structure as believed and told otherwise. As i have supporting evidence of extreme temperatures with garage facing west, as well with the storms. If the board could help with the new carport owner would like to build for extra protection. Mr. Arzate asked Board members for any additional questions pertaining to the owner, hearing no other, closes the public portion of the meeting, turns to members for discussion or motion. Tim Harry makes a motion to approve with the city recommendations including the refund of $200 to the Kincheloe's. As this case appears to be a little further than what is necessarily. As Chairman, Gerardo Arzate agreed with motion to approve just with the refund, questionable. At this time Chairman, Gerardo Arzate recommends making a private discussion, as well withdraw the motion until further notice. Chairman, Gerardo Arzate turns to Members of Zoning Board of Adjustment to make motion for private session. Tim Harry, Vice Chairman, motion to go into private session, Second motion from member Kirk Strahan, with unanimous vote "aye". Return from private meeting at 8:56 A.M. As Tim Harry makes motion to return from private meeting, Second motion Norberto Brito III, all unanimously “aye”. As Chairman, Gerardo Arzate, states no discussion concluded in executive session, turns to members for motion. Mr. Tim Harry, Vice Chairman, repeats motion for approval of this variance request with the staff recommendation as well, additional condition of refunding two hundred dollars to applicants. Mr. Gerardo Arzate, Chairman, states a discussion must be reopened up as Mr. Tim Harry explain reason behind refund. Mr. Tim Harry make a discussion on the appropriateness of this variance as was stated as a director level decision based on Zoning Ordinances, as this should not have gone. Soley as a director's approval. Chairman, Arzate, stated for the record "Ordinance should not have came to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, as this case to stay in the director level. Tim Harry remakes his motion to approve Variance as requested with additional amendment of refunding the two hundred dollars to the applicant Motion was made by member Tim Harry: Seconded by member Kirk Strahan, all unanimously “aye”. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Gerardo Arzate, Tim Harry, Kirk Strahan, Kyle Newton Norberto Brito III Nay: None Motion Pass with the following votes: 5-0 Cheynna Torres, Planning Technician, Placed the minutes in the Minute Book on June 19, 2024. Chairman ask motion to Adjourn with member Tim Harry; Second by Member Norberto Brito III, all unanimously “aye”. The meeting was adjourned at 8:58 A.M. ────────────────────────── Gerardo Arzate, Chairman  TO: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FROM: Maria Prieto, Planning Manager SUBJECT: DOCKET NO. 2024-12-V APPLICANT: Oscar Trevizo, Owner REQUEST: Variance from Section 14-7-5 and Section 14-7-13 (b) of the City of Odessa Zoning Ordinance PROPERTY INVOLVED: Lot 11, Block 86, College Lands Addition, 1st Filing The property involved in this request is located at 1418 N Jackson Avenue. This site is currently zoned GR, General Residence District, and is occupied by a single-family residence. The property is surrounded by residential development to the north, south, east and west. The applicant and owner, Oscar Trevizo, is seeking a variance from Section 14-7-5 of the City of Odessa zoning Ordinance to allow a structure (carport) to remain at three feet (3’) front yard setback on a required twenty feet (20’) front yard setback and a variance from Section 14-7-13 (b), to allow a structure (carport) to remain with a zero feet (0’) separation from main structure instead of the required six feet (6’) separation. The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 14-7-5 and 14-17-13 (b) of the City of Odessa Zoning Ordinance, which states: Sec. 14-7-5 Front Yard In the following zoning districts, the minimum required front yard shall be in accordance with the following schedule and no building or structure shall hereinafter be located, erected or altered so as to have a smaller front yard than hereinafter required, and no front yard existing at the time of passage of this ordinance shall be reduced below the minimum set forth in the following schedule except hereinafter provided: Schedule minimum required front yard General Residence (GR) 20 ft. (See Page 14 Attachment 5) Sec. 14-7-13 (b) Accessory building and structure regulations Side yard. There shall be a side yard for any attached accessory building equal to the minimum requirement for the main structure located in a residential area. For a detached accessory building located behind the front yard building setback, there shall be no side yard required, provided that all building code standards are met. Accessory buildings must maintain a six (6) feet separation from any other structure. If the six (6) feet separation is not maintained, the accessory building shall be considered to be an integral part of that structure and shall be required to observe the same side yard as the main structure. Adjacent to a side street, the accessory building shall observe either the platted setback line, the setback line established by the main structure, or the setback lines established by ordinance, whichever is most restrictive. The following criteria as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance are to be used by the Board of Adjustment in evaluating variance requests. The burden of proof in meeting each of these criteria is upon the applicant. A. The variance request is not contrary to the public interest. B. Special conditions exist for the applicant that do not generally exist for others. C. A literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship. D. The spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed, and substantial justice is done. Staff analysis of this request is the applicant’s request to reduce the front yard to three feet (3’) instead of the required twenty feet (20’) front yard setback and the zero foot (0’) separation from main building will not create issues related to light, air, or open space. A twenty feet (20’) right of way exists allowing for a total distance of twenty three feet (23’) from the carport to the curb. With this in mind, the planning staff has no objections to this request as presented. Information in order of inclusion: --Area of notification map --Copy of site plan  I -~ 5wr'o/? /6 I I1t . , ~ ~ \l - ~ ~ 0 ~ f . ~ 11-- <:)' r (0 ' 1: '\) ·- /Y-- I 1' zO' {~/' -.. Pt1 r-r .... "() y l\i ~ <E \ 1_ I -:t II f //) I < 11 ~ / (\ t' 6 l '10, 0 I ~1\) I ---- -  200ft public Notification 2024-12-V Location Ma 1418 N Jackson Variance Open from a public Section hearing 14-7-5approval to consider of the ofCitythe of request Odessabyzoning Oscar Trevizo, Ordinance owner, for a variance to allow a structure from Section 14-7-5 of the City of Odessa zoning (carport) to be built at an eighteen feet (18’) Ordinance to allow an existing structure (carport) front yard setback and from Section 14-7-13 ...... with an 18-foot setback front yard setback and from (b) structure Section 14-7-13 (carport) (b) structure to (carport) be builttowith a zero be built feeta (0’) with separation zero-foot from main (0') separation from structure the main in an SF-3, Single structure Family-Three a GR, General ResidenceZoningDistrict, District, onLot 11,11,Block Lot 86,College Block 86, College Lands Lands Addition, Addition, 1st 1st Filing. Filing.N Jackson (1418 (1418 Avenue N Jackson Avenue / Council District/ 3)Council District 3)  2024-11-V 2024-12-P Aerial Aerial MapMa 1418 N Jackson Variance Open from a public Section hearing 14-7-5approval to consider of the of City theof request Odessabyzoning OscarOrdinance Trevizo, owner, for a a to allow variance structure from Section 14-7-5 of the City of Odessa zoning (carport) to be built at an eighteen feet (18’) Ordinance to allow an existing structure (carport) front with anyard setback 18-foot setbackandfrontfrom yardSection setback 14-7-13 and from ..... (b) structure Section 14-7-13(carport) to (carport) (b) structure be built to with be a zero built feeta(0’) with separation zero-foot from main (0') separation fromstructure the main in an SF-3, Single structure in Family-Three a GR, Zoning District, General Residence District,on Lot Block 11,11, Lot Block86,86,College CollegeLands LandsAddition, Addition,1st 1st Filing. Filing. (1418 (1418NNJackson JacksonAvenue Avenue / Council District / Council 3) 3) District