The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-23-2026 Board of Adjustments Agenda PacketFairhope Board of Adjustments Agenda February 23, 2026 -5:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER Anil Vira, Chairman Frank Lamia, Vice Chairman Bryan Flowers 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • January 22, 2026 3. OLD/NEW BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS Ryan Baker Donna Cook Cindy Beaudreau, Secretary A. BOA 26.01 Public hearing to consider the request of the Owner, Karen Rice, for a 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance on property zoned R-1, Low Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is located at 11 Greenbrier Lane and is 0.38± acres . PPIN#: 113535 4. ADJOURN Council Chambers , Fairhope Municipal Complex, 161 N Section St For more information, please visit: fa irh o pea l.gov/de partments/plannin g-and -zon ing January 22, 2026 Board of Adjustments Minutes The Board of Adjustments met Thursday, January 22, 2026, at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Anil Vira, Chair; Frank Lamia, Vice-Chair; Cathy Slagle; Donna Cook; Payton Rogers, Planning and Zoning Manager and Cindy Beaudreau, Planning Clerk. Absent: Bryan Flowers and Ryan Baker Chairman Vira called the meeting to order at 5:01 PM. Approval of Minutes Cathy Slagle made a motion to approve the minutes from the December 15, 2025, meeting. Frank Lamia seconded the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: Aye: Anil Vira, Frank Lamia, Cathy Slagle and Donna Cook Nay: None. Old Business Revised Board of Adjustments Meeting Schedule Motion Frank Lamia made a motion to approve the revised Board of Adjustments Meeting Schedule. Cathy Slagle seconded the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: Aye: Anil Vira, Frank Lamia, Cathy Slagle and Donna Cook Nay: None. New Business BOA 26.01 Moved to the February meeting at the Applicant’s request. BOA 26.02 Public hearing to consider the request of the Owner, Patricia Schultze, for a 13.6- foot Rear Yard Setback Variance on property zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is located at 375 Ridgewood Circle and is 0.31± acres. PPIN#: 24357 Payton Rogers, Planning and Zoning Manager, stated that the applicant would like to table this request until the May 18, 2026, Board of Adjustments meeting. David and Patricia Schultz, Applicants, agreed that they would like to table their request until May 18, 2026, to have time to review options with Planning staff. January 22, 2026 Board of Adjustments Minutes Motion: Frank Lamia made a motion to table BOA 26.02. Cathy Slagle seconded the motion and the motion carried with the following vote. Aye: Anil Vira, Frank Lamia, Cathy Slagle and Donna Cook Nay: None. Adjournment Cathy Slagle made a motion to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously with the following vote: Aye: Anil Vira, Frank Lamia, Cathy Slagle and Donna Cook Nay: None. Adjourned at 5:07p.m. ____________________________ ________________________ Anil Vira, Chairman Hunter Simmons, Secretary Payton Rogers Denial 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance City of Fairhope Board of Adjustments February 23, 2026 BOA 26.01 -11 Greenbrier Lane Proiect Name: 11 Greenbrier Lane Site Data: 0.38 acres Proiect T't_e_e: Jurisdiction: Fairhope Planning Jurisdiction Zoning_ District: R-1 Low Density Single-Family District PPIN Number: 113533 General Location: End of cul-de-sac of Greenbrier Lane Surve't_or o[Record: N/A Engineer o[Record: N/A Owner L Deve/oe_er: Karen Rice School District: Fairhope Elementary School Fairhope Middle and High Schools Recommendation: Pre(!ared bl£: Zoning: □R-1 ~ □R-2 ---GREENBRIER·lN N ~ WW E s OR<::HARD ·DR w ~ '----'---I ~i------1 :5 "' "' w ::, ... 0:, N ~ WW E BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 1 of 7 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Public hearing to consider the request of the Owner, Karen Rice, for a 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance on property zoned R-1, Low Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is located at 11 Greenbrier Lane and is 0.38± acres. SITE HISTORY There have been no other Board of Adjustments applications associated with this site. STAFF COMMENTS The applicant is requesting a 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance to allow construction of a single -family dwelling to be within the required 40-foot front yard setback. The Zoning Ordinance requires all structures to be a minimum of 