►
From YouTube: Board of Zoning Appeals January 24, 2023
Description
Board of Zoning Appeals
January 24, 2023
5:30 PM
Old Business
Final Orders
New Business
A) Election of Officers
B) Approval of Meeting Schedule for 2023
C) App 23- 93008 — Variance request from Garfield Signs & Graphics to permit an
additional freestanding sign at 550 East Gate Dr. Zoned RMH. TPN: 122- 17- 07- 011.
D) App 23- 92001 — Special Exception request from Julia C. Devore to permit horses
on property at 125 Burkwood PI. SW. Zoned RSS. TPN: 105- 12- 16- 002.
E) App 23- 93009—Variance request from Leslie& Pamela NeSmith, to permit a fence
at 608 Whippoorwill Court. Zoned RS- 15. TPN: 106- 18- 18- 021.
Adjournment
A
C
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
I
A
D
D
A
J
J
The
subject
property
550
Eastgate
Drive,
is
approximately
13.81
Acres
an
area
and
located
on
the
south
side
of
the
city
between
Bedford
Place
Southwest
to
the
west
and
Whiskey
Road
to
the
east.
The
property
is
Zone
residential,
multi-family,
high
density,
RMH
developed
and
currently
used
as
a
rehabilitation
and
nursing
facility
with
related
parking.
J
The
request
before
we
use
for
a
variance
to
zoning
ordinance,
sections
447b1
and
4
4
10
C
to
permit
an
additional
freestanding
sign
approximately
15
square
feet
in
area
at
the
entrance
to
the
facility
along
Eastgate,
Drive
Frontage
of
the
property
cumulative
square.
Footage
of
all
proposed
signage
is
approximately
30
square
feet.
J
Pursuant
to
section
447,
not
more
than
one
freestanding
sign.
Excuse
me
shall
be
permitted
per
lot,
except
where
the
lot
fronts
on
two
major
arterials,
as
determined
by
the
planning
director,
in
which
case
an
additional
freestanding
sign,
may
be
permitted
with
no
more
than
one
such
sign
located
along
each
arterial.
In
this
case,
both
Bedford
Place,
Southwest
and
Eastgate
Drive
are
not
considered
major
arterials
pursuant
to
section
4410
of
the
city's
owning
ordinance
signs
in
RMH,
RMH
yeah
RMH
districts
with
a
maximum
area.
J
Sign
area
of
20
square
feet
and
a
maximum
height
of
eight
feet
are
permitted
by
right,
thus
requiring
the
variance
information
provided
by
the
applicant
about
the
site
plan
proposed
Dimension
is
assigned.
Is
it
contain
an
exhibit
B
of
your
agenda
packet
skip
this
here,
real
quick.
So
this
is
information
provided
by
the
applicant,
basically
just
Excuse
Me
A
Sign
permit
application
with
the
dimensions
here
on
the
top
and
the
proposed
design
on
the
pre-existing
brick
columns
or
wings
at
the
entrance.
J
As
indicated
by
these
plans,
the
property
currently
has
two
separate
signs
located
at
the
main
entrance
to
the
property
to
identify
and
advertise
the
location
of
the
facility
to
traffic
traveling
along
Eastgate
Road.
The
applicant
wishes
to
update
the
existing
signage,
utilizing
the
pre-existing
brick
pillars
as
support
structures
indicated
here.
J
But
they'll
be
used
using
the
pre-existing
structures,
the
site's
development
and
use
predate
the
current
zoning
District
designation
and
sign
requirements
of
the
district.
In
addition,
the
brick
structures
in
place
at
the
entrance
to
the
facility
predate
the
current
version
of
the
zoning
ordinance
and
the
requirements
they're
in
conditional
use.
Approval
for
the
existing
facility
was
approved
by
City
Council
on
October
28
1996,
but
they
really
only
prove
conditions
relating
to
the
exterior
design
and
scale,
not
necessarily
signage.
J
The
current
zoning
RMH
limits
the
size
and
size
number
and
typology
in
order
to
minimize
the
impact
of
surrounding
residential
districts.
Sign
restrictions
are
based
on
zoning
classification,
not
intensity
of
use,
which
prohibits
the
installation
of
the
additional
proposed
sign
in
the
district
as
zoned
as
depicted
on
the
attached
zoning
map
found
in
Exhibit
C.
