Subject: (VAR060501) Hardship variance to waive the street frontage requirement and
allow the construction of a nonresidential structure on a landlocked lot at
8851-4 Moore Road
PLANNING RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL
PLANNING & ZONING HISTORY
Applicant: Sarah Hubbuch
Owner: Same
Acreage: 20.0 Acres
Current Zoning Classification: RE5 ? Residential Estate 1
Current Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Residential Subdivision
Planning District: Planning District 2
General Use: Residential
Environmental Impacts: Public water will be installed to service the proposed
development. Septic Tanks will be installed on individual parcels. The
proposed subdivision must comply with minimum storm water drainage requirements
for a residential subdivision. All storm water drainage easements must be
installed and maintained by the property owner. The city will not be held
liable for any storm water drainage problems
Surrounding Zoning: RE5 ? Residential Estates 1
RE5 ? Residential Estates 1
RE5 - Residential Estates 1
RE4 ? Residential Estates 1
Traffic Impact: Traffic circulation is a major issue. The proposed
street layout does not comply with minimum street standards.
Planning Division
Recommendation: DENIAL based upon the fact that the proposed
subdivision does not meet minimum street requirements and standards that apply
to a public subdivision.
Reasonableness of Request: The proposed variance is not reasonable based upon
traffic circulation concerns. The proposed cul-de-sac (40? access easement)
does not meet street requirements applicable to private streets as stated in
the Unified Development Ordinance.
Attitude of Property Owners: Nine (9) property owners were notified by letter
of the hardship variance request. The Planning Division received one opposing
comment.
Other Recommendations:
Engineering: The proposed cul-de-sac must meet all standards as a public
street. Therefore, minimum access easement width must be equal to 50 feet.
Also, existing access easement to Moore Road must be revised and recorded to
include new lots.
Public Safety: The existing access easement that runs from Moore Road
along the South side of the property must meet the requirements of the private
street ordinance, be named, and accepted as a private street by the City. The
Cul-de-sac must meet the requirements of the private street ordinance, be named
and accepted by the City. Failure to meet these requirements creates Public
Safety Issues with locating new parcels. Also, there are concerns about the
unimpeded access by large public safety vehicles (Fire Trucks).
Public Works: Similar requested variances have been disapproved in the
past. Denial is recommended to maintain consistency.
APPLICANT?S PROPOSAL
The applicant requests approval of a residential subdivision, pursuant to
Section 7.3.5 (F2) of the Unified Development Ordinance, for the purpose of
creating six (6) lots with primary frontage on a 40? wide access easement. As
proposed, the preliminary layout would subdivide an existing 20.0-acre tract of
land into six individual parcels with a typical lot area of three acres or
more. The driveway length of the proposed access easement is 850 feet.
Section 7.3.5 (F2) of the Columbus Unified Development Ordinance states, ?all
lots shall front on a minimum of 25 feet of dedicated public right-of-way or
upon a right-of-way that has received the legal status as such.? The proposed
subdivision of the existing lot creates six (6) lots, which does not meet the
minimum street frontage requirement as stated above. To serve these homes, the
applicant proposes to construct an access easement measuring 40 feet in width
with a cul-de-sac. The access easement will provide a primary right of entry
onto the proposed parcels. However, the access easement will not meet
applicable street standards and requirements as established by the Columbus
Unified Development Ordinance.
VARIANCE CRITERIA
In order to grant the requested variances, the City Council must make a
decision that is based upon all of the following findings required by the
variance regulations of the Columbus Zoning Ordinance:
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public safety,
health or welfare or injurious to other property;
The granting of this variance is expected to be detrimental to the public
safety, health, and welfare of proposed and abutting properties. Traffic
circulation is a major concern of this proposed subdivision. The proposed
cul-de-sac does not guarantee proper access for large public safety
vehicles.
The conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are unique to the
property for which the variance is sought and are not applicable generally to
other property;
No unique conditions exist on the property for which this variance is being
sought. As proposed, the layout of the six parcels would be appropriately
shaped and lots would be created at right angles to straight access easement
lines or radial to curved access easement lines. The proposed lots conform to
zoning regulations of the Unified Development Ordinance with respect to lot
area, lot widths and building setbacks. However, the proposed parcels will not
have public street frontage. The 40-foot access easement shall provide
continuous driveway access. The proposed access easement does not comply with
street layout requirements as summarized in the Unified Development Ordinance.
Under Section 7.4.2 of the Columbus Unified Development Ordinance, ?private
streets, reserve strips or access easements are prohibited except in
multi-family and nonresidential development, or as otherwise approved by the
City Council on a case-by-case basis.? The Unified Development Ordinance does
not encourage development of residential subdivisions of this magnitude to have
a private street or access easement as the primary right of entry onto
residential parcels.
Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical
conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the
owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict
letter of these regulations are carried out; and
There are no significant physical constraints that make it unreasonable for the
owner to comply with street standard requirements as mandated by the Columbus
Unified Development Ordinance. Additionally, the proposed subdivision creates
a parcel layout that is inconsistent with the surrounding development
character. As a result, the proposed layout is expected to produce
neighborhood overcrowding.
The variances will not in any manner vary the provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan or Official Map.
Article 4, Section 7.42 (A) states ?Private streets, reserve strips or access
easements are prohibited except in multifamily and nonresidential developments,
or as otherwise approved by the City Council on a case-by-case basis.
Therefore, the applicant must receive final approval from City Council to
provide an access easement as the primary right-of-entry for the proposed
residential subdivision. Pursuant to Article 4, Section 7.4.2 (D) a private
street subdivision must meet all other requirements and standards that apply to
public subdivisions, such as storm water runoff and detention requirements, the
provisions of utilities, traffic and street name signs. Also, Article 8,
Section 7.8.3 (C) requires a minimum 50-foot right-of-way width for all local
residential streets. The applicant is proposing a 40-foot access easement as
the primary right entry for the residential subdivision. The 40-foot access
easement does not fully comply with Section 7.4.2 (D) of the Unified
Development Ordinance. The proposed access easement does not fulfill the
minimum right-of-way width stated in Section 7.8.3 (C).
The proposed layout does not display neighborhood characteristics that would
enhance the overall quality of living for this area. For this reason, the
subdivision as proposed does not implement the statement objectives and policy
recommendations of the land use and community development element of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Ordinance.
Planning Division believes no evidence exists to allow the type of variance
requested. The granting of the variance to waive the minimum street frontage
requirement to allow construction of a residential subdivision does not
constitute a genuine hardship. The proposed variance request detracts from the
intent and spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and will adversely impact the overall
objectives of the area as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and Unified
Development Ordinance.