city of San Antonio


Some of our meetings have moved. View additional meetings.

File #: 16-1053   
Type: Zoning Case
In control: City Council A Session
On agenda: 1/28/2016
Posting Language: ZONING CASE # Z2016033 S (Council District 1): An Ordinance amending the Zoning District Boundary from "I-1 AHOD" General Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District to "I-2 S AHOD" Heavy Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District with Specific Use Authorization for Metal Recycling with Outdoor Storage on 0.746 of an acre out of NCB 1021 located at 716, 718, 720, 724 Culebra Street. Staff and Zoning Commission recommend Approval.
Attachments: 1. Z2016-033 Location Map, 2. Z2016033 S_Site Plan, 3. Z2016033 S Zoning Minutes, 4. DRAFT ORDINANCE, 5. Ordinance 2016-01-28-0047

DEPARTMENT: Development Services                     

 

DEPARTMENT HEAD: Roderick Sanchez

                     

COUNCIL DISTRICTS IMPACTED: 1

 

SUBJECT:

Zoning Case Z2016033 S

 

SUMMARY:

Current Zoning:  "I-1 AHOD" General Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District

 

Requested Zoning:  "I-2 S AHOD" Heavy Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District with Specific Use Authorization for Metal Recycling with Outdoor Storage

 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Zoning Commission Hearing Date:  December 15, 2015

 

Case Manager:  Ernest Brown, Planner

 

Property Owner:  Richard Anyang

 

Applicant:  Richard Anyang

 

Representative:  Richard Anyang

 

Location:  716, 718, 720, 724 Culebra Street

 

Legal Description:  0.746 of an acre out of NCB 1021

 

Total Acreage:  0.746

 

Notices Mailed

Owners of Property within 200 feet:  20

Registered Neighborhood Associations within 200 feet:  Gardendale Neighborhood Association

Planning Team:  NA

Applicable Agencies:  None

 

Property Details

Property History:  The subject property is located within the city limits as established in 1938 and was zoned “J” Commercial District.  Upon adoption of the 2001 Unified Development Code, the previous base zoning district converted to the current “I-1” General Industrial District.  In 1950 a portions of the subject property was developed as follow: Lot 8 was developed as a single family residence with approximately 650 square feet of structure; Lot 7 and a portion of Lot 6 was vacant; in 1960 Lot 5 and a portion of Lot 6 was developed with a 3,021 square foot office warehouse. The property is currently developed as a Metal Recycling Center. The subject property was platted as established in the original 36 square mile city plat.

                     

Topography:  The property does not include any abnormal physical features such as slope or inclusion in a floodplain.

 

Adjacent Base Zoning and Land Uses

Direction:  North, East, West

Current Base Zoning:  I-1

Current Land Uses:  Vacant, Welding Shop, Vacant

 

Direction:  South

Current Base Zoning:  MF-33

Current Land Uses:  Single Family Residential

 

Overlay and Special District Information:  All surrounding properties carry the "AHOD" Airport Hazard Overlay District, due to their proximity to an airport or approach path.  The "AHOD" does not restrict permitted uses, but can require additional review of construction plans by both the Development Services Department and the Federal Aviation Administration.

 

Transportation

Thoroughfare:  Culebra Road

Existing Character:  Primary Arterial, Type A; two lanes each direction divided by turn lanes and sidewalks on both sides.

Proposed Changes:  None known

 

Thoroughfare:  West Laurel

Existing Character:  Local, Type A; one lane each direction

Proposed Changes:  None known

 

Public Transit:  The nearest VIA bus route to the subject property is the 82, 88, 282 and 288, which operate along Culebra.

 

Traffic Impact:  A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is not required.  The traffic generated by the proposed development does not exceed the threshold requirements.

 

Parking Information:  Off-street vehicle parking requirements are typically determined by the type of use and building size.  The rezoning application is an existing development with parking.

 

ISSUE:

None.

 

 

 

ALTERNATIVES:

Denial of the requested zoning change would result in the subject property retaining the present zoning district designation.

 

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff and Zoning Commission (8-0) recommend Approval.

 

Criteria for Review:  According to Section 35-421, zoning amendments shall be based on the approval criteria below.

 

1.  Consistency: 

The property is not located within any of the adopted Neighborhood or Sector Plan. The requested “I-2” base zoning district is consistent with the surrounding commercial development pattern fronting a major thoroughfare.

 

2.  Adverse Impacts on Neighboring Lands: 

Staff has found no evidence of likely adverse impacts on neighboring land in relation to this zoning change request.

 

3.  Suitability as Presently Zoned: 

Both the existing “I-1” base zoning district and the proposed “I-2” zoning district is appropriate for the subject property.

 

4.  Health, Safety and Welfare: 

Staff has found no indication of likely adverse effects on the public health, safety, or welfare.

 

5.  Public Policy: 

The request does not appear to conflict with any public policy objective.

 

6.  Size of Tract: 

The subject property is 0.746 of an acre in size, which accommodates the existing development with existing space for parking.

 

7.  Other Factors: 

The purpose of the Specific Use Authorization is to provide for certain uses which, because of their unique characteristics or potential impacts on adjacent land uses, are not generally permitted in certain zoning districts as a matter of right, but with may be, under the right set of circumstances and conditions be acceptable in certain specific locations.

 

The applicant was denied a non-conforming use based on the following facts:

                     During the time of established use the code allowed for indoor processing and storage. The existing use operated outdoor processing and storage. 

                     In addition, the denial included the fact the use expanded its outdoor operation across two additional lots.

Therefore the applicant was required to apply for a change in zoning.