Zoning board splits on Sunnymeade setback; rehearing scheduled after tie on reduced variance

The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals on Wednesday failed to secure the four votes required to grant a reduced street-setback variance for a house proposed at 1295 Sunnymeade Drive, and the board left the item on its docket for rehearing on July 17.

The appeal concerns a requested variance from the contextual street-setback standard in an RS 7.5 district. The zoning administrator’s materials show a contextual average setback of about 33 feet; the applicant sought a 21-foot setback, a 12-foot reduction from the contextual average. Applicant representative Brandon Scott said the house must move forward to get the dwelling off a creek that runs through the lot and to meet flood-elevation requirements: “The goal, again, for is to get us off the creek. That’s the main reason,” Scott told the board.

Board members expressed split views on whether the applicant’s hardship was narrowly tailored and on the visual and height impacts of pulling the house forward. Board member Ransom said after reviewing the record he was not yet comfortable voting: “Based on the information the applicant gave, wasn't enough for me to determine...how much it would injure the associated neighbor,” and indicated an abstention until more information was available. Other members said the lot’s floodplain encumbrance created a legitimate hardship but that the requested 12-foot variance might be larger than necessary.

The board voted to reopen the public hearing to take live testimony after several members said they needed answers before casting a final vote; the hearing was reopened and the applicant and an opponent, Katie Williams of 1252 Sunnymeade Drive, presented. Williams said the proposed siting would “tower over” her property because the lot slopes and the new house would sit higher than neighboring homes.

After deliberations, a motion was made to grant a reduced 6-foot variance (rather than the requested 12-foot variance). The motion was seconded but received only three affirmative votes from members present, short of the four votes required to approve a variance under the board’s rules. Because two members were not present to vote on the new motion, the board kept the case on the agenda for July 17 so those members can review the record and participate.

No final permit change was recorded at the meeting; the board’s announcement said proceedings on the matter will continue at the July 17 meeting at the Metropolitan School Board on Bransford Avenue, where the full panel may vote after reviewing the YouTube video and record of today’s hearing.

If the board later finds the requested reduction is not justified, the applicant may revise plans, seek a different variance, or pursue a rehearing per the board’s procedures.

The record shows the dispute centered on balancing an applicant-stated floodplain hardship against neighborhood context concerns about height and block-face setbacks.