CRISP COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
December 18, 2012
The Crisp County Zoning Board of Appeals met at a regular meeting on the 18th day of December at 9:00 am. in the Crisp County Government Center.
The following members were present: J.C. Clark, Jerry Carney, Wendy Peavy, Lucky Taylor and Dale Mitchell. Also present, Connie Sangster, Crisp County Planning Director and Jimmy Mumphery, County Building Inspector. Also present were the following visitors: Randy Rogers.
Vice Chairman J.C. Clark asked for a motion. Board Member Lucky Taylor asked that the Minutes of November 20, 2012 be changed to reflect that the presented minutes be amended from compensation for their time and expense for being on this Board to: compensation/reimbursement.
VOTE: Motion was made by Jerry Carney with a second by Lucky Taylor to approve the minutes of the December 18, 2012, with the above stated amendment. Carried unanimously.
Request from Randy Rogers for the following: 1) Variance to reduce the required 35' front yard setback to 30' on 29th Ave. East; and 2) Variance to reduce the required 35' front yard setback to 5' on 1st Street for the purpose of adding a 30x25 (750 sq. ft.) open carport to the existing structure. Property is zoned RS2 (Single Family Residential) and is located at 626 E. 29th Ave.
Vice Chairman J.C. Clark called the hearing to order. Mr. Clark read aloud the criteria and procedures that the board considers when making decisions. At this time, Mr. Clark read aloud the variance requests.
Mr. Rogers was present on spoke on his own behalf. Mr. Rogers explained to the Board that he would like to enclose his existing carport to enlarge his living area. He stated that his family was getting bigger, has grandchildren now. Mr. Rogers also told the Board that he has a son that is in a wheelchair, he stated that he has an existing ramp on the back side of his house which is real steep. If allowed for new carport he wants to put a ramp on the front edge that will be to code where the other one is not. He stated that the carport would not only allow him to put his vehicles under it but would also keep Cal (his son) to be able to enter and exit the residence without the rain being a factor in the wheelchair. Mr. Rogers stated that one day his son would eventually own the house. He stated that he lives alone right now and hopefully can continue but if that was the case he would have to move in with him here. Mr. Rogers stated that he would like to come out within 5' of the setback. He plans to add an open carport. Mr. Clark asked if the carport was going to be extended out. Mr. Rogers replied yes, out toward 1st Street. Mr. Rogers showed the Board a picture taken in the middle of 1st Street and stated that Mr. Mumphery came out and marked the r-o-w for him. Mr. Taylor asked if the carport would be attached to the house and not free standing. Mr. Rogers replied yes. Mr. Mitchell stated that he had a question about the fact that we were asking about a setback from the front yard, when the address of this house is 29th Ave., which means to him that the front faces 29th Ave. and why is this not considered a side yard setback? Ms. Sangster replied that anytime you front 2 streets, as in this case (corner lot), you have 2 front setbacks. Ms. Sangster also stated the reason for the request on the front is to stay in compliance, the lots in that area are not large enough to go by the County's setbacks, the house was constructed in the 70's before the County began enforcing regulations and normally we would honor the City's required (30' front) setback in those areas, and these City type lots are just not workable with the County's required (35' front) setback. Mr. Carney stated that what he was looking at, is the house is built 30' off there and Mr. Rogers is asking to bring the carport even with the front of his house, so to him, if this Board says no, its like saying you better go move your house too, so as far as he is concerned the front setback is not an issue from the front because the house is already there. Ms. Sangster replied that it is not an issue with the City's 30' the County's setback is 35 and the new carport will be within the required 35' County setback. Mr. Carney also stated that directly across the street, coming out of Mr. Rogers' carport, the permanent carport is not compliance with County setbacks either. So this carport is consistent with the carport across the street and others in the neighborhood. Mr. Taylor asked Mr. Rogers if he was going to widen his driveway entrance off the road also. Mr. Rogers replied yes. Mr. Carney asked if the roof was going to be like a shed roof attached or how was it going to be attached to the property. Mr. Rogers replied he was going to attach to the fascia and come back with a tin roof like the one on the house. Mr. Taylor asked if there had been any comments from the neighbors. Ms. Sangster replied that Ms. Mary Beasley (lives at 702 29th Ave. E.) sent a letter in full support of the request. Mr. Rogers stated his new carport would be facing her - she is on the opposite corner, right across from 1st. Mr. Mumphery replied no. Mr. Clark asked if there were any more questions. There were none. Mr. Clark stated that this concluded the public hearing portion of the meeting and now they would go into discussion and vote.
After discussion, the vice chairman asked for a motion.
VOTE: A motion was made by Jerry Carney seconded by Lucky Taylor to approve both variances as requested, 1) reduce the required 35' front yard setback to 30' on 29th Ave., and 2) reduce the required 35' front yard setback to 5' on 1st Street. Carried unanimously.