HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOA 967 Staff Summary 5.13.22VARIANCE REQUEST
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
May 24, 2022
CASE: BOA-967
PETITIONER: Samuel B. Potter, applicant, on behalf of New Jack Partners LLC, property owner.
REQUEST: Variance from the lot dimension standards requirement per Section 6.2.2.A.6.f of the New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance.
LOCATION: 4601 & 4607 New Jack Road
PID: R07213-033-000, RO7213-034-000
ZONING: R-15, Residential District
ACREAGE: 2.86 Acres
BACKGROUND AND ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS:
Samuel B. Potter, applicant, on behalf of New Jack Partners LLC, property owner, is requesting a variance to allow for the lots to exceed the depth-to-width ratio in order to allow for
the proposed dimensions as shown in the proposed subdivision map.
The applicant is proposing a 4-lot subdivision. New Jack Road serves as the primary access to the subdivision along the western edge of the property, and the property is bound by the
Intracoastal waterway on the east. As shown, the lot width is 80’ and due to the irregularity of the lot shape and topography, the lot depths vary from approximately 350’ to 570’.
Individual lots are subject to specific requirements of their designated zoning district. The subject parcel is zoned R-15 and thereby subject to the dimensional standards in Section
3.2.8 of the UDO as follows:
/
Figure 1: R-15 Dimensional Standards, UDO Section 3.2.8
In addition to compliance with dimensional standards of the zoning district of which the parcel is located, Section 6.2.2 of the UDO states that all subdivisions shall comply with specific
design standards. Section 6.2.2.A.6.f. requires that when subdivided, new lots must be dimensioned so that the length is no more than 4 times the mean width, as shown below.
/
At the minimum lot width of 80’ required in R-15 districts, the UDO’s subdivision design standards in Section 6.2.2.A.6.f. would only permit the lots to be a depth of 320’, or four times
the width. Due to the location of the lot along the Intracoastal waterway, flood zones and CAMA setbacks restrict the buildable area to the western portion of the proposed lots.
/
Figure 2: Proposed Subdivision Plan with Staff Markups
The applicant contends that the variance is necessary to subdivide the property using minimum lot widths due to the irregularity of the lot shape, the location of New Jack Road, and
the location of the mean high-water line. If the road was moved closer to the east so the new lots were only 320’ deep, the buildable lot area would be reduced significantly due to
the location of the mean high-water line.
In summary, the applicants are requesting a variance from the UDO Section 6.2.2.A.6.f. subdivision design requirement that new lot depths not be more than 4 times their mean width, to
allow the proposed 80’ wide lots be permitted depths greater than 320’ and at a ratio of up to 7 times the mean width.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT POWER AND DUTY:
The Board of Adjustment has the authority to authorize variances from the terms of the Unified Development Ordinance where, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the regulations
would result in unnecessary hardship. In granting any variance, the Board may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the Unified Development Ordinance.
A concurring vote of four-fifths (4/5) of the voting members of the Board shall be necessary to grant a variance. A variance shall not be granted by the Board unless and until the
following findings are made:
Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the ordinance. It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be
made of the property.
The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting
from conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance.
The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting
of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created hardship.
The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved.
ACTION NEEDED (Choose one):
Motion to approve the variance request based on the findings of fact (with or without conditions)
Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or documentation (specify)
Motion to deny the variance request based on specific negative findings in any of the 4 categories above.