Prosper board approves lot-area and width variances but denies front-yard setback reduction for Bryant's First Edition lot

The Town of Prosper Board of Adjustment and Construction Board of Appeals on Feb. 19, 2025, approved variances to the minimum lot area and lot width for property described as Bryant's First Edition, Block 14, Lots 11 and 12, but rejected the applicant's request to reduce the single-family (SF-15) front-yard setback from 35 feet to 30 feet.

Staff recommended the board grant relief for the lot area and lot width but deny the front-yard setback reduction, and the board voted to adopt that recommendation. CJ Alexander moved to follow staff's recommendation; Brad Black seconded. The motion passed by voice vote; individual vote tallies were not specified in the meeting record.

The variance request arose because the lot is nonconforming under the SF-15 zoning requirements that the board cited at the hearing. David Hoover, director of development services, told the board the lot was created from older plats of record and does not meet the current SF-15 minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet. "The area itself is the 12,560 [square feet]," Hoover said, and the lot width is 90 feet where the ordinance requires 100 feet. Staff concluded those two conditions were not self-imposed and recommended relief for area and width but recommended denial of the requested front setback reduction.

The applicant, Akhil Ahmad, spoke about the household's accessibility needs. "We have a 14-year-old son who has cerebral palsy, who is wheelchair bound," Ahmad said, and described plans for wider doors, larger bathrooms and an elevator to make the house accessible. Ahmad said the proposed house design is roughly 5,200 square feet and that granting a 5-foot front-setback reduction would preserve more usable yard for a pool and a special-needs swing and allow the main living areas to be on the ground floor.

Board members pressed on whether the setback request met the legal hardship criteria for a variance. Hoover told the board the first two variance issues (area and width) are straightforward because the lot's measured dimensions predate the zoning; the requested front-yard reduction is more subjective. "From our perspective ... the setback, it is a stretch as to whether or not it's a hardship," Hoover said. He emphasized staff's role to present facts rather than opinions: "Just the facts, ma'am."

Board members echoed that tension. One member noted that while the family's needs are compelling, the ordinance' variance criteria focus on conditions not self-imposed by the property owner and cautioned about opening the door to subjective decisions. Another member asked whether the applicant could revise plans to meet the existing 35-foot setback; Ahmad replied the architects had worked several months on the current plan and that the family would try to redesign if the variance were denied but might ultimately sell the lot and build elsewhere.

The board's action grants the applicant relief for the lot area (existing 12,560 square feet versus 15,000 required) and the lot width (existing 90 feet versus 100 required), and denies the requested reduction to the 35-foot front-yard setback. The denial means the applicant must retain the 35-foot front-yard setback in any subsequent building permit review unless the applicant returns with a different request or revised plans that meet ordinance criteria.

Separately, the board recessed to an executive session for legal advice before returning to open session and voted on the variance after public and applicant comment. Town staff said they will schedule a training session on board roles and procedures in the coming 6–8 weeks.