TO: Zoning Commission
THRU: Craig Harmon, Senior Planner
FROM: Demetrios Moutos - Planner I
DATE: November 12, 2025
RE:Title
A25-50: Variance (UDO §30-3.D.5; §30-7.D.2) to reduce the MR-5 corner-side setback along Davis St. from 25 ft. to 10 ft. and the rear setback from 30 ft. to 15 ft. for a new single-family dwelling on the corner lot at 1001 Branson St. (PIN 0437049051000), Fayetteville; owner: Verona Assets, Inc. (Bob Doran); agent: Marcel Boatwright (Coldwell Banker Advantage - Fayetteville).
Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
2 - Council Member Malik Davis
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Strategic Operating Plan FY 2025
Goal III - City Investment Planning: The Board’s quasi-judicial action sits squarely inside Goal III’s charge to “manage the City’s future growth and strategic land use” and to “sustain a favorable development and business climate through timely and accurate construction review and building inspection services.” Administering a variance by the book - grounded in competent, material, substantial evidence - supports both objectives by applying the UDO precisely while enabling small-scale reinvestment when warranted.
Goal IV (Live, Work, & Recreate): Objective 4.5 calls for “a place for people to live in great neighborhoods.” Where a setback modification can be conditioned or narrowed to protect light, air, privacy, and block character, it aligns with that neighborhood-quality focus rather than undermining it. (If the record shows adverse effects, denial is also consistent with Goal IV’s quality-of-life lens.)
Goal II (Diverse & Viable Economy): Objective 2.4 targets “a favorable development climate to encourage business growth.” At the household scale, a compliant variance pathway is part of that climate - reducing friction for code-consistent home investments while maintaining predictable rules. The plan tracks this climate with KPI’s like permitting timeliness and vacancy/appearance indicators; consistent variance administration contributes indirectly to those results.
Goal VI (Collaborative Government): The case workflow (public notice to owners within 300 feet, evidentiary hearing, on-record findings) embodies Goal VI’s emphasis on transparency, outreach, and trust in decisions. A25-50’s mailed-notice map and the hearing itself operationalize Objectives 6.12-6.3 (collaboration, customer service, and public information).
Linkage to the Future Land Use Framework that Underpins Goal III
The FLU Plan’s neighborhood policies explicitly contemplate measured flexibility (including setbacks) to encourage reinvestment where context supports it. In MDR settings, allowing modest adjustments while holding to design/compatibility standards is aligned with that guidance and with MR-5’s purpose of delivering diverse housing forms under Article 30-5.
Bottom Line: If the Board finds the statutory variance tests satisfied on this MR-5, MDR site, approval with any evidence-tied conditions advances Goal III (strategic land use and predictable processes), Goal IV (neighborhood quality), Goal II (favorable development climate), and Goal VI (transparent, collaborative decision-making). If the tests are not met, denial likewise supports the same goals by upholding rule-of-law expectations embedded in the plan’s performance-management framework.
Executive Summary:
Variance request at 1001 Branson St. (PIN 0437049051000), an MR-5 corner lot designated Medium-Density Residential on the FLU map, seeking relief from minimum yard/setback standards to enable a reasonable single-family building envelope. The relief focuses on the corner-side yard along Davis St. and the related rear-yard standard under MR-5 (25-ft. front/corner; rear 30 ft., or 15 ft. only when the corner-side is 25 ft.). Application filed Oct. 13, 2025 by Verona Assets Inc. (agent: Marcel Boatwright). Notices have been mailed to owners within 300 ft.
Background:
Owner: Verona Assets Inc. (contact: Bob Doran)
Applicant: Marcel Boatwright, Coldwell Banker Advantage - Fayetteville, for the owner
Requested Action: Variance(s) from UDO §30-3.D.5 (Minimum Yard/Setback; MR-5 Dimensional Standards) to reduce the corner-side yard along Davis St. from 25 ft. to 10 ft. and allow a rear yard setback of 15 ft., to enable a reasonable single-family building envelope on a platted corner lot.
Zoning District: MR-5 - Mixed Residential 5
Property Address: 1001 Branson St. (PIN 0437049051000)
Size: 0.11 acres ±
Existing Land Use: Vacant residential lot (single-family dwelling proposed)
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
• Immediate block: MR-5 - Predominantly residential
• Vicinity: LC - Limited Commercial; OI - Office & Institutional
Letters Mailed: Notices sent to 47 owners within a 300-ft. buffer of the subject parcel.
