TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Zoning Commission
FROM: Will Deaton, MPA, AICP, CFM, CZO - Planning & Zoning Manager
Demetrios Moutos - Planner I
DATE: May 8, 2025
RE:
Title
A25-10. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact: A variance request to address maximum lot coverage at 3299 Quarry Drive (0418817137000), owned by Vincent and Linda Higgins, represented by Christopher Haywood of Haywood Builders Inc.
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
District 9 - Deno Hondros
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Goal II: A Responsive City Government Driving Economic Diversity and Sustainability
• Objective 2.1: Expand and diversify the City’s tax base to promote long-term fiscal resilience and economic stability.
Goal IV: A Thriving, Livable Community
• Objective 4.5: Support the development of vibrant, well-connected neighborhoods that enrich the quality of life for all residents.
Executive Summary:
The applicant requests a variance from the City Code limitation that restricts residential structures to a maximum of 30% of the total lot square footage. According to the applicant, the proposed custom home at 3299 Quarry Drive in Fayetteville exceeds this threshold with a ground-floor footprint of 6,777 square feet on a 17,275-square-foot lot. This design is essential to accommodate the unique accessibility needs of the homeowners’ disabled child. The home features a specially designed garage, carport, and indoor pool - vital amenities in the child’s mobility, transportation, and therapeutic exercise. All ground-floor elements, including hallways, doorways, and rooms, are tailored to ensure full wheelchair access. The requested variance is crucial to providing a safe, functional, and inclusive living environment, and the proposed design complies with all required setbacks, as documented in the submitted plot plan.
The Zoning Commission held an evidentiary hearing on April 8, 2025. No speakers opposed the variance, which was approved unanimously (5-0).
Per Section 30.2.C.14, variances are intended to provide relief from dimensional standards in cases where exceptional conditions, beyond the landowner’s control, create a unique hardship under the strict application of the Ordinance. Variances do not authorize changes to permitted uses or modify conditions of approval, and they are to be granted only under limited and specific circumstances.
Background:
• Owners: Vincent and Linda Higgins
• Applicant: Christopher Haywood
• Requested Action: Exceed lot coverage for disability access.
• Zoning District: SF-10 (Single-Family Residential 10)
• Property Address: 3299 Quarry Drive
• Size: 0.40 acres ±
• Existing Land Use: Vacant
• Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses:
o North - SF-10 (Vacant/Wooded)
o South - SF-10 (Single Family Houses)
o East - SF-15 (Single Family Houses)
o West - SF-10 (Single Family Houses)
Issues/Analysis:
The request is for a variance from the maximum lot coverage standard established in Section 30-3.D.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) for properties zoned SF-10 (Single-Family Residential 10), which limits principal structure coverage to 30% of the total lot area. The subject property, located at 3299 Quarry Drive, contains 17,275 square feet, allowing a maximum footprint of 5,182.5 square feet. The proposed home includes a ground-floor building envelope of 6,777 square feet, exceeding the allowable coverage by approximately 1,595 square feet, or 9%. Based on these figures, the applicants are requesting an increase in the maximum lot coverage to approximately 40%.
The variance is being sought to construct a custom, ADA-accessible home designed for the applicants’ disabled daughter. The proposed design includes wider hallways and doorways for wheelchair access, a handicap-accessible garage and carport, and an indoor therapeutic pool accessible via wheelchair lift. Of the 6,777 square feet proposed on the ground floor, 1,725 square feet consists of unheated but essential areas, including the garage, storage spaces, porches, a spa area, and a carport. These elements are intended to support the child’s mobility, safety, and daily living needs within a fully accessible ground-floor layout.
Insufficient Justification for a Variance:
The following do not constitute valid grounds for granting a Variance:
• The existence of conforming or nonconforming uses or structures elsewhere in the same or other zoning districts;
• A request to establish a use that is expressly or implicitly prohibited within the zoning district; or
• Claims of economic hardship or increased profitability that would result from approval of the Variance.
Findings of Fact (Based on Applicant’s Responses):
The findings are based on the applicant’s responses to the submitted application and the most reliable information regarding the proposal before any testimony is presented at the evidentiary hearing.
Findings of Fact Statements as reviewed by the Planning Staff:
1. There is sufficient evidence that the strict application of the Ordinance requirements results in practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships as shown by the following evidence:
Strict enforcement of the Ordinance requirements would impose practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships, because the typical home footprint permitted under the Ordinance would be insufficient to accommodate an ADA-accessible structure.
2. There is sufficient evidence that any practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from unique circumstances related to the land and are not the result of the actions of the landowner, as shown by the following evidence:
The practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships are attributable solely to unique conditions specific to the property, not the landowner's actions, since the property is zoned Single-Family 10 (SF-10) and is subject to a 30% maximum limit.
3. There is sufficient evidence that the Variance is the minimum action that will make possible a reasonable use of land or structures as shown by the following evidence:
The requested Variance constitutes the least departure required to enable reasonable use of the property, as the Applicant is only seeking a 10% increase of the maximum percentage limit to accommodate the developmental needs of the Property Owner’s daughter. The proposed ADA-accessible home is thoughtfully designed to harmonize with the surrounding neighborhood, maintaining its established character and visual cohesiveness.
4. There is sufficient evidence that the Variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance and preserves its spirit as shown by the following evidence:
The Variance advances the general purpose and preserves the spirit of the Ordinance, as the proposed structure maintains the architectural compatibility and reinforces the cohesive character of the surrounding community. However, it exceeds the typical size found in the neighborhood.
5. There is sufficient evidence that in the granting of the Variance, the public safety and welfare have been assured, and substantial justice has been done, as shown by the following evidence:
Approval of the Variance advances public safety and welfare. It upholds substantial justice, as evidenced by the following: the proposed design maintains ample setbacks for the garage and residential areas, ensuring that the structure does not encroach upon the street or create any conditions detrimental to public safety.
Budget Impact:
There is no immediate budgetary impact associated with this request.
Options:
1. Approve Findings of Fact as drafted
2. Approve Findings of Fact with specific changes
Recommended Action:
Approve Findings of Fact as drafted
Attachments:
1. Application & Site Plan
2. Findings of Fact