Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lot Split topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Opelika zoning board approves two‑lot subdivision and minor variances at 500 Avenue A
Summary
The zoning board approved a two‑lot subdivision at 500 Avenue A with minor lot‑area variances (88 sq ft and 19 sq ft) and setback variances; staff recommended approval based on many existing nonconforming lots and urged design compatibility to match neighborhood character. Neighbors pressed for sidewalk and safety considerations.
The Opelika zoning board approved a request by Haley Investments to divide 500 Avenue A into two residential lots and granted minor variances to lot area and setbacks, after staff recommended approval and neighbors raised safety and design concerns.
Staff said the historic lot maps listed the parcel as 100 by 150 feet, which would meet the 7,500 square‑foot minimum per lot; a recent survey showed slightly smaller dimensions, prompting requests for an 88‑square‑foot variance on one lot and a 19‑square‑foot variance on the other. Staff recommended approval, calling the reductions "unnoticeable and minor" and noting many nearby homes are legal nonconformities with smaller setbacks.
"Staff does not believe approving the variance request would affect the character of the neighborhood," the planning staff member told the board, and recommended conditions that the new homes use compatible roof pitch, materials and distinct architectural features so they will "be in harmony with the neighborhood."
Nearby resident Ryan Bowen said he did not oppose the subdivision itself but urged the board and developer to consider pedestrian safety and construction staging on narrow 5th Street. "There is lacking pedestrian infrastructure," Bowen said, and he referenced a pedestrian casualty on 5th Street last year as part of his safety concerns.
Andrew Wall, representing Haley Investments, said the applicant prefers residential reuse over commercial development and plans driveway space to limit on‑street parking. After board discussion about whether a slightly larger front setback would address neighbor concerns, a member moved to approve the lot split and associated variances; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.
Staff will proceed with planning review and asked the applicant to reflect neighborhood‑compatible design in final building plans.
