crispcounty.com
   info@crispcounty.com  
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
spacer.gif - 810 Bytes


spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
Meetings

MINUTES
CRISP COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
March 20, 2007
9:00 A.M.

The Crisp County Zoning Board of Appeals met at a regular meeting on the 20th day of March, at 9:00 a.m. in the Crisp County Courthouse.
The following members were present: Emmett Walker, J.C. Clark, Mark Brubaker, Frank Lott and Bob McCadams. Also present, Connie Sangster, Secretary & Planning Director & Jimmy Mumphery, County Building Inspector.
Also present was the following visitor: Dallas Margeson, Monte Horne, Ron Gay, Bailey Gay, Ricky Hardin and Lisa Leggett with the Crisp County Health Department.

MINUTES

VOTE: Motion made by Mark Brubaker, seconded by J.C. Clark to approve the Minutes of the February 20, 2007 meeting. Carried unanimously 4-0.

PUBLIC HEARING

Request from Dallas Margeson for a variance to locate a structure (new house) on a parcel of property that dos not have public street frontage. Property described as a portion of lot 47; lot 48 and lot 49 in the Bay Branch S/D and located off of Cork Ferry Road (adjacent to 538 Cork Ferry Road) and being zoned RS2 (Single Family Residential).

Chairman Emmett Walker called the hearing to order. Mr. Walker read aloud the criteria in which variance requests are handled. Mr. Margeson was present and spoke on his own behalf. Mr. Margeson referred to the plat that was in the member's packet. He stated that the lots in question start at 47, 48 and 49, which was part of a lakehouse that was in his family's name that he just recently purchased. Mr. Margeson stated that he had spoken with Connie Sangster and she referred him to the Health Department to see if the property would qualify for a septic tank. Mr. Margeson stated that he applied for a septic tank permit August of 2006, which was prior to the regulations being changed from 1/2 acre to 3/4 acre lots, then after talking back with Connie he was told that the lots would have to be 1/2 acre lots, then he had the option of coming before this board for a variance. Mr. Margeson stated to make things a little more complicated, they have a public access road that comes off of Cork Ferry which you can see by the plat, it is platted in there which changes the dimensions of the lot and he thinks the problem they are going to have there is the easement to run water in, so if he is going to run water to the lot he wants to sell he will need an easement because he is running through someone else's property. He stated that he has been in discussion with Monte Horne (adjacent property owner) and the way they have left it is to move the road back to where it is originally platted, then he would have the full dimensions of his lot. He then stated that when he talked back to Lisa Leggett, she was willing to give him a conditional permit being that the existing road was moved back to the original plat location and county water being made available to the lot. He stated that what he is looking for is to be able sell or get a building permit for is parcel C, which according to Lisa would be far enough away from the existing well (parcel A), so what he is asking for is a building permit for parcel C, which is the first lot off of Cork Ferry. Mr. Walker stated that he noticed where the lots had been surveyed and he noticed that on the South side, that the 2 existing survey markers actually cuts off quite a bit of your land. Mr. Margeson replied that is correct and after discussing that with Connie, that by using the road as it exists, that road cuts through the back part of his lot and if Mr. Horne moves the road as originally platted it would give him the full dimension of the lot. Mr. Walker stated that the way it stands now with the existing road, he loses a lot of his land. Mr. Lott asked Mr. Margeson if his plans are to move the road to the existing row as platted. At this time, Ms. Sangster stated that the existing road had never been recorded as an easement to any of the property owners. Mr. Margeson stated that when they talked about moving the road, the Health Department did go back out and do another perk test. Lisa Leggett stated that she did go back out and if the road is moved there is enough property for a septic tank and drain field. Mr. Lott asked Mr. Margeson if he was planning on moving the road. Mr. Horne stated that when all this was done back in 1939 - 1940 that the road was platted, but was never put in so everyone has always used a path through the woods, he also stated that his father and Mr. Margeson's father had always talked about putting the road in but was never done. Mr. Horne stated that he told Mr. Margeson that he would be glad to bulldoze the trees and clear out the property so that he would be able to use his property. Mr. Brubaker stated that they had received a couple of letters from the Fire Dept. and EMS with concerns about the existing access road and in essence what the letters are saying, is that the existing road is not adequate for emergency vehicles, Mr. Brubaker asked Mr. Horne if there would be room there when the new road is put in. Mr. Horne stated that he did not have any intentions of paving the road, but the road will be the same r-o-w as Cork Ferry and Wolfe Thick and would certainly be better than what is in there now. Mr. Margeson stated that the new road would be much better than what is there now. Mr. Clark asked who owns the r-o-w now. Mr. Horne replied that everybody owns the road and the road was deeded and accepted and all those roads were recorded to be roads and some of them were not put where they were suppose to be and they are actually suppose to be public roads but they were never opened up. Ms. Sangster stated that the county has never accepted that road and the county does not maintain it. Mr. Margeson stated that the existing road affects lots 47, 48 and 49 of his property. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Margeson how was it fixed where they could go through his lots to the other houses on the lake? Mr. Horne stated there is a plat of Bay Branch S/D that was recorded and where they are talking about moving the road is actually where their legal access is to the property. Mr. Mumphery stated this is like the variance we had with Mr. Daniels that time, suppose to be a road, never was done. Mr. Horne stated there is a 40' r-o-w where the road is suppose to be and that gives the land owners the road to access their property and for some reason it was just put where it was but it does need to be moved and put where it is suppose to be. Mr. Walker stated that if Mr. Margeson wanted to shut his land off, there is nothing the other people could do and if the board approves this the way it is right now, there is no way he can start building there unless a new road is put there, because traffic is going to ride across the top of a 1000 gallon septic tank. Mr. Margeson stated that that is why the Health Department was willing to give him the conditional permit with the condition that the road was moved. Mr. Lott asked if the plan was to move the road. Mr. Margeson replied yes. Mr. McCadams asked if his plans were to sell parcel C and if he was planning on building and selling. Mr. Margeson stated that he was not going to build but did not want to sell something that was not buildable. Mr. McCadams stated that his concern is once the lot is sold it is a non-conforming lot and what is the new owner going to do. Mr. Margeson stated that parcel C as platted (current plat) is a 1/2 acre lot and per the Health Dept. is a conforming lot because he had talked with the Health Dept. prior to the regulations changing in September of '06. Mr. Margeson stated that he was doing the homework on the front end before selling the lot. Mr. Margeson stated that the road situation has always been an issue between themselves and the Horne's. Mr. Margeson stated that before they went to the trouble of moving the road, he wanted to make sure the lot would be a buildable lot. Mr. Clark stated that this Board couldn't do anything until there is adequate access to the road for emergency vehicles. Mr. Horne stated that would be very difficult for a fire truck to get down the existing road, and this is something that needs to be done for a lot of reasons including better access for emergency vehicles. Mr. Horne stated that he cannot speak for what Mr. Margeson plans to do but he is willing to build the road in there at his convenience. Mr. Horne asked the Board if what they want to see is the road built and is there anyway they can get an indication that if the road was built, that they would move favorably. Mr. Clark replied that if the County approves the road. Mr. Mumphery asked Mr. Horne when you say build/move the road, is that road going to be built to County standards? Mr. Horne replied no, built to County standards it would have to be a larger road and paved. Mr. Clark replied that is what he is referring to, and this Board has to look out for the interest of the County and others that may come in and want the same thing. Mr. Horne stated that the new road would be substantially better than what is there now. At this time Mr. Walker asked if there were further questions. There were none. Mr. Walker stated that this concluded the public hearing portion of the meeting and now they would go into discussion and vote.

MEETING

After discussion, the chairman asked for a motion.
VOTE: A motion was made by Bob McCadams, seconded by Mark Brubaker to approve the variance to locate a structure on a parcel of property that does not have public street frontage with the stipulation that the improved access road exists as originally platted at the time a building permit is issued. It was also noted that unless the road is built to county standards it will not be considered a county maintained road. Carried 3-1.

PUBLIC HEARING

Request from All South Outdoor Advertising, Inc. (with the property owner's authorization) to reduce the required 200' setback separation on the northwest property line to 120'; and a variance to reduce the required 200' setback separation on the south property line to 80' for the purpose of constructing a 12x30 (360 square foot) Billboard. The variance requests are for the separation between the RS1 (Single Family Residential) zone districts where billboards are not allowed. The property is located in a GC (General Commercial) zone district at the intersection of Coney Road S. and Ga. Hwy. 300 S.