Issues/Analysis:
This request departs from the MR-5 base dimensional standards for a corner lot at 1001 Branson St. (PIN 0437049051000). In MR-5, principal buildings must observe: (a) 25-ft. front and corner-side setbacks; (b) a 30-ft. rear setback (which may drop to 15 ft. only when the corner-side setback is at least 25 ft.); (c) a 10-ft. interior side setback; and (d) a 55% maximum lot coverage. The applicant seeks to reduce the corner-side setback on Davis St. to 10 ft. and the rear setback to 15 ft., with a 10-ft. interior side setback and no change to the 25-ft. Branson St. front setback. Their narrative argues that, absent relief, the corner-lot geometry forces a roughly 15’ x 60’ buildable envelope that is out of character for the block. Because this is a corner lot, visibility protections also apply: sight distance triangles must be preserved at the street intersection so that no object - including signs, fencing, walls, utilities, or landscaping - blocks the driver’s view (assume a 40-inch eye height taken 20 feet back from the edge of pavement). Standard 20’ x 20’ triangles are measured from the intersection of right-of-way lines at all intersections, and additional 10’ x 70’ triangles are required at any driveway or access onto a thoroughfare street. These triangles are independent of setbacks and effectively trim the buildable/planting area near the Branson/Davis corner.
Under the MR-5 rules, a rear setback of 15 ft. is only permitted when the corner-side setback is held at 25-ft. or more. Because the application proposes a 10-ft. corner-side setback on Davis St., the by-right 15-ft. rear allowance does not apply; relief is therefore required for both the corner-side (25 → 10 ft.) and rear (30 → 15 ft.) yards. The proposed 10-ft. interior side yard meets code and does not require a variance. Lot coverage limits for MR-5 (55%) are materially more permissive than SF-districts and, as proposed, are not the binding constraint. Sight-triangle limits, however, remain a safety constraint regardless of how the setbacks are varied.
Exhibits in the packet show the standard corner-lot setbacks that apply and the applicant’s proposed envelope, confirming that the requested relief is targeted to the Davis St. corner and rear yard. For the record, the final plan/plat should also depict the required 20’ x 20’ intersection triangles (and any 10’ x 70’ driveway triangles if accessing a thoroughfare) to document that visibility will be preserved. The city’s zoning/context maps reflect MR-5 on the subject lot, with nearby Limited Commercial (LC) and Office & Institutional (OI), consistent with a mixed residential fabric near neighborhood-scale nonresidential uses.
Relationship to the Future Land Use Plan (FLUP
The Future Lad Use Map places the site within the Medium-Density Residential (MDR) character area, adjacent to OI. MDR anticipates infill and reinvestment in walkable, established neighborhoods, with attention to scale, site design, functional open space, and safe operations at intersections. The FLUP’s Goals #4 ad #5 (“foster safe, stable, and attractive neighborhoods” and “preserve and enhance environmental features”) and the supporting policies (LU-6: quality neighborhood design; LU-8: open-space/natural-feature preservation; LU-10: stormwater/resiliency) are the most relevant touchstones for a small-lot corner variance.
On balance, a modestly deeper building envelope on a constrained corner lot can align with MDR if it (1) maintains a pedestrian-facing front on Branson St., (2) respects neighborhood scale and massing at the Davis corner, (3) protects required sight triangles so visibility is unobstructed for drivers and pedestrians, and (4) protects rear-yard drainage and any tree canopy. Those outcomes implement LU-6’s emphasis on street/sidewalk design, transition, and safety, and LU-8/LU-10’s direction to preserve usable open space and avoid off-site runoff effects. Conversely, if the encroachment materially reduces usable rear-yard open space, channels runoff onto adjacent parcels, or places structures/landscaping within the sight triangles, it would conflict with LU-6/LU-8/LU-10 and should be narrowed.
Variance Standards and Minimum-Necessary Relief
The application is processed under UDO §30-2.C.14 and must meet all variance standards (practical difficulties, land-related uniqueness, minimum action, harmony/spirit, public safety, and substantial justice). The submittal cites the corner-lot geometry and small lot size as the land-based constraints; it also asserts that comparable nearby houses sit closer to streets than today’s MR-5 standards, and that strict application would force an atypically narrow footprint. The Board should weight those assertions against on-the-ground evidence and block-face patterns. Public-safety findings should explicitly account for sight-triangle preservation, including the prohibition on visual obstructions between roughly 2.5 ft. and 10 ft. above grade within the required triangles.
