city of San Antonio


Some of our meetings have moved. View additional meetings.

File #: 19-4809   
Type: Zoning Case
In control: Board of Adjustment
On agenda: 6/17/2019
Posting Language: BOA-19-10300066: A request by Scott Thomas for a 1’6” variance from the 15’ rear setback requirement to allow an attached addition to be 13’ 6” away from the rear property line, located at 2907 Barrel Oak. Staff recommends Approval. (Council District 8) (Mercedes Rivas, Planner, (210) 207-0215, Mercedes.Rivas2@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)
Attachments: 1. BOA 19-10300066 Attachments
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
No records to display.

Case Number:

BOA-19-10300066

Applicant:

Scott Thomas

Owner:

Scott Thomas

Council District:

8

Location:

2907 Barrel Oak

Legal Description:

Lot 7, Block 17, NCB 18028

Zoning:

“R-6 MLOD-1 MLR-2 AHOD” Residential-Single Family Camp Bullis Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District

Case Manager:

Mercedes Rivas, Planner

Request

A request for a 1’6” variance from the 15’ rear setback requirement, as described in Section 35-516(e), to allow an attached addition to be 13’ 6” away from the rear property line.

Executive Summary

The subject property is located at 2907 Barrel Oak. The applicant is seeking permission to construct an addition located at the rear of the existing home to add more space to his dining room and kitchen area. The addition of the subject property will be aligned with both sides of the existing home and the existing patio in the rear yard. Further, the odd shape of the lot means that the owner has limited construction options. The subject property is surrounded by other residential properties.

 

Code Enforcement History

 

No Code Enforcement history exists on the property.

 

Permit History

 

The property owner is seeking variance to allow for a permit to be issued.

Subject Property Zoning/Land Use

 

Existing Zoning

Existing Use

“R-6 MLOD-1 MLR-2 AHOD” Residential-Single Family Camp Bullis Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District

Single-Family Dwelling

 

Surrounding Zoning/Land Use

 

Orientation

Existing Zoning District(s)

Existing Use

North

“R-6 MLOD-1 MLR-2 AHOD” Residential-Single Family Camp Bullis Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District

Single-Family Dwelling

South

“R-6 MLOD-1 MLR-2 AHOD” Residential-Single Family Camp Bullis Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District

Single-Family Dwelling

East

“R-6 MLOD-1 MLR-2 AHOD” Residential-Single Family Camp Bullis Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District

Single-Family Dwelling

West

“R-6 MLOD-1 MLR-2 AHOD” Residential-Single Family Camp Bullis Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District

Single-Family Dwelling

 

Comprehensive Plan Consistency/Neighborhood Association

 

The property is located within the boundaries of the San Antonio International Airport Vicinity Plan and is currently designated as “Low Density Mixed Use” in the future land use component of the plan. The subject property is located within the Oak Meadow Neighborhood Association. As such, they were notified and asked to comment. 

 

Street Classification

 

Barrel Oak is classified as a local.

 

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 the minimum separation between homes to allow quiet enjoyment of outdoor space. The addition will align with both sides of the existing home and the existing patio located in the rear yard. The addition will be in harmony with the neighboring properties. Staff finds that the request is not contrary to the public interest. 

 

2.                     Due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship.

 

Literal enforcement of the ordinance would not permit the owner of the property to expand upon the existing home as proposed. The structure would need to be redesigned.

 

3.                     By granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed and substantial justice will be done.

 

The intent of rear setbacks is to create an open area without crowding of structures and to establish uniform development standards to protect the rights of property owners. The reduction of the rear building setback line will not significantly disrupt uniformity and will not injure the rights of adjacent property owners.

 

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 variance will not authorize the operation of a use other than those uses specifically authorized in the zoning 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 requested variance will not be visible from the public right of way or alter the essential character of the district. The reduction of the rear building setback line will not produce water runoff on adjacent properties and will not require trespass to maintain the structure.

 

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.

 

The unique circumstance present in the case is that the addition does meet the rear building setback requirement. Further, this setback issue is not merely financial in nature as the lot is shaped oddly.

 

Alternative to Applicant’s Request

 

Denial of the variance request would result in the owner having to meet the required 15’ rear setback.

 

Staff Recommendation

 

Staff recommends APPROVAL of variance in BOA-19-10300066, based on the following findings of fact:

 

1.                      The variance is unlikely to harm adjacent properties, and;

2.                     The addition will have to comply with required construction codes.