|
Case Number: |
A-17-061 |
|
Applicant: |
Isrrael L. Castro |
|
Owner: |
Isrrael L. Castro |
|
Council District: |
6 |
|
Location: |
8903 Rich Trace Street |
|
Legal Description: |
Lot 27, Block 1, NCB 17643 |
|
Zoning: |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
|
Case Manager: |
Shepard Beamon, Senior Planner |
Request
A request for a 15 foot variance from the 20 foot platted front setback, as described in Section 35-516 (o), to allow a carport to be five (5) feet from the front property line.
Executive Summary
The property is located within the Richland Hills Unit-1 subdivision, which was established October 22, 1980 and includes a 20 foot platted front setback. The existing carport was built without permits, and was cited by Code Enforcement for failure to obtain permits and encroachment into the front setback. The home’s front façade measures about 28 feet from the front property line and the addition of the carport encroaches into the front setback 15 feet.
Subject Property Zoning/Land Use
|
Existing Zoning |
Existing Use |
|
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
|
Orientation |
Existing Zoning District(s) |
Existing Use |
|
North |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
South |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
East |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwellings |
|
West |
“R-6 AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association
The property is within the boundaries of the West/Southwest Sector Plan and currently designated Suburban Tier in the future land use component of the plan. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Tara Neighborhood Association and they were 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 setback requirements to ensure equal access to air and light and to reduce the threat of fire. The variance from the front setback is not contrary to the public interest as the carport does not impose any immediate fire threat to adjacent properties, or increase water runoff. Further, the carport does not interfere with Clear Vision requirements, as the property is located within a cul-de-sac.
2. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.
The special condition present in this case is the 20 foot platted front setback, which restricts any development in the front of the home. A literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in the removal of the structure.
3. By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.
The spirit of the ordinance will be respected in that the carport does not harm any adjacent properties as the carport respects the established side setbacks and does not interfere with the Clear Vision requirements. Denial of the request would not result in substantial justice for the property owner.
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-6 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.
The carport contributes to increased protection of the owner’s vehicles. The location of the carport also allows for maintenance without trespass and will not increase water run-off on the adjacent properties. Staff observed other carports within the subdivision with similar design. The carport does not detract from the character of surrounding 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.
Due to the platted setback and the configuration of the lot, additional parking with covered protection would not be possible on any other portions of the property, which is no fault of the owner. The plight of the owner of the property is not merely financial in nature.
Alternative to Applicant’s Request
Denial of the variance request would result in the removal of the carport.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the requested variances in A-17-061 based on the following findings of fact:
|
1. |
The carport does not encroach into the side setback or on the public right-of-way, does not increase water runoff, and does not interfere with Clear Vision; |
|
2. |
The carport does not detract from the character of the neighborhood. |
|
|
|