|
Case Number: |
A-18-120 |
|
Applicant: |
Tanya Lechner |
|
Owner: |
Ryan Kutzik |
|
Council District: |
1 |
|
Location: |
1710 Grant Avenue |
|
Legal Description: |
The North 30 Feet of Lots 23 and 24, Block 4, NCB 3105 |
|
Zoning: |
“R-4 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
|
Case Manager: |
Debora Gonzalez, Senior Planner |
Request
A request for 1) a variance from the Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation District design requirements to allow the primary structure to be 7’3” from the front property line, and 2) a 18’ variance from the 20’ rear setback, as described in Section 35-310.01, to allow the primary structure to be 2’ from the rear property line, and 3) a 2’ variance from the 5’ side yard setback, as described in Section 35-310.01, to allow the primary structure to be 3’ from the side property line, and 4) a 2,500 square foot variance from the 4,000 square foot minimum lot size to allow a lot zoned “R-4” to be 1,500 square feet, and 5) a request for a parking adjustment, as described in Section 35-526 (b)(7), to allow the lot to contain no off-street parking.
Executive Summary
The subject property was built in 1929 and the lot area is 1500 square feet. The owner remodeled the subject property, making additions to the house without obtaining permits. The owner is seeking to complete the project and keep the subject property, as is. The owner states that the additions were done in order to accommodate a large size family and to provide affordable housing. In February 2018 the owner received a ticket from Code Enforcement for not meeting the required setbacks.
Subject Property Zoning/Land Use
|
Existing Zoning |
Existing Use |
|
“R-4 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
|
Orientation |
Existing Zoning District(s) |
Existing Use |
|
North |
“R-6 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
South |
“R-4 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
East |
“R-6 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
West |
“R-6 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association
The property is within the boundaries of the Midtown Neighborhoods Plan and currently designated as “Low Density Residential” in the future land use component of the plan. The subject property is within the Beacon Hill Neighborhood Association. As such, they were notified and asked to comment.
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, the existing structure is 7’3” from the front property line, 2’ from the rear property line, 3’ from the side property line, and the addition aligns with the existing footprint. Staff finds the request is not contrary to the public interest in that the requested setbacks largely maintain what has been in place for years, and are similar to other setbacks within the community.
2. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.
The existing structure footprint is very small and additional living space is required to make this house habitable. The applicant remodeled the existing structure and built an addition to the side of the house. A literal enforcement of the ordinance would render the property nearly undevelopable. Staff finds that relief is warranted.
3. By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.
The special condition in this case is that the current lot is only 1500 square feet and the applicant is seeking to keep the additional living space added to the structure. Staff finds that a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship as the variances will not permit massing that is not found elsewhere in the neighborhood.
4. The variance will not authorize the operation of a use other than those uses specifically authorized in the district in which the request for a variance is located.
The variance will not authorize the operation of a use other than those uses specifically authorized in the “R-4 NCD-5 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Beacon Hill Neighborhood Conservation 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 addition will not detract from the neighborhood as the addition will not deviate substantially from existing setbacks. Specifically, the variances would not place the structure out of character within the community. Many homes within this community were built prior to the establishment of required setbacks.
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 in this case is the original dwelling layout on the lot which restricts the owner’s ability to construct any addition without encroaching into the front, side and rear setbacks, and removing the off-street parking. This issue is not merely financial in nature.
Alternative to Applicant’s Request
The alternative to the applicant’s plan would be to comply with the side building setbacks as defined within Section 35-310.01 and comply with the Section 35-526 (b)(7) parking requirements.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the variance in A-18-120, based on the following findings of fact:
1. The request does not negatively impact surrounding property owners and does not significantly alter the appearance of the district; and
2. The structure, largely, maintains the existing setbacks.