40 feet from the front property line in an R -1, Low Density Single-Family Residential District. The subject site is Lot 9 within Greenbrier Subdivision Unit 2 and is currently one (1) of only three (3) undeveloped lots within the subdivision. Greenbrier Subdivision was approved by the Planning Commission and recorded in Baldwin County Probate Court in 1993 (see exhibits). The 1993 plat did not illustrate any revised setbacks, and as such, setbacks for all properties are determined by the underlying zoning district as required by the current Zoning Ordinance. Article III.C.1. Table 3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance details setback requirements for R-1 districts as follows: Dimension, District or Use Zoning District Front Setback Rear Setback Side Setback R-1 40’ 35’ 10’ b b. Where a driveway is in the side, and extends past the front of the principle structure, the side setback shall be 15’. Driveways shall not be within 3 feet of the side lot line. The area between the side lot line and driveway shall be vegetated and remain pervious. It’s important to note that various easements are recorded on the 1993 plat for the subject site (see exhibits). The site contains a 7.5-foot drainage easement along the northern property line, a 20-foot drainage easement crossing the southeast corner of the lot diagonally, and a 10 -foot utility easement along the front lot line abutting Greenbrier Lane. In addition to the aforementioned easements, there is another drainage easement bisecting the subject site across the middle of the lot ranging in size from 20-feet wide at its smallest up to 35- feet wide at its largest. Just North of this easement on the subject site is a large gully approximately 50-feet wide and 15-feet deep (see exhibits). The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,900± square foot single-family dwelling on the property located on the area northwest of the gulley. If approved, the dwelling would encroach 15 feet inside the required 40-foot front yard setback allowing the applicant and any future owner to develop the subject site with a 25-foot front yard setback. The applicant’s full narrative can be found within the application package attached to this report. However, the applicant provided the following as justification for their request within the attached narrative: “The existing gulley on Lot 9 Greenbrier Subdivision creates a hardship to abide by the required 40 -foot [setback].” --- BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 2 of 7 Staff acknowledges that the lot has physical elements which make construction within the required setbacks challenging. However, the lot is buildable as it is. A different footprint could potentially allow construction within the required setbacks while maintaining compliance with Zoning standards. The information provided with this application leaves staff undetermined on whether a Variance is warranted. However, it should be noted that similar Variance requests have been approved in the area. At its meeting on April 17, 2006 the Board of Adjustment approved a 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance request (ZBA 06-06) for property directly abutting the subject site to the East located at 95 Blue Island Avenue (Lot 1 of Greenbrier Subdivision Unit 1). Similarly to the subject site, 95 Blue Island is zoned R -1 requiring a 40-foot front yard setback. A portion of the same gully that bisects the subject site of th is application extends across 95 Blue Island, hence the 2006 variance request. The Board approved the 2006 request allowing a 25 -foot front yard setback for construction of a single -family dwelling. The meeting minutes and Notice of Action for ZBA 06-06 can be viewed attached to this report. It is worth noting that out of the nineteen (19) Lots within Greenbrier Subdivision only two (2) are affected by the existing gulleys in such a way that development of said lots may benefit from setback relief. The subject site is one (1) and the other is 95 Blue Island Avenue. All other lots within the neighborhood do not appear to have any topographical challenges such that may necessitate a Variance. Citizen Comments During the public comment period Staff received comments from two (2) individuals who were not in support of the Variance request. The citizens’ primary concerns appear to be regarding the potential for the proposed dwelling to not conform with the Greenbrier Homeowners Association (HOA) Covenants & Restrictions. Stating that the applicant has not yet received