TO: Zoning Commission
THRU: Craig Harmon, Senior Planner, CZO
FROM: Thomas Cohen - Planner I
DATE: April 14, 2026
RE:Title
A26-14: Order of Approval: Findings of Fact for T&C Construction Group, LLC (Travis Hinnant, Applicant) for a variance in the setback requirements to allow for construction at 2421 Colgate Drive (042655813200)
Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
5 - Lynne Greene
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Goal I - Safe and Secure Community
• Objective 1.2 - To ensure traffic and pedestrian safety
• Objective 1.3 - To ensure low incidence of property and violent crime
Undeveloped and unmanaged land can be the source of neighborhood harm via vagrants, hostile wildlife, or a source of wildlife-centered road accidents on a curved road.
Goal II - Responsive City Government Supporting a Diverse & Viable Economy
• Objective 3.2 - To manage the City’s future growth and strategic land use
Additional properties connected to existing utility services generate property tax revenue with minimal additional infrastructure investment
Goal IV - Desirable Place to Live, Work, & Recreate
• Objective 4.5 - To ensure a place for people to live in great neighborhoods
A single-family home of like appearance can influence aesthetics and can be seen as more aesthetic than an undeveloped tract of land within a residential neighborhood.
Goal VI - Collaborative Citizen & Business Engagement Base
• Objective 6.2 - To ensure trust and confidence in City government through transparency and highquality customer service.
The case is quasi-judicial and requires public notice and standards are decided on using fact-based evidence which reinforces transparency and public confidence.
Executive Summary:
Applicant is requesting a variance in the setback requirements associated with the city’s UDO as it relates to detached single-family homes within the bounds of an SF-10 district - to allow the construction of a home to similar standards as neighboring property. Stated requirements are a 9ft and a 3.0ft adjustment to accommodate the western rear-corner and garage (front) respectively.
The Zoning Commission unanimously approved the variance on March 10, 2026.
Background:
Variance Request: Minimum yard/setback (9ft to the rear, 3 feet to the front) to allow for normal construction of a detached single-family home.
Current Setback Requirements:
• Front: 30 feet
• Side: 10 feet
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): (0426558132000)
Site Size: ± 0.73 acres
Current Zoning: SF-10
Immediate Context: Adjacent to a series of utility poles and single-family homes
Existing Use: None
Public Notice: Notification letters were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the subject site equating to 24 notices sent.
Issues/Analysis:
Variance Requirements
In accordance with NCGS § 160D-705(d) and City UDO Section 30-2.C.20 - four statutory standards must all be met to grant a variance.
1. Unnecessary Hardship - That unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the ordinance.
2. Peculiar Conditions - These hardships result from the peculiarity of the land only
3. Not Self-Created - These hardships cannot be self-created by the owner or the applicant
4. Spirit of the Law - The variance is consistent with the spirit and intent of the UDO in that public safety is secured.
An additional principle includes that the minimum action necessary is being requested - that a mile is not being requested when an inch would suffice.
Applicable Standards and Proposals
UDO Section 30-3.D.3 outlines setbacks and buildable area requirements for Single Family 10 zoned parcels.
• Existing Front and Corner Side Setback (minimum ft): 30ft
o Proposed Variance: 27ft (Reduction of 3ft)
• Existing Side Setback: 10ft
o Proposed Variance: 1ft (Reduction of 9ft)
Evidence Presented by Applicant
The required build area is the result of compounding geographical circumstances
• The utility easement on the eastern portion of the lot and the 10ft fall line created pushed building westward
• Westward push was into grading unsuitable to construction necessitating further westward placement
• Odd shape of the lot renders reasonable building within constraints untenable
Findings of Fact
The statements below reflect the findings set out in the draft Order to Approve A26-14. The Commission made these findings after considering sworn testimony, admitted evidence, and arguments presented at the evidentiary hearing.
1. Practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships:
a. Strict enforcement of the Ordinance requirements would impose practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships because of physical constraints on the Subject Property, including a utility easement along the eastern portion of the lot and significant grade change across the central portion of the lot, which collectively limit the buildable area in compliance with required setbacks.
2. Unique Circumstances; not self-created:
a. The practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships are attributable to unique conditions specific to the property, including its physical characteristics and layout, and not the landowner’s actions because of the limited buildable area and odd shape.
3. Minimum action necessary:
a. The requested Variance constitutes the least departure required to enable reasonable use of the property because the minimal deviation will allow construction without further imposition.
4. Harmony with the Ordinance; spirit preserved:
a. The Variance advances the general purpose and preserves the spirit of the Ordinance because the construction will add value to the land and surrounding properties, increasing net tax value. Further it allows development compatible with existing single-family residential uses.
5. Public safety and welfare; substantial justice:
a. Approval of the Variance advances public safety and welfare while upholding substantial justice as evidenced by the attempt to build within the central portion of the lot would require a retention wall and significant terraforming to adjust the grade to one that is usable and would be threatened by the flood zone.
Budget Impact:
Approval or denial of the requested variance does not create immediate and direct impacts on the budget other than the budget allocated operating cost of relevant staff. Any indirect budget impact via utility extensions, enhancements, or other such costs are not triggered by the map amendment itself and will be evaluated through other processes.
Options:
1. Approve the drafted Findings of Fact which match the drafter Order to Approve A26-14 and the hearing record.
2. Approve the Findings of Fact with revisions, that the Zoning Commission requests, and the hearing record supports.
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
Option 1 above.
end
Attachments:
1. Order to Approve A26-14 - Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law