J
That's
to
the
north
here
planned
commercial
to
the
east,
planned
residential
kind
of
all
back
in
here
to
the
Northwest
West,
West
and
limited
professional,
which
is
in
this
area
here,
accept
the
property
immediately
adjacent
to
the
West,
which
is
also
Zone,
RMH
Southwest,
really
other
contiguous
properties
are
not
subject
to
the
same
signage
requirements
as
they're
located
in
either
plan
unit
development
or
Zone,
commercial
or
not.
Zoned,
for
multi-family
density,
except
for
this
property
here
exhibit
D
in
your
agenda.
J
Packet
contains
photographs
of
the
property
taken
by
staff
depicting
the
existing
conditions
of
the
property,
as
well
as
the
distance
between
the
pre-existing
signs,
the
roadway
and
the
nearest
property.
This
is
just
a
photograph
of
notice.
This
is
on
the
Bedford
Place
Southwest
side
of
the
property.
J
J
That
is
the
right
side.
If
you're
looking
at
it
from
the
entrance,
that's
the
left
side.
Let's
give
you
an
indication
of
the
current
condition
of
this.
The
signs
this
is
looking
West
from
Eastgate
Drive.
Just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
basically
kind
of
how
obscure
they
are
from
the
roadway
there's
quite
a
bit
of
vegetation
there.
So
it's
really,
as
you
get
much
closer
to
the
entrance
way,
that
you
actually
even
see
the
the
pillars
here.
J
J
I
can't
I
can't
recall
at
the
top
of
my
head.
Basically,
it's
a
South
Carolina
Department
of
Transportation
determination.
It
has
to
do
with
a
number
of
trips
daily
trips,
but
it
would
have
to
be
significantly
higher
than
Eastgate
I
believe
to
be
considered
an
arterial
like
closer
to
Whiskey
Road
levels
of
traffic
for
a
major
arterial.
J
Necessarily
be
any
difference,
for
example,
if,
if
bad
for,
if
both
Bedford
Place
and
Eastgate
Drive
were
major
arterials,
then
there
could
be
two
signs
on
the
lot,
but
they
would
have
to
each
kind
of
front
each
roadway
but
yeah.
Typically
speaking,
Parcels
are
only
given
one
freestanding
sign.
One
freestanding
sign
per
parcel:
okay,.
F
J
J
Typically
speaking,
if
they're
pre-existing
structures
or
signs
that
kind
of
predate
the
the
current
iteration
of
zoning
and
zoning
ordinance
as
long
as
they're
just
kind
of
replacing
those
sort
of
things
swapping
them
out,
for
example,
if
a
brand
changes
or
something
like
that,
then
that's
considered
a
reface
and
not
a
change
per
se
or
a
new
sign.
So
in
that
case
they
would
not
be
required
of
variance
for
just
just
replacing
these
A's
here,
but
because
they're,
including
this
additional
sort
of
I,
guess
wording.
Yeah.
Okay,.
I
H
J
A
A
K
We
we
from
time
to
time
depending
on
different
celebrations,
Christmas
Veterans,
Day,
Etc
or
sometimes
put
lights
out
there
just
to
indicate
for
families
loved
ones
where
the
entrances,
but
there's
a
light.
That's
on
top
of
each
of
those
pillars,
that's
on
a
photo
cell
that
lights
up,
which
is
connected
to
the
facility,
but
it's
not
directed
to
the
sign
per
se.
You
can
see
it
right
here.
It's
kind
of
a
little
Lantern
Style
sits
the
top
of
that,
but
yeah.
H
So
obviously,
the
company's
gone
through
a
Rebrand
in
there
great
refurbishing,
all
of
their
signage
correct.
Is
this
a
atypical
placement
for
signage?
Is
there
more
of
a
standard
so
that
corporate
is
saying
they're
they're,
fitting
it
specifically
to
their
standards
or
they've
adapted
corporate
standards
to
fit
the
space
yeah.
K
We've
we've
consulted
a
few
folks
particular
to
South
Carolina,
and
this
seems
to
fit
the
the
form
and
finish
of
what
we're
looking
like.
Typically,
it's
a
v-shaped
sign
and
didn't
think
it
really
fit
the
aesthetic
to
be
honest
with
you,
it
does
run
into
Woodside
and
they
are
rather
particular
about
what
what
kind
of
gets
placed
in
and
around
there.
