TO: Zoning Commission
THRU: Craig Harmon - Senior Planner
FROM: Heather Eckhardt, CZO - Planner II
DATE: November 12, 2025
RE:Title
A25-47. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact - Variance to reduce the rear yard setback, located at 5490 Ivyridge Ct (REID 0407932810000), and being the property of Dark Horse Investments LLC, represented by Alfonzo Whittington.
Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
7 - Brenda McNair
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 requests a variance to reduce the rear yard setback at 5490 Ivyridge Court. The Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requires a 35-foot rear yard setback in the Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10) zoning district. The applicant is requesting a 10.82 foot reduction in this setback requirement.
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: Dark Horse Investments LLC
Applicant: Alfonzo Whittington of Landmark Property Enhancements LLC
Requested Action: Reduce rear yard setback from 35 feet to 24.18 feet
Zoning District: Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10)
Property Address: 5490 Ivyridge Ct
Size: .23 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Single family residential
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• North: SF-10 - Single Family Residential
• South: SF-10 - Single Family Residential
• East: SF-10 - Single Family Residential
• West: SF-10 - Single Family Residential
Letters Mailed: 42
Issues/Analysis:
According to Cumberland County tax records, the house on the subject property was built in 1970. Subsequently, a roughly 238 square foot addition was constructed at the rear of the house. Based on aerial photography, the addition was completed between 2008 and 2010. Staff was unable to verify if a permit was issued for the construction.
Section 30-3.D.3. of the UDO outlines the dimensional standards for development in the SF-10 zoning district. The UDO requires a 35 foot rear yard setback in this district. The addition currently encroaches into the setback by 10.83 feet. The applicant has requested a variance to reduce the rear yard setback to 24.18 feet order to bring the structure into compliance.
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 requested variance would address the currently non-conforming room addition at the rear of the house. There are no current plans to do additional development of the property.
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 presented by the Applicant:
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 home was purchased with the space counting as heated square footage. Without the variance we would lose value in the home.”
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 “There will be no hardships to the neighborhood or the general public. The space is in the back yard and it is in good condition.”
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 variance is keep the value of the home in which we purchased.”
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 variance will add value to the home and return. We add to the property taxes.”
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 room will be inspected by an civil engineer to ensure that everything is up to code.”
Budget Impact:
Options:
1. Approve as written
2. Remand to staff for revisions
3. Deny
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
Staff does not provide recommended actions for variance cases because variances are considered quasi-judicial decisions. The Board must make its decision based solely on competent, material, and substantial evidence presented during the evidentiary hearing. Due-process requirements prevent staff from advocating for either approval or denial. Instead, staff’s role is to compile the record, outline the relevant standards and required findings, present pertinent facts and exhibits, and, when appropriate, identify conditions that are legally connected to the evidence. The burden of proof lies with the applicant, and it is the Board - not the staff - that must make the findings and final determination.
end
Attachments:
Finding of Fact