TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Demetrios Moutos - Planner I
DATE: April 9, 2024
RE:
Title
A24-14. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact: Variance to increase the maximum front yard setback for two storage/maintenance buildings at the rear of the property located at 1204 Walter Reed Rd., totaling 13.21 acres ± and being the property of Cumberland County Hospital System Inc.
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
5 - Lynne Greene
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Strategic Operating Plan FY 2022
Goals 2027
Goal 2: Responsive City Government Supporting a Diverse and Viable Economy
• Objective 2.4 - To sustain a favorable development climate to encourage business growth.
Goal 4: Desirable Place to Live, Work, and Recreate
• Objective 4.5 - Ensure a place for people to live in great neighborhoods.
Executive Summary:
The applicant seeks a variance from the front yard setback requirement for two structures within the Hospital Area Overlay District (HAO).
On March 12, 2024, the Zoning Commission held an Evidentiary Hearing regarding this case. After receiving all evidence and testimony, the Commission voted 4-1 to approve the Variance application.
30.2.C.14 Variance:
The purpose of a variance is to allow certain deviations from the dimensional standards of this Ordinance (such as height, yard setback, lot coverage, or similar numeric standards) when the landowner demonstrates that, owing to special circumstances or conditions beyond the landowner's control (such as exceptional topographical conditions, narrowness, shallowness, or the shape of a specific parcel of land), the literal application of the standards would result in undue and unique hardship to the landowner and the deviation would not be contrary to the public interest.
Variances are to be sparingly exercised and only in rare instances or under exceptional circumstances to relieve undue and unique hardships to the landowner. No change in permitted uses or applicable conditions of approval may be authorized by variance.
Background:
Applicant: George Rose
Owner: Cumberland County Hospital System Inc.
Requested Action: Increase front yard “build to” line in HAO for two structures
Zoning District: Office and Institutional (OI) and Hospital Area Overlay (HAO)
Property Address: 1204 Walter Reed Road
Size: 13.21 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Parking lot and open space/wooded
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
North: OI - Medical Offices
South: OI - Medical Offices
East: OI - Medical Offices
West: SF-10 - Single Family Residential
Letters Mailed: 59
Issues/Analysis:
The subject property was granted to Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc. by the County of Cumberland, North Carolina on May 2nd, 2006. The most recent plat for the subject property was recorded on December 18th, 2003. (DB 7225-0436; PB 0110-0138)
While zoned OI (Office Institutional), the subject property resides within the hospital overlay district, which enforces a stricter 10-foot maximum setback requirement. The proposed project involves constructing two storage/maintenance buildings suitable for the rear portion of the property, strategically reserving the Walter Reed Road frontage for future office or medical clinic development.
Section 30-3.H.2.e.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance outlines the front yard “build to” line requirement in the HAO. The UDO reads as follows:
Front Yard “Build To” Line
The front façade of the principal building shall be located ten feet or less from the street right-of-way. A greater setback of up to 15 feet from the right-of-way edge may be approved in accordance with an Administrative Adjustment (see Section 30-2.C.16).
The applicant is requesting to increase the required setbacks for only the two storage/maintenance buildings, as shown on the site plan, to the following:
- Maximum Front: 800 feet
- Corner Side: No change
- Side: No change
- Rear: No change
Insufficient Justification for Variance
The following does not constitute grounds for a Variance:
1. The siting of other nonconforming or conforming uses of land or structures in the same or other districts;
2. The request for a particular use expressly, or by inference, prohibited in the district; or
3. Economic hardship or the fact that property may be utilized more profitably with a Variance.
Subsequent Development
The applicant intends to construct a series of office buildings that front the street in the future. Frontage on Walter Reed Road is to be reserved for office or medical clinic buildings.
The following findings are based on the responses submitted in the application by the applicant and the best available information about the proposal without the benefit of testimony provided at the evidentiary hearing.
Findings of Fact Statements as reviewed by the Planning Staff:
1. There is sufficient evidence that the strict application of the Ordinance requirements results in practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships as shown by the following evidence:
The applicant states “Hospital overlay district maximum setbacks not appropriate for storage/maintenance warehouse type buildings. Placing these structures on the front of the property would prevent future development of more appropriate medical office buildings along Walter Reed Road frontage.”
2. There is sufficient evidence that any practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from unique circumstances related to the land, and are not the result of the actions of the landowner as shown by the following evidence:
The applicant states “Setback requirements within the Hospital Overlay District create the hardship for this intended use and are not the result of any actions of the landowner.”
3. There is sufficient evidence that the Variance is the minimum action that will make possible a reasonable use of land or structures as shown by the following evidence:
The applicant states “Setback requirements within the Hospital Overlay District intended to force office-type buildings to the front of the property. Warehouse-type buildings are not appropriate for the street frontage and waiving the maximum setback is the minimum action that allows for proper placement of the proposed structures.”
4. There is sufficient evidence that the Variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance and preserves its spirit as shown by the following evidence:
The applicant states “Warehouse-type buildings are not appropriate for the street frontage and the maximum setback requirements within the Hospital Overlay District are intended for office-type buildings to be located along the front of the property. The variance allows for the warehouse buildings to be appropriately located on the rear of the property.”
5. There is sufficient evidence that in the granting of the Variance, public safety and welfare have been assured and substantial justice has been done as shown by the following evidence:
The applicant states “Warehouse buildings are more appropriate for the rear of the property and out of the public view, so the safety and welfare of the public are better served by the buildings not being located near the street.”
Budget Impact:
There is no immediate budgetary impact.
Options:
1. Approve Findings as submitted by staff.
2. Approve Findings with specific changes.
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends option 1 above.
Attachments:
1. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact
2. Application
3. Aerial Notification Map
4. Zoning Map
5. Land Use Map
6. Overlay Map
7. Subject Property Photos
8. Surrounding Property Photos
9. Site Survey