Board of Adjustment (In-Person) (Jul 27, 2026)

Meeting Overview The City of Asheville Board of Adjustment convened for an in-person meeting on July 27, 2026, at City Hall. The session focused on evidentiary hearings for two specific cases: a variance request for 56 Moore Avenue and an application for a rehearing regarding 133 South Grove Street. The Board, consisting of Chair Suzanne Godsey and members Bruce Johnson, James Warnall, John Michael Cletus, and Jeremy Plemons, reviewed site plans, surveys, and public testimony before rendering decisions on both matters.

Key Decisions and Votes The Board took two formal actions during the meeting. First, the Board approved the variance for 56 Moore Avenue by a unanimous vote of 5-0. This approval allows applicant Ryan Reynolds to construct a single-family dwelling and parking areas within the 30-foot aquatic buffer of a jurisdictional stream, acknowledging site constraints such as steep slopes and right-of-way limitations.

Second, the Board denied the application for a rehearing regarding 133 South Grove Street by a unanimous vote of 5-0. The Board determined that the new as-built survey submitted by applicant Darian Bodenhurst did not constitute "newly discovered evidence" because the physical facts of the encroachment existed prior to the initial hearing on May 18, 2026, and could have been presented with reasonable diligence. Consequently, the original decision denying the variance remains in effect.

Discussion Highlights and Community Input During the hearing for 56 Moore Avenue, applicant Ryan Reynolds presented site plans and photographs, explaining that topographical constraints necessitated the variance. He emphasized his intent to build a single-story home for retirement accessibility and noted that existing vegetation helped stabilize the stream bank. Board Member John Michael Cletus commended the thoroughness and professionalism of the application, though he noted a personal disappointment that Reynolds was not present in person. Chair Suzanne Godsey stated that she did not believe it was necessary to impose specific conditions regarding Reynolds’ proposed rain catchment system, noting that compliance with stormwater regulations would be handled separately by the city’s stormwater department during the standard permitting process.

Regarding 133 South Grove Street, the Board heard from builder Josh Holcomb, who apologized for missing the initial hearing and presented photographs of survey markers to argue that the encroachment resulted from flagging errors rather than negligence. Jesse Swords, attorney for the neighboring property owner, objected to the rehearing, arguing that the new survey merely documented existing facts and that the builder’s remedy for surveyor error was legal action against the surveyor, not a variance. Board members Johnson and Cletus supported the denial, with Cletus stating that evidence of pre-existing conditions could have been produced earlier, and Johnson affirming that the facts of the encroachment had not changed.

Follow-ups and Next Steps No new directives were assigned to staff or board members during this meeting. However, it was noted that Nancy Watford from the stormwater department will review the rain catchment system and gutter downspouts proposed by Reynolds as part of the standard residential permitting process. The next scheduled meeting for the Board of Adjustment is set for August 24, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. at Asheville City Hall.

Impact on Residents The approval of the variance for 56 Moore Avenue allows for residential development in a sensitive aquatic buffer zone, subject to standard stormwater compliance reviews. The denial of the rehearing for 133 South Grove Street reinforces the Board’s strict interpretation of "newly discovered evidence," clarifying that physical conditions existing at the time of an initial hearing do not qualify for reconsideration simply because they were not previously documented. These decisions maintain the integrity of the Unified Development Ordinance’s setback and buffer requirements while providing clarity on the evidentiary standards for future appeals.