|
Case Number: |
A-18-092 |
|
Applicant: |
Jason Tyson |
|
Owner: |
Carol and Steve Spears |
|
Council District: |
10 |
|
Location: |
2922 Albin Drive |
|
Legal Description: |
Lots 3, 6, 18 & the West 70 Feet of Lot 4, Block 2, NCB 11838 |
|
Zoning: |
“NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
|
Case Manager: |
Debora Gonzalez, Senior Planner |
Request
A request for 1) a special exception, as described in Section 35-514, to allow an 8’ tall solid screen fence along the side property lines and 2) a request for a variance from the Clear Vision standards, as described in Section 35-514, to allow a fence within the Clear Vision field.
Executive Summary
The subject property is located at 2922 Albin Drive, approximately 280 feet east of Seidel Road. The applicant is seeking a special exception to allow a fence to be as tall as 8 feet along the side property lines. The subject property has had similar fence height since 2007 on both sides of the subject property. During field visits, the staff noted that the fence is in violation of the Clear Vision field. The fence Clear Vision area must be free of obstruction for the first 15 feet; the applicant’s fence is 9 feet away from the street curb.
|
Existing Zoning |
Existing Use |
|
“NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
|
Orientation |
Existing Zoning District(s) |
Existing Use |
|
North |
“NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
South |
“NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
East |
“NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
|
West |
“NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District |
Single-Family Dwelling |
Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association
The subject property is within the boundaries of the Northeast Inner Loop Neighborhood Plan and is currently designated Low Density Residential in the future land use component of the plan. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Oak Park Northwood Neighborhood Association. As such, they were notified and asked to comment.
Criteria for Review
According to Section 35-482(h) of the UDC, in order for special exception to be granted, Board of Adjustment must find that the request meets each of the five following conditions:
A. The special exception will be in harmony with the spirit and purpose of the chapter.
The spirit of the chapter is intended to provide for reasonable protections to property owners and to establish a sense of community within our neighborhoods. The request for an 8 foot tall front yard fence is inconsistent within the community. Staff finds that this request is not in harmony with the spirit and purpose of the chapter.
B. The public welfare and convenience will be substantially served.
Staff is unable to establish a special condition that would allow a request for a variance from the Clear Vision standards.
C. The neighboring property will not be substantially injured by such proposed use.
An 8 foot tall solid screen fence does not observe the intent of the code. Neighbors on either side of the subject property have views from their driveways obscured by the fence.
D. The special exception will not alter the essential character of the district and location in which the property for which the special exception is sought.
Although the side yard fence has existed since 2007; it lost its non-conforming status when it was removed. Any new fence should meet the code.
E. The special exception will not weaken the general purpose of the district or the regulations herein established for the specific district.
The property is located within the “NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation Airport Hazard Overlay District and permits the current use of a single-family home. The fencing regulations are established to ensure consistency within our communities, and it is difficult to establish how granting the requested special exceptions will not weaken that purpose. The fence is significantly taller that the code permits and blocks views from adjacent driveways.
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, a portion of the fence is in violation of the Clear Vision field which creates unsafe conditions. Staff finds that the variance request is contrary to the public interest.
2. Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.
Staff is unable to establish a special condition that will allow the fence to be 9 feet away from the street curb instead of 15 feet, in violation of the Clear Vision field.
3. By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.
The spirit of the ordinance is the intent of the code, rather than the strict letter of the law. In this case the intent of the code is to allow property owners to secure their property while still proving for safe conditions for motorists and pedestrians. A 9 foot setback instead of a 15 foot setback does not observe the intent of the code.
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 “NP-8 AHOD” Neighborhood Preservation 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 fence obstructs views from both adjacent driveways which is likely to harm adjacent property.
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 cannot identify any unique circumstance that warrants the fence to be 9 feet away from the street curb instead of 15 feet.
Alternative to Applicant’s Request
The applicant would need to adhere to the permitted fence heights as described in Section 35-514.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends DENIAL of the special exception in A-18-092 based on the following findings of fact:
1. Allowing the 8 feet solid tall fence will create inconsistency and alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
Staff recommends DENIAL of the variance in A-18-092 based on the following findings of fact:
1. Allowing the 9 feet distance from the curb will harm adjacent property owner from a safe view to the street.