So
we've
tried
to
to
the
best.
We
can
make
it
not
so
obstensious,
but
we
think
it
looks
pretty
nice
not
too
loud.
K
K
We
didn't,
we
had
a
few
others
to
try
and
fit
Within.
You
know
without
coming
to
variance,
but
some
of
them
we
just
couldn't
make
it
look
nice
it
didn't
it
didn't
it
looked
awkward
to
be
to
be
honest
with
you.
It
was
too
small.
It
was
too
big.
Garfield
recommended
we
go
with
this
sign,
it
kind
of
fit
it
fairly.
Well,
so
that's
kind
of
what
we've
what
we've
proposed
at
least.
K
K
K
B
K
F
K
Correct
it's
it's
the
the
a
Insignia
or
the
the
Rebrand.
It
is
a
little
bit
tough.
There
is
no
actual
text
on
that
sign.
That's
on
the
main
pillar,
so
the
thought
was
to
make
it
a
little
bit
easier.
Have
that
signed
there
with
the
with
the
a
for
the
sale
of
anchor,
but
also
have
the
text
spelled
out
and
really
just
a
cut
down
on
confusion.
F
K
I
F
F
F
A
E
10.
C
at
the
city,
zoning
ordinance
to
commit
to
freestanding
signs
total
30
square
feet
in
an
area
on
a
property
Zone
residential
multi-family,
high
density
RMH
in
general,
is
located
at
5550
Eastgate
Drive
I've
got
the
sign,
comply
with
all
other
requirements
of
chapter
4,
article
4
of
the
zoning
ordinance
the
starting
signs
that
the
sign
be
consistent
with
the
submitted
design
dimensions
and
site
plan,
and
that
defines
reported
at
the
Aitkin
County
RMC.
D
A
F
G
I
think
there's
a
way
I'm
willing
to
get
past
condition,
one
with
the
extraordinary
and
exceptional
conditions
piece
being
well.
They've
already
got
the
monuments
there,
okay,
so
we're
not
building
or
constructing
something
that
doesn't
really
need
to
be
there.
It's
already
there,
so
that
was
that
was
my
other
Russell
with
I'm
kind.
D
G
G
C
D
G
H
E
Supposed
to
make
a
motion
I
personally
feel
that
I'm
I'm
questioning
whether
we
we
need
to
be
talking
about
design
the
square
footage
is
in
question
or
experience.
That's
where
footage
in
height
and
so
forth.
So
having
had
in
10
years
of
having
had
a
loved
one
there
for
place,
the
the
sign
wasn't
too
obvious
for
me.
E
J
J
E
J
Subject:
property
125,
birkwood,
Place
Southwest
is
approximately
0.99
acres
in
area
and
located
on
the
south
side
of
the
city
between
Newberry
Street
Southwest
to
the
west
and
Whiskey
Road
to
the
east.
The
property
is
zoned
residential,
single
family,
stable,
RSS
and
developed
as
a
detached
single-family
residence.
J
There
are
two
types
of
stables
addressed
in
the
city
of
Aitkin
zoning
ordinance.
Chapter
10
defines
a
pleasure
stable
as
a
stable
used
to
shelter,
horses,
mules,
Burrows
or
ponies
which
are
kept
or
written
for
the
sole
purpose
of
recreation
or
pleasure.
Therefore,
the
proposed
use
is
classified
as
a
pleasure
stable
in
the
Aiken
zoning
ordinance,
which
has
special
criteria
described
in
article
3,
chapter
3
and
attached,
as
exhibit
B
in
your
agenda.
Packet.
J
Information
provided
by
the
applicant
about
the
size
and
proposed
use
is
contained
in
exhibits.
A
c
and
d
of
your
agenda
packet,
according
to
the
Aitkin
County
Assessor,
the
property
consists
of
an
approximate
3934
square
foot
residents
with
Associated
detached
accessory
structures
on
a
0.99
acre
parcel
section.
3323
found
in
exhibit
B
of
your
agenda.
Packet
requires
a
minimum
lot
size
of
one
acre
for
two
horses,
an
additional
one-half
acre
for
each
additional
horse.
J
The
lot
requires
an
additional
0.01
acres
to
permit
horses
by
right.
The
RSS
district
is
one
of
the
three
districts
found
within
the
city.