approval for any plans from said HOA. It should be noted, however, that the covenants for Greenbrier Subdivision , recorded in Baldwin County Probate Court in 1990 (Document Number 1990-108644) do not include setback standards nor does the 1993 plat. Additionally, the City of Fairhope Board of Adjustments does not consider individual subdivision covenants & restrictions when making Variance determinations. The applicant will need to address any concerns the HOA may have with that body prior to submittal of a building permit application. The aforementioned public comments can be found in their entirety within the application package attached to this report. BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 3 of 7 VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS Standards of Review: Variances are not intended to be granted frequently. The applicant must clearly show the Board that the request is due to very unusual characteristics of the property and that it satisfies the variance standards. What constitutes extraordinary and exceptional conditions and unnecessary hardship is a matter to be determined from the facts and circumstances of each application. Article II Section C.3.e(1) of the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance states that the Board of Adjustments may grant a Variance if: (a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography ; (b) The application of the ordinance to this particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship. Personal financial hardship is not a justification for a variance ; (c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved; and (d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The Applicant has provided evidence of extraordinary and/or exceptional conditions which may create unnecessary hardship on the land such that a Variance may be necessary for the reasonable use of the property. However, applying the standard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to the subject site would not create unnecessary hardships as the site can be developed as is without the need for a Variance. As illustrated by the attached Topography Map for Greenbrier Subdivision the topographical challenges presented by this application are peculiar to this and two (2) other properties within the subdivision. If approved, the Variance request would not appear to cause substantial detriment to the public good as it would allow development on a scale similar to what has already been constructed within the neighborhood. Additionally, it’s important to note that the proposed Variance is in keeping with past variance approvals made by this Board on other properties located within Greenbrier Subdivision. As it relates to Variance requests, Staff is limited in their scope for consideration with regard to a staff recommendation and must adhere to what the Zoning Ordinance does and/or does not allow. While staff acknowledges that the lot has physical elements which make construction within the required setbacks challenging the lot is buildable as is if the applicant were to utilize a different building footprint. Recommendation: Based on the preceding, Staff recommends DENIAL of BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane Variance request for a 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance. EXHIBITS BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 4 of 7 Proposed Site Plan 'i? :.... .f c:i :'" ..... ; ---- EXHIBITS BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 5 of 7 1993 Greenbrier Subdivision Recorded Plat I 1.5 ' ~ I 0 VI ·., I I @ I I @ I __ __,. ~· B'I • 53" !;S"-~ lo5' 10s · ·o @ >l ® ~ .:r C> l 0 <i f- "''.I .., ., -0 -0 ,f) ~ zoo. G-!'>Z ."JC.. 10:5' -~ 'I @) . ~ "~ !) 0 oil I 1~• ·-o ~ @ II) .. . <t <l 0 '.!! "Z -I ) 0 z ' ·J <d'l EXHIBITS BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 6 of 7 Existing Gulley EXHIBITS BOA 26.01 – 11 Greenbrier Lane February 23, 2026 Page 7 of 7 Greenbrier Subdivision Topography Map Page 4 of 6 APPLICATION FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS Application Type: D Administrative Appeal D Special Exception D Variance Property Owner / Leaseholder Information Nrune: \~Q~'Bie,,e,~----Phone Numbl.5 '205-90I-3':133 StreetAddress: JJ. Gr-e.e.obr:ie.r CLotC\ City: FC\•" State: AL Zip: ~C,p5 32. Applicant / Agent Information If different from above. Notarized letter from property owner is required if an agent. is used for representation. Natne: Phone Number: Street Address: City: State: Zip: Site Plan with Existing