DEPARTMENT: Development Services
DEPARTMENT HEAD: Michael Shannon
COUNCIL DISTRICTS IMPACTED: 2
SUBJECT:
Zoning Case Z2017251
SUMMARY:
Current Zoning: "R-6 AHOD" Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District
Requested Zoning: "IDZ AHOD" Infill Development Zone Airport Hazard Overlay District with uses permitted for two (2) Residential Single-Family Dwellings
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Zoning Commission Hearing Date: October 3, 2017. This case is continued from the September 19, 2017 Zoning hearing.
Case Manager: Daniel Hazlett, Planner
Property Owner: TST Mann LLC
Applicant: Michele Debs
Representative: Michele Debs
Location: 302 East Carson Street
Legal Description: North 105 feet of Lot 8, Block A, NCB 486
Total Acreage: 0.1711
Notices Mailed
Owners of Property within 200 feet: 31
Registered Neighborhood Associations within 200 feet: Government Hill Neighborhood Association
Applicable Agencies: None.
Property Details
Property History: The subject property was included in the original 36 square miles of the City of San Antonio and was zoned “D” Apartment District. The “D” converted to the “MF-33” Multi-Family District with the adoption of the 2001 Unified Development Code (Ordinance 93881, dated May 3, 2001). The property was a part of a large area rezone, where the property was downzoned from “MF-33” to the current “R-6” base zoning district, which was established by Ordinance 2010-11-04-0971, dated November 4, 2010.
Topography: The property does not include any abnormal physical features such as slope or incursion in a flood plain.
Adjacent Base Zoning and Land Uses
Direction: North
Current Base Zoning: “R-6”
Current Land Uses: Single-Family Residence
Direction: East
Current Base Zoning: “R-6”
Current Land Uses: Single-Family Residence
Direction: South
Current Base Zoning: “R-6”
Current Land Uses: Vacant Lot
Direction: West
Current Base Zoning: “R-6”
Current Land Uses: Single-Family Residence
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: East Carson Street
Existing Character: Local Street
Proposed Changes: None Known
Thoroughfare: North Olive Street
Existing Character: Local Street
Proposed Changes: None Known
Public Transit: VIA bus route 20 is within walking distance of the subject property.
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: The “IDZ” Infill Development Zone District waives off-street vehicle parking requirements.
ISSUE:
None.
ALTERNATIVES:
Denial of the requested zoning change would result in the subject properties retaining the present zoning district designations. The current “R-6” Residential Single-Family District accommodates single-family dwelling (detached) with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet and a minimum lot width of 50 feet, as well as, a foster family home, and public/private school.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
PROXIMITY TO REGIONAL CENTER/PREMIUM TRANSIT CORRIDOR:
The subject property is located within a ½ of a mile of the Midtown Regional Center and it is also located within a ½ of a mile of the New Braunfels Avenue Premium Transit Corridor.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff recommends Approval.
Criteria for Review: According to Section 35-421, zoning amendments shall be based on the approval criteria below.
1. Consistency:
The subject property is located within the Government Hill Community Plan and is currently designated as “Medium Density Residential” in the future land use component of the plan. The requested “IDZ” base zoning district is consistent with the future land use designation.
2. Adverse Impacts on Neighboring Lands:
Staff finds no evidence of likely adverse impacts on neighboring lands in relation to this zoning change request. The proposed rezoning to “IDZ” for two single-family units does not negatively impact the neighboring properties.
3. Suitability as Presently Zoned:
The current “R-6” base zoning district is appropriate for the surrounding area. The neighborhood has a mix of zoning from “R-6” to “RM-5” and “C-2” respectively.
4. Health, Safety and Welfare:
Staff has found no indication of likely adverse effects on the public health, safety, or welfare. The zoning change will not pose a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents within the area. It will add needed housing options in close proximity to downtown San Antonio.
5. Public Policy:
The rezoning request does not appear to conflict with the land use goals and strategies of the Government Hill Neighborhood Plan. Specifically, the land use designation of “Medium Density Residential” allows for the following type of development:
- Medium Density Residential includes a variety of detached or attached dwellings, including single-family homes, townhomes and zero lot line configurations, duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes. Recommended development densities in Medium Density Residential should not exceed 18 dwelling units per acre.
6. Size of Tract:
The property is 0.1711of an acre which should reasonably accommodate the proposed development of two single-family residences.
7. Other Factors:
Infill Development Zone (IDZ) provides flexible standards for developments. IDZ is to encourage and facilitate development on vacant, bypassed lands, or the redevelopment of underutilized buildings of structures, within existing built-up areas. IDZ may be approved as either a base zoning district or an overlay zoning district. Standards required in an IDZ district shall apply to either IDZ base zoning or the IDZ overlay district except where otherwise specifically stated. Typically IDZ gives flexibility to parking requirements, lots sizes, and setbacks.
The requested “IDZ” base zoning is supported by the following criteria:
• The applicant’s request meets the Master Plan’s Policy for Growth Management - Policy 1g, because it makes physical improvements on an inner city property encouraging redevelopment and infill development.
• The applicant’s request the Master Plan’s Policy for Urban Design - Policy 4b, because it incentivizes property to encourage development in underutilized urban areas.