Limits
designed
to
facilitate
the
keeping
of
horses
horses
for
personal
use
were
previously
kept
on
the
property
up
until
the
1980s,
at
which
time
the
youth
ceased.
However,
no
building
or
structure
or
premise
where
a
non-conforming
use
has
ceased
for
more
than
12
months
or
has
changed
to
a
permitted
or
conforming
use
shall
be
again
used
in
a
non-conforming
manner.
J
Pursuit
City
zoning
ordinance,
section
812,
a
non-conform.
Excuse
me,
four
non-conforming
Lots,
containing
less
than
an
acre
permissions
to
keep
horses
must
be
grounded
by
the
board
of
zoning
appeals
if
the
if
it's.
If
it
ceases
at
that
more
than
that
12-month
period,
the
subject
property
property
is
located
in
the
historic
overlay
District.
Therefore,
any
exterior
changes
visible
from
a
right-of-way
are
required
to
be
consistent
with
the
design
guidelines,
as
determined
by
the
Aiken
design
review
board.
J
Basically,
this
whole
area
are
all
also
zoned
residential
single-family,
Stables
RSS,
numerous
properties
in
the
area
both
conforming
and
non-conforming,
currently
have
horses
on
the
property.
The
area
has
been
designated
for
the
keeping
of
horses
prior
to
the
current
version
of
the
city.
Zoning
ordinance
adopted
in
1999.
J
J
J
And
the
front
lawn,
this
is
sort
of
looking
towards
Hitchcock
Woods
down
the
property,
as
you
can
see,
there's
some
pre-existing
structures,
detached
structures
and
I
believe
this
one
in
particular,
is
is
historic
and
is
the
reason
why
it's
it's
the
contributing
property
to
the
district,
not
exactly
sure
what
it
is,
but
I
believe
that's
the
historic
structure,
another
picture
of
that
structure
there.
This
is
looking
West,
again
kind
of
towards
Hitchcock
Woods,
another
picture
of
the
kind
of
front
and
area
for
for
parking
of
vehicles.
J
This
is
the
back
side
of
the
property
along
Coker
Springs.
As
you
can
see,
there's
some
significant
change
in
elevation
again,
just
just
pictures
of
the
the
rear
of
the
property
As.
You
move
towards
Hitchcock
Woods
on
the
dirt
roadway
there-
and
this
is
the
this-
is
looking
kind
of
North
East,
but
this
is
the
extent
of
the
property
line
here
this
approximately
around
this,
this
fence
area
here.
Extending
that
way,
this
this
property
here
to
the
South
is
a
separate
property.
J
J
J
B
J
Possible
I
wasn't
able
to
determine
that.
Basically,
every
record
that
I
was
able
to
locate
indicates
that
it's
just
under
it's
possible
as
surveying
technology
has
you
know,
Advanced
or
become
more
accurate,
that
that
discrepancy
may
have
occurred,
but
I
wasn't
able
to
determine
that
it
was
ever
quite
an
acre.
Okay,.
A
J
J
But
in
in
speaking
with
the
planning
director
and
based
on
the
applicants
request,
it
was
determined
that,
because
they're
still
having
to
go
through
the
special
exception
and
it's
the
discrepancy
is
the
acre
difference.
Excuse
me
the
0.01
Acres
difference
that
it
was
more
appropriate
to
limit
it
to
the
one.
One
excuse
me
two
horses
per
acre
requirement,
rather
than
the
RSS
District.
J
If
you
were
to
do
a
new
property
in
the
RSS,
District
I
think
the
the
max
the
minimum
acreage
you
would
have
to
do
is
like
I
think
about
four
acres.
Something
like
that.
So
I
think
that's
where
that
original
language
comes
from,
stating
that
there
isn't
really
a
number
of
restricted
number
of
horses
on
that
lot,
but
because
it's
going
via
a
special
exception,
I
think
it
was
determined.
It
was
more
appropriate
to
to
limit
it
to
that
because
of
its
size.
F
F
J
And
again,
that's
just
this
point:
that's
based
on
the
size.
So
if
it
were
a
one
acre
parcel
and
they
took
the
horses
off
for
40
years,
they
could
put
them
back
on.
It
wouldn't
be
an
issue,
but
because
it's
a
non-conforming
lot
technically,
based
on
the
new
or
the
the
most
current
iteration
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
E
J
No,
if
it
were,
if
it
were
an
acre
and
they
had
removed
the
horses
in
the
80s
and
wanted
to
bring
horses
back
on,
they
would
not
need
a
special
exception.