Conditions Attached: Site Plan with Proposed Conditions Attached: ~ NO NO s Variance Request Information Complete: Q'Es) NO Names and Address of all Real Property Owners within 300 Feet of Above Described Property Attached: w NO Applications for Administrative Appeal or Special Exception: Please attach as a separate sheet(s) information regarding the administrative decision made or information regarding the use seeking approval. Please feel free to be as specific or as general as you wish in your description. This information will be provided to the Board before the actual meeting date. It is to your benefit to explain as much as possible your position or proposal. I certify that I am the property owner /leaseholder of the above described property and hereby submit this application to the City for review. *If property is owned by Fairhope Single Tax Corp. an authorized Single Tax representative shall sign this application. t-') Q '(_$2,V\ J\ ;g.,e, J<0:ca1,-~::]C,_; Property Owner/ Leaseholder Printed Name Signature Date Fairhope Single Tax Corp. (If Applicable) I am requesting a 15-foot Front Yard Setback Variance to allow a 25-foot front yard setback to construct my home. If a 15-foot Variance cannot be approved, I would be amenable to a 10-foot Variance. Please see my attached detailed narrative for more information. VARIANCE REQUEST INFORMATION What characteristics of the property prevent / preclude its development?: D Elevation D Slope □ Soil D Subsurface Page 5 of6 D Too Narrow D Too Small D Too Shallow D Shape [ZJ Other (specify) 9u I l y What type of variance are you requesting (be as specific as possible)? Hatdship (taken from Code of Alabama 1975 Section 11-52-80): "To authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variance from the terms of the (zoning) ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provision of the (zoning) ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship and so that the spirit of the (zoning) ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done." BOA Fee Calculation: Residential Commercial Filing Fee: $100 $500 Publication: $20 $20 TOTAL: $ 1'20 I certify that I am the property owner /leaseholder of the above described property and hereby submit this application to the City for review. *If property is owned by Fairhope Single Tax Corp . an authorized .single Tax representative shall ~~n~, (L,a.r..e.n~,c,e, ~ ...... ~c:,,,,o::::;.-~· ~ .. ___... Property Owner/ Leaseholder Printed Name Signature , o /20 [z5" Date Fairhope Single Tax Corp. (If Applicable) November 12, 2025 Board of Zoning Adjustments, Thank you for the opportunity to apply for request of 25-30 foot easement in Greenbrier Subdivision. The existing gully on Lot 9 in Greenbrier Subdivision creates a hardship to abide by the required 40 foot easement. Payton Rogers has been very helpful. After sharing site plan, Payton informed me the roof shows a 2'11" overhang, exceeding The Zoning Ordinance of maximum of 2' overhang. The roof will not exceed a 2' overhang. Payton also pointed out The Zoning Ordinance requires 3 feet of landscape between my lot and my neighbor north of my lot. My realtor informed me the 3 mature trees next to my neighbor's driveway are on my Lot 9 (photo included). I will add 3 feet of required additional landscaping between my driveway and my neighbor's driveway. Lastly, Payton pointed out 3' of landscape leaves only 9.5' width for a driveway. The site plan shows a 30' easement. I can make adjustments needed for landscaping and driveway issues with a 30' easement. A 25' easement would comfortably solve my issues with landscape and driveway. The realtor and I measured 22' from curb to back of north side of house plan (70'). Twenty-two feet from north side of curb lined up with the front of my neighbor's porch (see photo). Due to the curve in cul-de-sac, 22' on Lot 9 gives the illusion of required 40' easement. I hope a 25'-30' easement will be approved. I love all the trees in Greenbrier Subdivision and the City of Fairhope! I plan to remove as few trees as possible around my home. None of the trees on the south side of the gully will be removed. I will add beautiful hedges and shrubs north and east for privacy. If approved, I will build a 2,228+ square foot Cottage/Tudor/European style home. My home will be primarily brick with stone and stucco accents. I have included photo examples in this packet. If needed, I will provide more detailed design photos upon approval for 25-30 foot easement. Thank you for your consideration on easement exception, Karen Rice 205-901-3433 getkarenrice@gmail.com StJRYEVOH'S NOTES: 1 t\U MCJ:.:.J:~\\\!l" 11ul: .n l,Q;,,,'l:Ltla,a.e\oll!J, :J ::, ")l••..JlrA D..:-..:n?