The Board of Zoning Appeals on a recorded roll-call vote approved a 35-foot variance Thursday for a small parcel at 217 East Holland Street, reducing the C-1 district minimum street frontage from 75 feet to roughly 40 feet so the property owner may move forward with a proposed commercial building and potential upstairs residence.

The decision matters because the variance clears a specific dimensional hurdle that previously prevented development of the 0.157-acre lot, which staff said has existed in its current configuration since at least 1910. Staff recommended approval after finding the situation met the ordinance standards for variance relief.

Staff explained the application during the meeting, saying, “The property owner is, Joey Simmons at Simcoe LLC, and then Chad is here. He can answer any questions he's representing,” and described the relief sought as a “35 foot variance” for the portion of the parcel fronting East Holland. The staff presentation identified the property as a lot of record and said the frontage shortfall was an existing physical condition not created by the current owner. Staff also stated the parcel’s current measured frontage is about 40 feet and that the C-1 regulation requires 75 feet.

In discussion, staff noted the application meets the typical legal standards for a variance: an existing physical condition creating a hardship, uniqueness in the zoning district, and that the requested relief is the minimum necessary and is not expected to injure public welfare. Staff said the proposed use would be commercial on the ground floor with a possible residential unit above and that the concept plan can meet parking requirements. The staff presentation referenced historical Sanborn Fire Map imagery to show the parcel’s long-standing dimensions and said the deed shows Simcoe LLC acquired the site in late 2022.

Staff cautioned that additional approvals remain. The development will require site-plan review and Planning Commission approval for any upstairs residential unit under the city’s amended code, and state review is required for driveway access because East Holland and Jefferson are state right-of-way. Staff said, “I had a verbal from a TDOT representative that we believe that we could do the tube. He's gonna come to a site visit once we make it through BCA,” indicating the applicant will need a site visit and permission from the state transportation agency before finalizing access arrangements.

Staff and the applicant also noted that an adjacent property owner is not willing to sell a strip that would have allowed the parcel to meet frontage requirements without a variance; staff said that constraint is part of why the variance was sought. Staff described an alternative access plan that could allow one travel movement if TDOT approves it, but stressed that access details and curb cuts must be resolved through later reviews.

A board member moved to approve the variance under the staff recommendation language provided in the meeting materials; a separate board member seconded. A roll-call vote recorded “yes” from Member Patterson, Member Armstrong, Council member Novell, and Chairman Williams, and the motion carried. The staff recommendation and motion text were entered into the record as the basis for approval.

Next steps identified at the meeting: the applicant proceeds to Planning Commission for required approvals for the proposed uses and site plan, and staff will coordinate the TDOT site visit and any state permissions needed for ingress/egress. No additional conditions beyond the usual site-plan and agency reviews were recorded in the meeting minutes.

The action clears the dimensional barrier for the 217 East Holland Street parcel; further technical, access, and permitting matters remain to be resolved before construction can proceed.