TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Heather Eckhardt, CZO - Planner II
DATE: February 13, 2024
RE:
Title
A24-05. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact - Variance to increase maximum setbacks, located at 522 Person Street & two unaddressed parcels (REID 0437923505000, 0437923367000, and 0437923396000), and being the property of Second Baptist Church Inc, represented by Gordon Rose of Gradient, PLLC.
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
2 - Malik Davis
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Strategic Operating Plan FY 2022
Goals 2027
Goal 2: Responsive City Government Supporting a Diverse and Viable Economy
• Objective 2.2 - Invest in community places to ensure revitalization and increase quality of life
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 is requesting a variance to increase the maximum corner side setback from 20 feet to 80 feet.
Zoning Commission approved the request at the January 17, 2024 meeting.
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:
Owner: Second Baptist Church Inc
Applicant: Gordon Rose of Gradient, PLLC
Requested Action: Increase maximum corner side yard setback
Zoning District: Downtown 2 (DT-2)
Property Address: 522 Person Street and two unaddressed parcels
Size: .9 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Religious institution
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• North: DT-2 - Office building
• South: DT-2 - Park and vacant commercial building
• East: DT-2 - Vacant lots
• West: DT-2 - Office building
Letters Mailed: 22
Issues/Analysis:
The subject property currently has three structures which were constructed between 1970 and 2003. The School of Hope, a private school, currently occupies the building at the center of the site (111 Burns Street). They would like to construct a separate building on the site specifically for the school.
The subject property is currently zoned Downtown 2 (DT-2). The Downtown zoning districts place maximum front and corner side yard setbacks instead of the minimum setback required for most other zoning districts. This is intended to bring structures to the street and contribute to the pedestrian feel of these areas. However, the proposed development would be located along Burns Street which is much more vehicle oriented than other streets in the DT-2 zoning district.
Due to the shape of the subject property and existing site conditions (parking lot), the maximum setback would require the removal of existing parking and create an inaccessible and undeveloped area at the rear of the property.
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 is requesting to increase the maximum corner side setback from 20 feet to 80 feet. This would allow for the construction of a new structure to house an existing private school. If the variance is approved, the site will be reviewed by the Technical Review Committee to ensure that the site meets the requirements of the Unified Development Ordinance.
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 “1. Maintaining a maximum setback of 20 feet eliminates some of the existing parking spaces and renders the eastern portion of the property as essentially unusable.
2. The rear portion of this property is narrow such that, if the building is located in accordance with the ordinance, the rear (eastern) portion of the property is inaccessible.
3. This variance will make possible a reasonable use of the property and maintains the current use of the existing parking lot.”
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 “The southeastern portion of this property is narrow such that the building cannot be rotated or relocated in such way as to comply with the maximum building setback without eliminating parking spaces and rendering that portion of the property as essentially inaccessible and unusable.”
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 “By approving this variance, the building can be located in such a way as to make the best use of the property and maintain existing parking spaces.”
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 “This building will be located off of a narrow side street (Burns Street) and does not negatively impact the harmony of the surrounding parcels.”
5. There is sufficient evidence that in the granting of the Variance, the public safety and welfare has been assured and substantial justice has been done as shown by the following evidence:
The applicant states “By approving this variance the public safety and welfare will not be negatively affected.”
Budget Impact:
There is no immediate budgetary impact.
Options:
1. Approval of Findings of Fact
2. Approval with corrections
3. Remand to staff
Recommended Action:
Approval of Findings of Fact as presented.
Attachments:
1. Application
2. Aerial Notification Map
3. Zoning Map
4. Land Use Map
5. Subject Property Photos
6. Surrounding Property Photos
7. Site Plans - UDO & Proposed
8. Order of Findings of Fact