TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Will Deaton, MPA, AICP, CFM, CZO - Planning & Zoning Manager
Heather Eckhardt, CZO - Planner II
DATE: December 10, 2024
RE:
Title
A24-48. Variance request for building setbacks located at the southeast corner of Hay Street and Myrover Street, owned by North Carolina History Center on the Civil War, Emancipation and Reconstruction Foundation.
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 2.1: To ensure a diverse City tax base
Goal 4: Highly Desirable Place to Live, Work, and Recreate
• Objective 4.5: To ensure a place for people to live in great neighborhoods
Executive Summary:
The applicant is requesting a one-foot setback on the east side of the subject property, adjacent to the Martin Luther King Jr Freeway. The ordinance would require a 25-foot setback.
The subject property is the future site of the North Carolina History Center on the Civil War, Emancipation, and Reconstruction.
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: NCCCWER Foundation
Applicant: Vines Architecture
Requested Action: Reduce minimum front yard setback from 25 feet to 1 foot
Zoning District: Office and Institutional (OI)
Property Address: 12 parcels at the corner of Hay St and Myrover St
Size: 3.19 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Arsenal Park
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• North: MR-5 and LC - Convenience store with gas sales and a residential structure
• South: OI - Remainder of Arsenal Park
• East: MR-5 - Single family residential on the other side of MLK Jr Fwy
• West: OI - Variety of office spaces
Letters Mailed: 34
Issues/Analysis:
The subject properties are located at the southeastern corner of Hay Street and Myrover Street, encompassing 12 parcels within the existing Arsenal Park site. The Fayetteville Arsenal, constructed between 1838 and 1856, has a remaining portion located in Arsenal Park, which is currently undergoing a three-phase redevelopment project. Phases one and two involved relocating three historic homes and constructing a pavilion. Phase three involves the construction of the North Carolina History Center on the Civil War, Emancipation, and Reconstruction.
Given the project's size, location between four roads, goal of preserving old-growth trees, and the need to preserve the remaining Fayetteville Arsenal ruins, the proposed history center is planned along the easternmost property line, adjacent to the MLK Freeway. The Unified Development Ordinance requires a 25-foot front yard setback along this property line, but the applicant is requesting a reduction to 1 foot.
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 reduce the minimum front yard setback from 25 feet to 1 foot. This variance would allow for the construction of the North Carolina Center on the Civil War, Emancipation, and Reconstruction.
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 “The design for this History Center navigates several circumstances:
• Site is surrounded by four roads/right of ways, of which setbacks at Myrover, Hay, and Branson Streets are maintained.
• It sets back from archaeologically sensitive areas covering a large portion of the site, giving visitors space to approach visible ruins of the Fayetteville Arsenal and experience historic interpretive context in the landscape.
• Preserves the existing Arsenal Park and mature trees, leaving open plots of land for community enjoyment.
• Meets minimum parking requirements with lots at the north and south ends of the site as well as parallel street parking.
• Maintains a single story structure while still maxing out site square footage to avoid feeling out of scale in the neighborhood.
Alongside these constraints, adhering to the current setback requirements on the east property line further compresses the usable site area, leaving the east corner encroachment to be the only feasible option for the structure. A variance would accommodate these challenges while still maintaining the overall spirit of the zoning law.
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 presence of historic Arsenal ruins on the property creates unique site-specific challenges. These ruins, being one of the few surviving examples from this time period in the U.S., are not only significant in terms of heritage preservation but also restrict the available buildable area. The need to preserve these ruins and integrate them into the site design imposes constraints on the location and layout of any new construction. This results in fewer design options and necessitates creative solutions, such as requesting a variance, to make the project feasible.
The decision to avoid extensive site development and maintain the nature of Arsenal Park additionally contributes to the difficulty in meeting strict ordinance requirements. Preserving the park's character requires a design that avoids interruption of the natural landscape, resulting in even more restricted buildable area.
The site being surrounded by four roads as well as Arsenal ruins, mature trees, and the preservation goals that come with them are unique to this site and do not represent conditions common to neighboring properties or the general public. The practical difficulties arising from these site-specific circumstances justify the need for a variance and are not a result of personal actions by 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 “This design follows all setback requirements other than the east side lot. The east one foot setback is needed specifically to address a localized issue-the corner of the building encroaching on the setback at the east edge (see attached site diagram). At its closest, this roof corner is 5’ 10” from the east property line. Allowing the corner to encroach slightly would enable reasonable use of the site and minimize the impact.