(Jo:11:.,!W1"J:JIII.Clb1Cl.\.211. 1 :b\'1'',;UllJ}' t:...·~u:UC'lt\:COldcJOll.a4.~.> ll t:,1 1t~•"""""S. or ::ilb-..'T m.-.~.nru:'hl.~ tJutt «.•~d c.."--a lhc J.jc.:,."lr.1:&ni:.i£ ~ .s.;ud pm~ 4 l'l~tt.csNu11.ll..,r.t,lllo&.1..num.·l!-<1.."\c:i.:'IC:l.;.~g-. "-' _,11..-:t1ul••w~~....rl.~1c.a..~--:)'\l\'.!'lw.!'icjit.c11:Jb, Ji.r.[J:J~t.·:e s Bl.-l/1..'la,, 11nU L>-~,Li.xu,, it.~11 h~-n:cu \\t:fC ·coiq,Jtu! • h ,,, .:c:.:.J~.!:.a~~~~ 6 ,• C ,,.:..-..)O!ilc.4u~,(1Jflh.L"S-.1."'\',._") iii;~....-n!1t'N)C. 1 11,'o.! c. t1 1:nt !uc.:i1• • .111:J\ J~ll\ 1H)11:n,..-r1WJ .. ~;.:) :s11d1 l,C, b-.:t 11 l\:Jr,lhS.:l('\\:-1!~,\le ~ U _;c.•..:n...,-:.,'.S o:' tla.: r~~ un:: i.:>,."o,n: 1!~u:1c:ufo.ru ...i,J 1/J\: :ic1 lLI L ... u~ •c~ :ic:u.lal~.~ !-Q~U\: lootllj!.,; cf r~J..::.:..: 9 r 1 Vrt,~Jt.,J\\lLh..'f,,:t>J'I:.~ TO!'O(;!~?HIC SU:1.VEY !'OH R!Cl!A!!!) O,\;\TORD (;rcc•1t,r:•.:1 f..;~: F~id'.o;-:i.: . .-\1,ibi.m.J Timothy M. Kant, C.M.O. Mayor Geniece W. Johnson, C.M.C. City Clerk • Treasurer Council Members Cecil Christenbeny Michael A. Ford, A.C.M.O. Robert C. Gentle, C.M.O. Debbie W. Quinn, A.C.M.O. Daniel R. Stankoski 161 North Section Street P.O. Drawer 429 Fairhope, Alabama 36533 251-928-2136 251-928-6776 Fax www.cofairhope.com P.ritJted on rrY')'cled paper Mr. Roland & Miriam Neeson PO Box 1633 Orange Beach, AL 36561 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Neeson April 18, 2006 The Fairhope Board of Adjustments and Appeals heard case ZBA 06-06 at 5:00 PM Monday April 17, 2006 in Council Chambers located in the Municipal Complex at 161 N. Section Street. • Case ZBA 06-~ regarded your property located at 95 Blue Island. The application requested a 25' front yard set back. The Fairhope Board of Adjustments and Appeals approved this request unanimously. Please contact us with any questions or concerns. Barry Fulford Building Official \ ZBA 06-05 Public Hearing to Consider the Request of Ms. Baldwin to allow a carport at 308 Patlynn 1) closer to the primary structure than 10' and 2) fonvard of the rear of the house. Ms. Baldwin came forward and explained that she would like to put a carport with a storage area in back over an existing driveway. Chaimrnn Bassett opened the public hearing. Ms. Nel Hamrick of 310 Patlynn came forward in support of Ms. Baldwin. No other public speakers were present so Chairman Bassett closed the public hearing. Chairman Bassett asked for the staff interpretation. Barry Fulford explained: The City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance adopted 06/27/05, Article 111, Table 3-3 has the setbacks for accessory structures for "all other residential districts" which would include the R-2 zoning of this property as: • Front: behind rear building line of principle structure • Minimum structure separation from principle structure: 1 O' The previous City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance, September 1992 Codification, 5.142 on Accessory Buildings: • • • 7.6152 "A detached accessory building shall not be closer than 1 O' to the main building, nor closer than 5' to the lot line. 7.1654 "No detached accessory building shall be located within the minimum exterior front yard of a lot." 7.6155 "An open carport may be constructed over an existing driveway not nearer than 5' to property line and need not provide the 1 O' separation required by Section 7.6152; provided, however, that a carport permitted under this section shall not in the future be enclosed or converted to any other use." After some discussion the board agreed to define a carport as a structure open on 3 sides (allowing for a storage or closure on one side). The Board did not want to change the zoning ordinance (back to 1992 version), but would rule on this specific case. Chai1man Bassett said he would entertain a motion. Louise Agee made a motion to allow for the carport as described, over existing driveway (7' off house, 5' off side property line, not fo1ward of the front of the house) with storage area along one side, remaining open on 3 sides. Bob Mannich seconded the motion. It was carried unanimously, Chairman Bassett abstained. ZBA 06-06 Public Hearing to Consider the Request of Mr. Moore on behalf of Ronald & Miriam Neeson to allow a 25' front set back at 95 Blue Island. The property is zoned R-1. R-1 requires a 40' set back. This would result in a 15' variance. Mr. Neeson came forward