TO: Zoning Commission
THRU: Jennifer C. Baptiste, Planning & Zoning Division Manager
FROM: Craig Harmon, Senior Planner
DATE: July 14, 2026
RE:Title
A26-22: Order of Approval - Findings of Fact: Request for a Variance to the Corner Side Setback at 423 MCPHEE DR (0427432465000) on a 0.39 acre lot owned by Robert and Evelyn Spicer.Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
5 - Green
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Goal III - City Investment Planning: The Board’s quasi-judicial action sits squarely inside Goal III’s charge to “manage the City’s future growth and strategic land use” and to “sustain a favorable development and business climate through timely and accurate construction review and building inspection services.” Administering a variance by the book - grounded in competent, material, substantial evidence - supports both objectives by applying the UDO precisely while enabling small-scale reinvestment when warranted.
Goal IV (Live, Work, & Recreate): Objective 4.5 calls for “a place for people to live in great neighborhoods.” Where a setback modification can be conditioned or narrowed to protect light, air, privacy, and block character, it aligns with that neighborhood-quality focus rather than undermining it. (If the record shows adverse effects, denial is also consistent with Goal IV’s quality-of-life lens.)
Goal II (Diverse & Viable Economy): Objective 2.4 targets “a favorable development climate to encourage business growth.” At the household scale, a compliant variance pathway is part of that climate - reducing friction for code-consistent home investments while maintaining predictable rules. The plan tracks this climate with KPI’s like permitting timeliness and vacancy/appearance indicators; consistent variance administration contributes indirectly to those results.
Goal VI (Collaborative Government): The case workflow (public notice to owners within 300 feet, evidentiary hearing, on-record findings) embodies Goal VI’s emphasis on transparency, outreach, and trust in decisions. A25-50’s mailed-notice map and the hearing itself operationalize Objectives 6.12-6.3 (collaboration, customer service, and public information).
Linkage to the Future Land Use Framework that Underpins Goal III
The FLU Plan’s neighborhood policies explicitly contemplate measured flexibility (including setbacks) to encourage reinvestment where context supports it. In MDR settings, allowing modest adjustments while holding to design/compatibility standards is aligned with that guidance and with MR-5’s purpose of delivering diverse housing forms under Article 30-5.
Executive Summary:
On June 9th the Zoning Commission held an evidentiary hearing regarding this application. After receiving testimony and evidence the Commission voted 5-0 to approve the Variance.
The applicant has submitted a request for a variance at 423 McPhee Drive to reduce the required corner side-yard setback from 30 feet to 23 feet within the Single-Family 10 (SF-10) residential district. The subject property is a corner lot and is designated as Low-Density Residential (LDR) in the City’s adopted Future Land Use Plan (FLU).
The requested variance is intended to accommodate a proposed addition to the existing single-family residence. Due to the unique configuration of corner lots, which are subject to two front-facing setback requirements, the applicant is seeking relief from the corner side-yard standard to allow for reasonable expansion of the home while maintaining compliance with other applicable development regulations.
Background:
Owner: Robert and Evelyn Spicer
Applicant: Phillip Due, Critical Path Solutions & Michael Adams, MAPS Surveying Inc.
Requested Action: Variance to reduce corner-side setback to 23 feet
Zoning District: SF-10
Property Address: 423 MCPHEE DR (0427432465000)
Size: 039 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Single-family dwelling
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• SF-10 single family development
Letters Mailed: Notices sent to 31 owners within a 300-ft. buffer of the subject parcel.
Issues/Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a variance from the dimensional standards of Section 30-3.D.3, Single-Family Residential 10 (SF-10) District, specifically to reduce the required corner side-yard setback from 30 feet to 23 feet in order to accommodate an addition to an existing single-family residence. Staff has reviewed the request in relation to the applicable variance standards outlined in the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
A primary consideration in this request is whether the strict application of the ordinance creates practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship. The subject property is a corner lot, which inherently results in two street-facing setbacks being applied, thereby reducing the buildable area compared to similarly sized interior lots within the same neighborhood. While the lot is comparable in size to surrounding properties, the additional setback requirement limits the ability to expand or improve the existing structure in a manner that would otherwise be permissible on non-corner lots. Staff finds that this condition represents a constraint tied to the location and configuration of the property, rather than actions taken by the property owner.
The applicant has indicated that the requested variance would allow for a reasonable expansion of the home to meet typical residential needs. In evaluating whether the request represents the minimum necessary relief, staff notes that the proposed reduction is limited in scope and appears to be designed to accommodate the addition in a location that aligns with the existing structure and functional layout of the home. The request does not seek to eliminate the setback entirely but rather to reduce it to a degree that still maintains a reasonable separation from the adjacent street.
In considering public safety and welfare, staff finds no evidence that the proposed reduction would create adverse impacts. The applicant has indicated that the addition will not obstruct visibility at the intersection or create unsafe conditions related to proximity to the street. Provided that all other applicable development standards are met, the reduced setback is unlikely to negatively affect traffic safety, emergency access, or the general welfare of the surrounding area.
With respect to compatibility and consistency with the intent of the ordinance, the surrounding neighborhood consists of homes constructed during a similar time period, many of which have smaller building footprints relative to modern living standards. The requested variance would allow for reinvestment in the existing structure without significantly altering the character of the neighborhood. The intent of the SF-10 district is to maintain low-density residential development while allowing for reasonable use and improvement of residential properties. Staff finds that the request is generally consistent with this intent, as it facilitates reinvestment without introducing a use or scale that is out of character with the area.
Overall, the requested variance appears to be driven by unique site constraints associated with the corner lot configuration, represents a limited and reasonable adjustment to the standard, and does not result in significant adverse impacts to the surrounding area. The request allows for continued use and improvement of the property in a manner that is generally consistent with the purpose and spirit of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Budget Impact:
The requested variance is not anticipated to have any measurable impact on the City’s operating or capital budget. The proposal involves a minor residential addition to an existing single-family home and will be served by existing public infrastructure and services. Any costs associated with plan review and permitting are recovered through standard application and inspection fees. As such, the overall fiscal impact of this request is expected to be negligible.
Options:
The Board may approve or approve with specific changes that to the Findings of Fact.
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
The professional Planning Staff recommends approval of the Findings as presented.
end
Attachments:
1. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact