Opelika board approves Executive Park Drive setback variance despite business-owner complaints about chronic drainage

The Opelika Zoning Board of Adjustment approved a 20-foot rear-yard variance on a commercial lot at 2821 Executive Park Drive even as a neighboring commercial owner described long-standing drainage problems and urged the board to delay action until the city engineer reviewed stormwater capacity.

Matt, planning staff, told the board the lot is in a C-2 zone but was originally developed under a mid-1980s M-1 standard that lacked side and rear setbacks. The applicant proposes a new office building with a 30-foot front setback, 10-foot side setbacks and a 10-foot rear setback — a 20-foot variance from the now-required 30-foot rear-yard standard. Staff recommended approval and noted that several neighboring lots previously received variances.

Chris Tomlinson, who identified himself as the owner of two commercial properties and two businesses in Opelika, told the board he has monitored flooding on Executive Park Drive since 2017 and said he has photos and videos documenting repeated incidents. "It floods the cul de sac every single time it rains," Tomlinson said, adding that the city detention area "backs up into my parking lot approximately a 100 feet every time it rains." He said recent construction and a raised grade nearby exacerbated the problem and that maintenance of the detention basins is inadequate.

Brad Flowers of Flowers and White Engineering, representing owner Corey Yeager, responded that the area was platted for the development pattern now proposed and argued the immediate problem is maintenance of the pond, not the proposed building. "By denying this, you're punishing the landowner that had rights to do what was originally designed to be done because of failure of the city to maintain its drainage structures," Flowers said.

Board members debated whether to table the item to obtain testimony from the city engineer. Some members urged tabling and an engineering review; others emphasized the board's limited jurisdiction over setbacks and the fact that the lot could still be developed under existing setbacks. After discussion a member moved to approve the requested variance; the motion carried by voice vote. Staff said they would follow up with the city engineer and with a contact named in the public comments so that drainage concerns could be addressed administratively.

The variance allows the applicant to build with a 10-foot rear setback as presented, subject to any engineering requirements that arise in later permitting steps.