and explained the house plans that they have chosen along with the topography of the north west portion of the lot would allow a maximum front set back of 25'. Chairman Bassett opened the public hearing no speakers were present. The public hearing was closed. The staff acknowledges that the lot has physical elements that make construction within the required setbacks challenging. However, the lot is build-able as it is. A different footprint would allow construction within the required setbacks. There maybe work that could be done to the lot to somewhat lessen the topographical challenges. The gully is not indicated on the FEMA flood maps. It would take additional information to determine if and to what extent the gully could be filled. The information provided leaves the staff undetermined on weather the variance is warranted. In the discussion of the Board with Mr. Neeson, Mr, Neeson indicated that it is his intent to landscape fill the gully in the rear. He said the design would be done in such a way to not increase the flow or velocity of the drainage. Mr. Neeson asked for some infomiation regarding hydroseeding. Barry Fulford indicated that he would get that infonnation together. Chainnan Bassett said he would entertain a motion. Bob Mannich made a motion to allow a 25' front setback. Louis Agee seconded the motion. It was carried unanimously, Chainnan Bassett abstained. Old/New Business There was no old or new business to discuss. A motion to adjourn was made by Ray Clark. A second followed by Cathy Slagel. All approved. The meeting was adjourned at 5:50 PM. Minutes are prelinzinary until reviewed an approved by the Board of Adjustnzents. The Board will have the opportunity to review the 1ninutes at the next meeting scheduled for May 15, 2006. Minutes were reviewed at the May 15, 2006 meeting. Ray Clark made a motion to accept the minutes, with noted corrections. Louis Agee seconded the motion. The Board of Adjustments approved unanimously. From:jharshberg@aol.com To:planning Cc:Jerald Harshberger Subject:11 Greenbrier Lane 10 foot setback variance Date:Wednesday, January 7, 2026 9:24:27 AM January 7, 2026 Cindy Beaudreau Thank you for our conversation January 6, 2026. I would like to ask a few questions regarding 11 Greenbrier Ln. and the template setback variance to the board of adjustment members. 1. Why is this 10 foot variance being considered? Why not 20 ft. or 30 ft. ? 2. Are the board members aware of the size and the depth of the gulley within the property? 3. Are there going to be pictures or drawings of this construction situation? 4. Are the board members aware of Greenbrier homeowners Association building covenants and guidelines? 5. Are there any timelines set for decisions and/or follow-up meetings? I am not in favor of this request of a 10 foot setback for the property at 11 Greenbrier Ln. Respectfully yours Jerald Harshberger, owner of Lot 9 Greenbrier Ln. Fairhope Alabama 251 753 1373 jharshberger@aol.com From:LEROY SLOAN To:planning Cc:Leroy Sloan; Jerry Harshberger Subject:Re: Lot 9, 11 Greenbrier Ln. 10" Setback Variance Date:Wednesday, January 7, 2026 2:21:13 PM January 7, 2025 To: Cindy Beaudreau, Planning Clerk, Planning & Zoning Department, City of Fairhope From: Leroy Sloan 20 Greenbrier Ln (Lot 10) Fairhope, AL 205-410-7748 Cindy, as per your letter pertaining to the referenced variance request, please accept this a my comments/questions to be considered by the Board of Adjustment Members. 1. This lot has a very large gully, (30-40 ft. wide/12-16 ft. deep), which completely bisects this lot and effectively divides it into two distinct sections with a small front section and a large back section. I do not believe the front section is large enough to support a structure of any type or design that would fit or blend into the building style of the existing houses in the neighborhood nor meet the requirements of the Greenbrier HOA Covenants. 2. The lot owner needs to be aware of the requirements of our covenants and submit plans for approval prior to the start of construction. This has not been done to date. 3. What is the stated purpose/requirement for the setback variance? 4. In my opinion, the best solution for the lot owner would be to use the front section of the lot as a manicured vegetation area and build a bridge across the gully for access to the back portion of the lot where there is enough room to build a house that would meet all requirements and blend in with the neighborhood. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Leroy Sloan