|
Case Number: |
A-16-170 |
|
Applicant: |
Armando Alvarado |
|
Owner: |
Armando Alvarado |
|
Council District: |
1 |
|
Location: |
331 Nassau Drive |
|
Legal Description: |
Lot 17, Block 25, NCB 9747 |
|
Zoning: |
“R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
|
Case Manager: |
Shepard Beamon, Planner |
A request for 1) a 25 foot variance from the 25 foot platted front setback, as described in Section 35-516 (a), to allow a carport to be located on the front property line and 2) a five foot variance from the minimum five foot side setback, as described in Section 35-310.01, to allow a carport to be on the side property line.
Executive Summary
The subject property is located in the Wonder Home Addition subdivision, which was platted in 1950 and includes a 25 foot platted front setback. The applicant recently had a carport built without obtaining a permit and was cited by Code Enforcement. The carport is made of metal, has gutters to direct water runoff towards the street, and was constructed on both the side and front property line. The applicant has obtained a signed written letter of support from the most affected adjacent property owner, who also has a carport.
Subject Property Zoning/Land Use
|
Existing Zoning |
Existing Use |
|
“R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
|
Orientation |
Existing Zoning District(s) |
Existing Use |
|
North |
“R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
South |
“R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
East |
“R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
West |
“R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association
The property is within the boundaries of the Greater Dellview Area Plan and has a future land use designation of Low Density Residential. The subject property is within the Dellview Area Neighborhood Association. As such, the neighborhood association was 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 public interest is represented by setbacks that help to ensure that we have uniform, safe development within the City of San Antonio. A carport built on both the front and side property lines is contrary to the public interest as it does not establish uniformity and conflicts with the overall appearance of the surrounding properties.
2. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.
Staff was unable to find a special condition that would require the applicant to eliminate the front setback. The applicant could construct a carport that meets the side setback minimum requirement and is not directly on the front property line.
3. By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.
Granting the variance will not result in substantial justice as there is not a property related hardship that requires the applicant to build on the front and side property line.
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 “R-4 AHOD” Residential Single-Family 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.
As there are some existing carports in the neighborhood, the carport in question does not meet the setback requirements, thus altering the appearance of the neighborhood.
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.
Staff was unable to find a unique circumstance or property related hardships which would require the applicant to locate the carport on both the side and front property lines.
Alternative to Applicant’s Request
The applicant could remove the carport.
The applicant could amend the plat.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends DENIAL of variance requests in A-16-170 based on the following findings of fact:
|
|
|
1. There is not a special condition or property related hardship in this case; 2. The carport detracts from the character and uniformity of the district; 3. The applicant could construct the carport to meet the side setback. |
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the alternate recommendation of a 20 foot variance from the 25 foot platted front setback to allow a carport to be five feet from the front property line based on the following findings of fact:
|
|
|
1. Approval of the alternate recommendation will still allow the owner to have a carport that provides adequate coverage for his vehicles. |