Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fairhope Board approves front-yard setback variance for Wisteria Street lot, requires 25-foot drainage easement
Summary
The Fairhope Board of Adjustment approved a 15-foot front-yard setback variance for Lot 76 in the Fairfield Heights subdivision but required the applicant to record a 25-foot nonexclusive drainage easement protecting an existing natural drainage way; the decision was unanimous and includes recording and timing conditions.
The Fairhope Board of Adjustment on July 20 approved a 15-foot front-yard setback variance for Lot 76 in the Fairfield Heights subdivision, authorizing a 20-foot front setback for potential construction on the vacant Wisteria Street parcel owned by Gina Littlepage. The board attached conditions to preserve a natural drainage way, including a recorded 25-foot nonexclusive drainage easement to be filed in Baldwin County probate within 365 days.
Planning staff told the board the 0.14-acre lot contains an established overland drainage flow that should not be obstructed. Staff recommended conditional approval while urging protection of the drainage feature. As the planner explained, “Richard Johnson … supports substantial front yard setback variance based on his findings, but he feels strongly that the rear portion of the lot functions as an established overland drainage way,” and staff offered easement language that forbids structures, fill, piping, or other work that would obstruct flow.
Owner Gina Littlepage told the board she wanted the variance approved without added restrictions that would prevent later engineering solutions; she said she has sought letters from private engineers and asked the board not to preclude use of a pipe if future design work supports it. “I respectfully request that the easement be granted without the stipulation,” Littlepage said during public testimony. Neighbors who spoke during the public comment period said they either accept the existing drainage or would support city action to improve flow, but several cautioned against solutions that could worsen conditions for adjacent yards.
Board members debated whether to require an engineer before action or approve now with an easement to protect the drainage way. The board ultimately voted to approve the variance with staff-recommended conditions, including recording the 25-foot drainage easement with specific language prohibiting grading, piping or other alterations that would impede natural flow; the board noted the easement language can be finalized by the city engineer before recording. The decision is effective upon recording of the easement as required by the board’s condition.