Key “Minimum-Necessary” Checks:
• Could a somewhat larger corner-side setback (e.g., >10 ft.) still yield a viable plan and reduce the scale of relief while simplifying compliance with the 20” x 20’ triangles?
• Note that maintaining a 25-ft. corner-side setback would permit a 15-ft. rear yard by right (no rear variance), but would tighten the width - tradeoffs the Board may explore to calibrate relief alongside triangle constraints.
• If driveway access is proposed to a thoroughfare, can the plan shift the driveway to more readily meet the 10’ x 70’ triangles without additional variance?
Potential Conditions to Keep the Request Consistent with the FLUP
If the Board finds the standards met, conditions can tie approval to MDR/FLUP outcomes without over-reaching: (1) fix the footprint and elevations to the submitted exhibit; (2) require compliance with MR-5 lot-coverage/height and all sight-triangle protections (depict 20’ x 20’ intersection triangles and, where applicable, 10’ x 70’ driveway triangles on the final plan/plat; no obstructions within these triangles; coordinate driveway location with the City/NCDOT as needed); (3) require stormwater neutrality (no net increase in concentrated discharge onto adjoining lots), and preserve any significant rear-yard trees where feasible; and (4) maintain the Branson-facing front entry/porch orientation. These address LU-6 (neighborhood design/safety), LU-8 (open space/trees), and LU-10 (resiliency).
Scope and Record
Any approval should be limited to the specific setbacks and exhibit(s) adopted in the decision; all other UDO provisions remain in force, and building/trade permits are still required. Case setup and fee records confirm the active A25-50 variance with payment received.
Context recap for the Board’s evidentiary review:
• Zoning & standards: MR-5; front/corner-side 25 ft.; rear 30 ft. (15 ft. only when corner-side ≥25 ft.); side 10 ft.; lot coverage 55%.
• Request: corner-side (Davis) 25 → 10 ft.; rear 30 → 15 ft.; side 10 ft. (meets code); front (Branson) retained at 25 ft.
• Safety: preserve 20’ × 20’ sight triangles at the Branson/Davis intersection; provide 10’ × 70’ triangles at any access onto a thoroughfare; no visual obstructions (including signs) within triangles, measured assuming a 40-inch driver eye height taken 20 ft. from edge of pavement; triangles must be shown on the final plan/plat.
• FLUP: MDR setting with nearby OI; apply Goals #4-#5 and LU-6/LU-8/LU-10.
• Maps/exhibits: zoning and aerial context included in the packet for notice and record.
Net: The relief is numerical and localized. If conditioned to protect sight distance at the corner, rear-yard function, street-side character, and drainage, the variance can be reconciled with the MDR framework and the FLUP’s neighborhood/safety/stormwater policies; if not, it should be narrowed to the minimum that cures the corner-lot constraint.
Budget Impact:
A25-50 (setback relief on Branson St.) is budget neutral. The City has already collected the standard variance application fee, which covers routine administrative work - intake, case routing, mailed notice and site posting, agenda prep, and minutes. The request does not require new capital spending, utility extensions, or additional City operations beyond normal permitting and inspections if a project proceeds. If the Board grants the variance, the applicant - not the City - pays any permit, inspection, and deed-recording fees. If approval allows a home or addition to be built or brought into compliance, the fiscal effect is a modest uptick in the tax base with negligible incremental service demand typical of built-out neighborhoods. If denied, there is no change to revenues or expenditures beyond staff time already recovered by the application fee.
Options:
The Board may approve, deny, or approve with conditions. Its decision must rely solely on the record and the required findings of fact. Approval is appropriate only if competent, material, and substantial evidence supports each finding; if any finding is not supported, the appropriate action is denial. When granting approval, the Board may attach reasonable, related, evidence-based conditions to ensure the findings are met. Deliberations should stay tightly focused on each required finding (variance standards in the UDO).
Case A25-50 - Possible Motions and Required Findings
(Variance(s) to minimum yard/setback standards at 1001 Branson St. (corner of Branson & Davis; zoning MR-5. Applicant seeks: (1) reduce the corner-side setback along Davis from 25 ft. to 10 ft.; and (2) reduce the rear setback from 30 ft. to 15 ft. Side setback of 10 ft. is the MR-5 base standard and does not require relief.)
