|
Case Number: |
A-15-156 |
|
Applicant: |
Chrispark, LLC |
|
Owner: |
Chrispark, LLC |
|
Council District: |
1 |
|
Location: |
121 Camp Street |
|
Legal Description: |
Lot 10, Block 5, NCB 2554 |
|
Zoning: |
“C-3 NA AHOD” General Commercial Non-Alcoholic Sales Airport Hazard Overlay District |
|
Case Manager: |
Kristin Flores, Planner |
Request
A request for a 2 foot variance from the maximum 6 foot fence height, as described in Section 35-514 (d), to allow an 8 foot fence around a private park area.
Executive Summary
The subject property is located at 121 Camp Street approximately 360 feet West of South Flores Street. The applicant, Chrispark, LLC, owns the property directly adjacent to the East. This adjacent property currently serves as a private park which is open to the public 6 days a week. Chrispark is expanding to include 121 Camp Street within the bounds of the park. In an effort to continue a unified exterior look throughout the park. The current fence is predominantly open and made of galvanized steel and stands at eight feet in height.
Subject Property Zoning/Land Use
|
Existing Zoning |
Existing Use |
|
“C-3 NA AHOD” General Commercial Non-Alcoholic Sales Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Vacant Lot |
Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
|
Orientation |
Existing Zoning District(s) |
Existing Use |
|
North |
“C-3 NA AHOD” General Commercial Non-Alcoholic Sales Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single Family Residence |
|
South |
“IDZ AHOD” Infill Development Zone Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Multi-Family Residence |
|
East |
“IDZ AHOD” Infill Development Zone Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Chrispark |
|
West |
“C-3 NA AHOD” General Commercial Non-Alcoholic Sales Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single Family Residence |
Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association
The property is located within the boundaries of the Lone Star Plan and is designated as High Density Residential in the future land use component of the plan. The subject property is not located within the boundaries of a Neighborhood Association.
Criteria for Review
According to Section 35-482(e) of the UDC, in order for a variance to be granted, the applicant must demonstrate all of the following:
1. The variance is not contrary to the public interest.
The public interest is defined as the general health, safety, and welfare of the public. In this case, these criteria are represented by minimum fence to protect home owners, and also to provide for a sense of community. The proposed fence will serve to provide a unified look, provide an enhanced amenity for the public, and increase security of the property. This is not contrary to the public interest.
2. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.
The special condition in this case is the ability to ensure privacy and security for a private park. While this park is open to the public most days of the week it is privately owned and ensuring the protection of this property is valid.
3. By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.
The spirit of the ordinance is defined as the intent of the code rather than the letter of the law. The addition fence height is intended to provide safety, security, and the privacy of the applicant. Therefore, this variance observes the spirit of the code.
4. The variance will not authorize the operation of a use other than those uses specifically authorized for the district in which the property for which the variance is sought is located.
The requested variance will not authorize the operation of a use on the subject property other than those specifically permitted in the “C-3 NA AHOD” General Commercial Non-Alcoholic Sales Airport Hazard Overlay District.
5. Such variance will not substantially injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property or alter the essential character of the district in which the property is located.
The property is located in an area with many other eight foot fences. The proposed fence would be in keeping with the character of the community and in character with the current park.
6. The plight of the owner of the property for which the variance is sought is due to unique circumstances existing on the property, and the unique circumstances were not created by the owner of the property and are not merely financial, and are not due to or the result of general conditions in the district in which the property is located.
The unique circumstance on this property is the need to increase security and privacy of the property. This is not merely financial and was not created by the property owner.
Alternative to Applicant’s Request
The applicant must build the fence not to exceed to six foot maximum, as described in Section 35-314 (d).
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends APPROVAL of a two foot variance from the six foot minim to allow a fence to be eight feet in height in A-15-156 based on the following findings of fact:
|
1. |
Increasing security and privacy of a private park is in the best interest of the applicant and community; |
|
2. |
The additional fence height is in keeping with the character of the community. |
Attachments
Attachment 1 - Notification Plan (Aerial Map)
Attachment 2 - Plot Plan (Aerial Map)
Attachment 3 - Site Plan
Attachment 4 - Site Photos