Mr. Walker called the hearing to order. Mr. Ron Gay was present and spoke on behalf of the request. Mr. Gay circulated photos of the location to the members. Mr. Gay stated he had also provided letters of 2 adjacent property owners that are not in opposition of the request. Mr. Gay stated that the DOT in past time when you were placing a sign in unzoned areas, they required you to get letters from the adjacent property owners and if they objected, DOT would not issue a permit. Mr. Gay stated that the State DOT regulations did not require that if the location was in the correct zone district. Mr. Gay stated that he was in the middle of negotiations with a couple of different clients, The Retreat and Daphne Lodge so this is the best location for the sign because when you are coming up 300 you will know where to turn. Mr. Gay also stated that Mr. Ricky Hardin from Striplings is contracted to be on the south side of this sign. Mr. Gay stated that in his 30 years of outdoor advertising business there is a right place to put it and not a right place to put it and this is the best location because of the visual to turn people to Coney Road, and it would have to be there because you can't move it up the road because if you did people would miss it and have to turn around and come back. Mr. Brubaker asked Mr. Gay why could he not comply with the existing setbacks? Mr. Gay stated that where this spot is you have 2 roads Coney and another road that goes back and meets Old Coney back in there somewhere, so all of that is not where you would have residential and in the future you may have commercial stuff out there and then there is nothing close enough on down Coney, for instance, the 2 people that said it was fine for them for the sign to go in that spot. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Gay if he wanted to put the sign where the marker is located on the property. Mr. Gay replied yes it is off the r-o-w. Mr. Walker asked how many feet. Mr. Gay stated that it would be about 20' from the Coney r-o-w and about 12' from the 300 r-o-w and that is because the power lines dictate where you have to be and the 10' is a County requirement but they always go 12'. Mr. Walker asked the diameter of the pole the sign would be located on. Mr. Gay stated that it is 2' (24-30 "). Mr. Walker asked how much of the sign would go toward 300. Mr. Gay replied it would be a flag unit and would not go any closer to 300 and the biggest portion goes to the back towards the building with 20" of clearance and 12' from the power lines. Mr. Walker asked if the property owner where the sign is going was present. Mr. Gay stated that Vernon Smith and his wife, Teresa Smith owns the property and he is not here. Mr. Lott asked Mr. Gay if he had an agreement with the Smith's. Mr. Gay stated yes, he has a 20 year agreement with them. Mr. Walker asked why did he have to have that one spot. Mr. Gay stated that then you couldn't tell them to turn to go to Daphne's or the Retreat, because further up, they would miss it and these signs are directional advertising signs. Mr. Walker stated that he felt like it would be another hazard on that property that corner is too busy and it would be another object there with the power pole. Mr. Gay replied yes, it is a commercial object in a commercial zone where it belongs. Mr. Lott asked if everything else conformed except for the distance of the zone districts. Ms. Sangster replied that is correct. Mr. Walker asked if there were other questions. Mr. Ricky Hardin was present and spoke in support of the billboards. Mr. Hardin stated that he owns Striplings General Store and has a contract with Mr. Gay for advertising, Mr. Hardin said that where Ronnie wants to put the sign would be the best location and he his here for support of the sign. Mr. Bailey Gay with Allsouth Outdoor Advertising also spoke on behalf of the request. Mr. Gay stated that they could build the sign in front of Jesse's and Vernon's shop and would still look good and readable but it would seem a Little cluttered there, and if they put it there they would not have to get a variance there and they picked the corner because it would not be in the parking lot of Jesse's or in the way and would look funny if the sign was placed where it would be conforming. Mr. Walker asked if there had been any opposition to the request. Ms. Sangster replied no. At this time Mr. Walker stated that this concluded the public hearing portion of the meeting and now they would go into discussion and vote.

MEETING

After discussion, the chairman asked for a motion.
VOTE: A motion was made by Mr. Frank Lott to approve the request, the motion died due to the lack of a second, therefore the request to reduce the required 200' setback separation on the northwest property line to 120' and a variance to reduce the required 200' setback separation on the south property line to 80' for the purposed of constructing a 12x30 (360 sq. ft.) billboard was denied.

OLD BUSINESS

None.

NEW BUSINESS

None.

spacer.gif - 810 Bytes
  © Crisp County Board of Commissioners