TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Heather Eckhardt, CZO - Planner II
DATE: May 8, 2025
RE:
Title
A25-16: A variance request to reduce required setbacks at 528 Person St (0437924559000), owned by The School of Hope
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 front yard setback from 20 feet to 180 feet.
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: The School of Hope
Applicant: Gordon Rose of Gradient, PLLC
Requested Action: Increase maximum front yard setback
Zoning District: Downtown 2 (DT-2)
Property Address: 528 Person Street
Size: 1.20 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Vacant
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: 24
Issues/Analysis:
The subject property is currently vacant however, the Family Farm Store was located on the property until it was lost to fire in October of 2021. Aerial photography indicates the original structure was constructed prior to 1968.
The subject property is currently zoned Downtown 2 (DT-2). The Downtown zoning districts place maximum front 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 Person Street which is heavily traveled by car rather than on foot.
The School of Hope does intend to building another structure meeting the maximum setback requirement in the future however, the approval of this variance would allow them to construct the rear building first.
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 front yard setback from 20 feet to 180 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 “Requiring this modular building to maintain the 20-foot maximum setback would prevent this area from being developed with the proposed future building. It would force the future building to be constructed where the modular is sited. Construction traffic would interfere with operations of the school and force the children to walk along the edge of a construction zone when going to the playground.”
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 playground, on land currently owned by Second Baptist but intending to be purchased by the School, is to the south of the property. The proposed location of the modular classroom building places the classrooms closer to the playground. Once the future recreational building is constructed, the classroom will be situated in the middle, between the rec building and the playground, minimizing the distance needing to be traveled by these autistic children.”
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 allowing the setback variance for this building, the School will be able to construct the future building without conflicting with the operations of the school or presenting a safety hazard for the children. The future building will meet the setback requirements for the DT-2 district.”
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 allows for a phased development of the entire property while minimizing conflict with the operations of the school.”
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 “As described above, if this variance is not allowed and the modular building has to be constructed on Person Street, construction of the future building will conflict with the operations of the school and will present a safety hazard to autistic children walking from the modular classroom to the playground. This variance places the classroom in closer proximity to the playground and the future rec building.”
Budget Impact:
There is no immediate budgetary impact.
Options:
Type 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 increase the maximum front yard setback from 20 feet to 180 feet.
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:
Attachments:
1. Application
2. Aerial Notification Map
3. Zoning Map
4. Land Use Map
5. Subject Property Photos
6. Surrounding Property Photos
7. Site Plan