TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Demetrios Moutos - Planner I
DATE: September 10, 2024
RE:
Title
A24-35. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact: Variance to reduce the minimum required lot size, minimum lot width, rear setback, and side setback for a lot in the Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10) zoning district, located at 0 McRae Drive (REID # 0427432094000)
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 4.5 - Ensure a place for people to live in great neighborhoods.
Executive Summary:
Thomas Michael Lecka, owner of a residential property at 0 McRae Drive in Fayetteville, has applied for a variance to reduce the minimum lot size, lot width, and setbacks for his undeveloped, Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10) zoned property. The requested variances include reducing the lot size from 10,000 to 7,793 square feet, the lot width from 75 to 40 feet, the rear setback from 35 to 31 feet, and the side setback from 10 to 5 feet.
On August 13, 2024, the Zoning Commission held an Evidentiary Hearing regarding this case. After receiving all evidence and testimony, the Commission voted 5-0 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 condition of approval may be authorized by variance.
Background:
Applicant: Michael Lecka
Owner: Michael Lecka
Requested Action: Reduce lot size, lot width, and setbacks in SF-10
Zoning District: Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10)
Property Address: 0 McRae Drive (0427432094000)
Size: 0.21 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Vacant/Wooded
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• North: SF-10 - Single Family Residence
• South: SF-6 - Single Family Residence
• East: SF-10 - Single Family Residence
• West: SF-6 - Single Family Residence
Postcards Mailed: 34
Issues/Analysis:
Property History and Request:
Thomas Michael Lecka acquired the subject property from Sanjay Khazanchi on June 5, 2023. The last plat for the property was recorded in January 1953. The applicant proposes to recombine two existing lots, one of which is non-compliant, to create two buildable lots. While one lot meets the minimum size requirement, the second does not, prompting the need for a variance to allow development on the undersized lot. Additionally, a property line adjustment reducing the lot width further requires a variance from the minimum width standard. To accommodate a future residence on the smaller lot, the applicant is also requesting variances for side and rear setbacks.
Zoning Standards and Variance Requests:
The SF-10 zoning district's dimensional standards, per Section 30-3.D.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance, require a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, lot width of 75 feet, side setbacks of 10 feet, and rear setbacks of 35 feet. The applicant seeks to reduce the lot area to 7,793 square feet, the lot width to 40 feet, the rear setback to 31 feet, and the side setback to 5 feet, as shown on the site plan.
Insufficient Justification for Variance:
A variance cannot be justified by the presence of other nonconforming or conforming land uses, requests for prohibited uses, or claims of economic hardship or potential profitability.
Subsequent Development:
The applicant plans to build a house on the property in the future.
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 “Reducing the 10 feet from 75 to 65 which gives both neighbors symmetrical distance in their backyards, which makes it fair to their property. And the extra five feet in the new backyard request so that the future home can be five feet deeper into the 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 “I want to keep each lot fair and symmetrical to each adjacent property.”
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 “Referring back to the initial variance, this must be done to ensure all three lots are symmetrical, buildable, and aesthetically pleasing.”
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 variance would increase the symmetry and beauty of the properties on this portion of McRae.”
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 “This variance will ensure that everybody’s yard will be symmetrical and aesthetically pleasing.”
Budget Impact:
There are no anticipated budgetary implications at this time.
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. Subject Property Photos
7. Surrounding Property Photos
8. Site Survey