Bentonville board grants variance to Matthews, approves property-line adjustment

The Bentonville Board of Adjustments on January 2025 voted to grant variance No. 240025 to Cody and Emily Matthews, allowing an adjustment to an interior property line so the parcel can be brought into conformance with setback requirements.

The board opened a public hearing, heard a summary from staff that described a small property-line shift and a setback measurement of roughly 6.2 feet, and then heard from the applicants' attorney, Steve Zaga. Zaga said building officials inspected the property's footings and approved them and that the Matthewses only learned of the setback issue after ordering a survey while seeking permission for an addition. "My clients didn't know about this," Zaga said, adding that the owners did not create the discrepancy and asking the board for "favorable consideration of the variance application."

The nut graf: the variance resolves a survey-discovered setback discrepancy by adjusting an interior property line so the property meets the city's setback rules without requiring the owners to bear what the attorney described as a fault they did not create.

Board members asked technical questions about which boundary lines would move. Staff and board members discussed that the proposed adjustment involves the interior (eastern) property line and that the western property line — currently about 6.5 feet from a structure, per the survey — would not be moved as part of this adjustment because altering it could affect a neighboring lot. One board member said it would make sense to adjust all property lines so the parcel would not have to return to the board, while another noted that moving the western line could impose on the adjacent property.

Board member (unnamed) moved to approve the property-line adjustment on the east side and to "make the entire property conforming." A second motion to approve was made and seconded. On roll call the board recorded votes in favor from Bennett, Phillips, Rita, and two other board members identified in the meeting as Sue and Danny; there were no recorded no votes or abstentions. The board approved variance No. 240025.

After the vote, counsel asked whether the board required anything further from the applicants; staff indicated no further action at the hearing. Zaga then excused himself and the applicants. The meeting then moved on to other business and adjourned.

The board's action grants the Matthewses the zoning relief they sought; the transcript shows the next steps are to complete the formal property-line adjustment with city staff and related paperwork. The exact timing for recording the adjusted survey and any follow-up permits was not specified during the meeting.