This request is not for a blanket exemption but a minor adjustment to accommodate the proposed layout.”
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 “The building’s compliance with 25-foot setbacks on the neighborhood adjacent north, south, and west borders preserves the intent of the ordinance by preserving buffers from roads and neighboring structures. This maintains public safety, privacy, and the consistency in city planning that the ordinance aims to achieve.
Along the east edge, the presence of a 50-foot Department of Transportation right-of-way creates a substantial buffer between the proposed structure and the Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway. This buffer effectively serves the same purpose as a setback, maintaining a safe distance from the highway.
The east one foot setback variance allows the building to make a small adjustment on the east side without compromising the intended separation between structures or intruding on nearby residents, as the adjacent area in question is unoccupied space rather than residential property. It enables efficient use of the land while preserving Arsenal Park's character by avoiding overdevelopment and minimizing landscape impact. The variance aligns with the ordinance's intent of balanced, orderly development."
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 “The granting of the east one foot setback variance assures public safety and welfare while promoting substantial justice. The site’s proximity to the Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway creates a natural buffer through a 50-foot Department of Transportation right-of-way that sits just outside the property line on the east edge. This wide right-of-way, with its steep topography and dense woods, enhances safety by providing significant separation between the proposed building and the highway. The east side of the building, which approaches this right-of-way, is not intended for public access. This area is only accessed by maintenance personnel, minimizing potential safety concerns.
Granting the variance promotes substantial justice by allowing the landowner to make reasonable use of the property without creating unnecessary burdens. It supports both the intended use of the land and the preservation of surrounding natural features. This variance request ensures that the needs of the property owner are met while also maintaining the public's interest in safety and welfare.”
Budget Impact:
There is no immediate budgetary impact.
Options:
The Board’s Authority: The board has the authority to approve or deny the request and must base its decision on the answers to the following five required findings of fact:
If a member believes that the evidence presented is substantial, competent, and sufficient to meet the required findings of fact then the member may make a motion to approve the variance and the members must state all of the following five findings of fact along with the evidence that was presented to satisfy each finding.
If the members cannot find specific supporting facts under all five findings of fact, the members must consider a motion of denial. A motion of denial should indicate which of the five (5) of the findings of fact cannot be met.
The board can also place reasonable conditions on any variance approval.
If a member wishes to make a motion to approve the variance they should make a brief statement that recaps the evidence showing each of the five findings of fact. Any discussion by the Board following a motion may include a recap of the evidence supporting each of the five (5) factual findings.
Possible Motions and Factual Findings:
Motion to approve a variance to reduce the required front yard setback to 1 foot.
Findings of Fact Required to Approve this Request:
1. Strict application of the Ordinance requirements results in practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships as shown by the following evidence:
______________________________________________________________________
2. 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:
______________________________________________________________________
3. The Variance is the minimum action that will make possible a reasonable use of land or structures as shown by the following evidence:
_____________________________________________________________________
4. The Variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance and preserves its spirit as shown by the following evidence:
______________________________________________________________________
5. In the granting of the Variance, the public safety and welfare have been assured and substantial justice has been done as shown by the following evidence:
______________________________________________________________________
Motion to approve the variance(s) as requested but with added conditions
Findings of Fact Required to Approve this Request with added conditions:
1. Strict application of the Ordinance requirements results in practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships as shown by the following evidence:
___________________________________________________________________
2. 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:
___________________________________________________________________
3. The Variance is the minimum action that will make possible a reasonable use of land or structures as shown by the following evidence:
___________________________________________________________________
4. The Variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance and preserves its spirit as shown by the following evidence:
___________________________________________________________________
5. In the granting of the Variance, the public safety and welfare have been assured and substantial justice has been done as shown by the following evidence:
___________________________________________________________________
Motion to deny the variance as requested.
Findings of Fact Statements Required to Deny this Request:
1. There is not sufficient evidence that the strict application of the Ordinance requirements results in practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships as shown by the following evidence:
________________________________________________________________
2. There is not 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:
_______________________________________________________________
3. There is not 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:
_______________________________________________________________
4. There is not 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:
_______________________________________________________________
5. There is not 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:
_______________________________________________________________
Recommended Action:
N/A
Attachments:
1. Application & Site Plan
2. Aerial Notification Map
3. Zoning Map
4. Land Use Map
5. Subject Property Photos
6. Surrounding Property Photos