Subject: (VAR060603) Hardship variance to waive the street frontage requirement and
allow the construction of a nonresidential structure on a landlocked lot at
5417 Whittlesey Boulevard.
PLANNING & ZONING HISTORY
Applicant: Moon, Meeks, Mason & Vinson
Owner: George C. Adams Co, Inc.
Acreage: 2.257 Acres
Current Zoning Classification: GC ? (General Commercial)
Current Use of Property: Undeveloped
Planning District: Planning District 2
General Use: Commercial - Retail /Restaurant
Environmental Impacts: None
Surrounding Zoning: North ? GC (General Commercial)
South ? GC (General Commercial)
East ? GC (General Commercial)
West ? GC (General Commercial)
Traffic Impact: None
Planning Division Approval based on the fact that it is
Recommendation: compatible with existing land-uses and it will not
vary the provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance
Reasonableness of Request: The proposed variance is reasonable based upon its
use as nonresidential and it ability to provide a primary right of entry via a
30-foot joint-use access easement
APPLICANT?S PROPOSAL
This proposal is for the construction of a nonresidential structure on a
landlocked lot. The applicant is proposing to split an existing 11.85-acre
tract of land at Columbus Park Shopping Center. In doing so, the landowner
will created a landlocked lot (proposed Lot 300 ? see replat). The landowner
is seeking to utilize the undeveloped parcel of land as a commercial out parcel
for the existing shopping center.
Section 7.3.5 (F2) 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
one lot, which does not meet the minimum street frontage requirement as stated
above. The subject property is located approximately 270 feet from the nearest
dedicated public right-of-way property line. For this reason, the subject
property lacks proper street frontage. An existing commercial out parcel abuts
the subject property on the North and North East boundaries. Lot 300 will be
provided practical access via a joint use 30-foot access easement intersecting
Whittlesey Boulevard.
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 these variances will not result in significant view, privacy or
other impacts detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
properties in the vicinity.
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;
The subject property is 98,315 square feet or 2.257 acres. The parcel complies
with property development regulations to construct a commercial establishment.
However, the parcel does not have legal street frontage. The property will
have proper street access via a joint use 30-foot access easement. Reliance
upon access easements is common in large shopping centers where landlocked
parcels do not have street frontage. 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
developments, or as otherwise approved by the City Council on a cases-by-case
basis.? The Unified Development Ordinance promotes the use of access easements
and private streets in nonresidential developments such as shopping centers.
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
The landowner?s pursuit to develop an additional retail establishment that is
in full compliance with the Unified Development Ordinance is limited in scope
due to topographical conditions, the irregular shape of existing parcel, and
the location of surrounding structures. The variance results from the property
owner?s intent to use infill development to complete the large shopping
center. The physical surroundings restrict the property owner from utilizing
the property to its maximum potential. It would be an unnecessary hardship to
strictly apply the Ordinance due the unique circumstances stated above.
The variances will not in any manner vary the provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan or Official Map.
The proposed variance will not vary provisions or grant special privileges
inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan or Official Map.
Planning Division believes there is evidence to support the findings for the
variance requested. The granting of the variance to waive the public street
frontage requirement constitutes a genuine hardship, which will not detract
from the intent and spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and will not adversely
impact the overall objectives of the area as outlined in the Comprehensive
Plan.