Motion to Approve (as requested)
Motion: Approve variances to the MR-5 minimum yard/setback standards to: (a) reduce the corner-side yard (Davis St.) from 25 ft. to 10 ft.; and (b) reduce the rear yard from 30 ft. to 15 ft., for a single-family dwelling at 1001 Branson St., as depicted on the exhibits in the record.
Findings of Fact required for approval (all must be supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence):
1. Practical difficulties / unnecessary hardships, shown by: ______.
2. Unique land-related circumstances / not self-created, shown by: _____.
3. Minimum action to enable reasonable use, shown by: _____.
4. Harmony with the Ordinance; spirit preserved, shown by: _____.
5. Public safety, welfare, and substantial justice assured, shown by: _____.
Note: In MR-5, rear setback may be 15 ft. only when the corner-side setback is 25 ft. or more; because the request reduces the corner-side to 10 ft., the 15-ft. rear requires its own variance. This motion grants both.
Motion to Approve with Conditions
Motion: Approve the above variances with the following conditions tied to the exhibits and findings.
Findings of Fact for conditional approval (all must be supported):
Same five findings as above, “as conditioned.”
Example conditions (tailor to the record):
1. Location & setbacks: The dwelling shall be constructed substantially as shown on the approved site exhibit. The corner-side setback along Davis shall be no less than 10.0 ft. at any point; the rear setback shall be no less than 15.0 at any point. Any relocation that increases encroachment requires new approval.
2. Lot coverage compliance: Total building coverage shall not exceed the MR-5 maximum of 55%; zoning shall verify at permit stage.
3. Drainage control: Roof runoff from the new structure shall be managed on-site (gutters/downspouts/splash blocks or equivalent) and shall not be directed onto adjacent lots or public rights-of-way; no grading onto adjoining properties.
4. Code/permit conformance: The project must comply with all applicable codes and obtain required permits; staff shall verify conformance with the approved exhibits and these conditions at permitting and inspection stages.
Alternative condition path if the Board prefers to avoid a rear-yard variance: set the corner-side setback at ≥25 ft. to allow a by-right 15-ft. rear; or, retain the requested 10-ft corner side but require the rear at ≥30 ft. (no rear variance). Use whichever configuration the evidence supports.
Motion to Deny
Motion: Deny the requested variance to reduce the MR-5 corner-side (Davis) and rear setbacks at 1001 Branson St.
Findings statements supporting denial (identify which findings are not met and why, with record citations):
1. Insufficient evidence of practical difficulties / unnecessary hardships, because: _____.
2. Insufficient evidence of unique, land-related circumstances (not self-created), because: _____.
3. Insufficient evidence that the request is the minimum action necessary, because: _____.
4. Insufficient evidence that the request is in harmony with the Ordinance and preserves its spirit, because: _____.
5. Insufficient evidence that public safety, welfare, and substantial justice would be assured, because: _____.
Record touchpoints used above: Site is MR-5; base setbacks for single-family are 25 ft. front/corner-side, 10 ft. side, 30 ft. rear (rear may be 15 ft. only when the corner-side is ≥25 ft.). Applicant expressly seeks 10 ft. on Davis (corner-side) and a 15-ft. rear; side yard at 10 ft. matches MR-5 base and needs no relief.
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
Because A25-50 is a quasi-judicial variance, staff does not recommend approval or denial. The Board must base its decision solely on competent, material, and substantial evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing; due-process requirements prohibit staff from advocating either way.
For A25-50 (minimum yard/setback variance at 1001 Branson St. on the Branson/Davis corner in the MR-5 district), staff’s role is to:
• Assemble and organize the record (application, site plan/exhibits, mailed-notice list and affidavits, staff attachments).
• Identify the applicable UDO provisions and the five required findings of fact.
• Present relevant facts and exhibits without advocacy.
• Where appropriate, outline conditions that are legally tied to the evidence should the Board grant relief - for this case, examples include: tying any approval to the submitted building envelope/setbacks (10 -ft. corner-side on Davis; 15-ft. rear, as shown), confirming compliance with MR-5 dimensional and lot-coverage limits, maintaining sight-triangle/ROW and utility easements, addressing stormwater/drainage per City/PWC standards, and satisfying all permit/code requirements.
The burden of proof remains with the applicant. The Board - not staff - must make the findings and the final determination.
end
Attachments:
1. Application
2. Aerial Notification Map
3. Zoning Map
4. Land Use Map
5. Subject Property Photos
6. Surrounding Property Photos
7. Plot Plan