Horses
are
permitted
by
right
on
Lots,
an
acre
or
more
without
any
additional
I
mean
they
still
have
to
conform
to
the
the
keeping
of
horses.
Provisions
I
mean
they're
conditionally
approved,
essentially
yeah,
but
because
it's
just
slightly
smaller
and
the
fact
that
they
had
removed
the
horses.
That's
they're
here
for
the
special
exception.
J
Then
they
would,
they
would
be
permitted
those
two
horses
by
right.
That's
my
understanding
that
I
believe
the
owner
has
had
some
recent
survey.
Work
done,
I'm,
not
sure
they
may
be
able
to
clarify
that,
but
perhaps
in
an
attempt
to
find
that
extra
square
footage
but
I
believe
that
even
a
more
recent
survey,
it
indicated
that
it
was
just
shy
of
that
one
acre.
Okay,.
J
D
J
A
A
L
L
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
re-establish
deal
with
this
0.01
acre
issue
when
I
look
at
the
deed
and
the
original
sales
agreement,
the
lines
intersected,
Coker,
Springs,
Road
well,
there's
a
line
now
that
doesn't
quite
get
it
because
it
cuts
across.
That's
probably
about
that
0.01
figure.
I
I
can
tell
you.
I
can't
tell
you
that
there
was
one
acre
originally
I'm,
assuming
that,
because
of
the
the
that
definition
of
the
property
of
being
a
fence
line
and
a
small
tree
and
Coker
Springs
Road,
it's
kind
of
difficult
to
really
go
back
to
it.
L
A
L
It
was
broken
up
as
it's
like
the
original
Mead
Mansion
property.
So
the
way
they
divided
it
in
easements,
you
know
the
way
they
attend.
Coker,
Springs,
Road,
they'll
they'll
take
the
ruts
out
periodically
after
a
big
rain
and
things
kind
of
move
around
I
I
can't
really
say
it
was
that
no,
but
but
when
it
comes
down
to
it,
it
just
was
actually
broken
up
into
about
five
four
or
five
properties.
There.
B
L
There's
a
property
line
I
think
on.
If
you
look
at
the
upper
you
come
off
of
the
circle,
there's
a
property
line
there
there's
actually
the
goat
carbs
on
a
section
of
that
property
with
access
and
I,
think
access
available
to
run
down
right,
there's
a
there's,
a
there's,
a
line,
but
it's
not
a
not
a
an
easement.
It's
actually
it's
a
it's
a
group
for
our
own
property.
G
L
G
L
Having
horses
on
the
property
since
nineteen,
you
know
like
the
mid
80s,
so
obviously
there's
fencing
need
to
be
replaced,
it
would
be
the
stable
or
just
you
know,
some
some
minor
or
you
know,
stalls
and
whatever
that
to
be
installed
and
that
sort
of
thing
I
addressed
the
I
looked
at
the
spatial
relationship
or
the
spatial
requirements
in
the
ordinance
and
I
responded
really
to
that
and
I
think.
The
key
here
is
at
0.01
Acres.
G
G
L
G
L
L
L
E
Mr
chairman,
but
just
real
quickly,
sir
I
I
walked
your
property
this
afternoon
and
the
in
the
lower
Paddock
area
and
that's
yes,
there's
a
path
leading
from
the
upper
Paddock
to
the
lower
Paddock
yeah
looked
like.
There
was
a
little
bit
of
washing
there
yeah
that
it
might
need
to
be
looked
at,
but
from
that
lower
Paddock,
there's,
no
either
formerly
or
currently
any
access
to
filter,
Springs
and
thus
the
Hitchcock.
A
B
D
N
N
N
I
and
several
of
our
neighbors
got
together
and
we
rent
a
a
dumpster
which
is
considerably
down
Coker,
Springs
Road
and
it's
removed
either
weekly
or
twice
a
week
by
I
believe
it's
Waste
Management
they
come
and
they
take
it
away.
I,
don't
know
how
how
that
would
it
would
happen
up
here:
I
I,
don't
unless
they
put
it
right
in
their
front
lawn
and
Mr
Culver's
maintained
this
property
magnificently.
It's
it's
like
a
golf
courses,
front
yard,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
Horsemen
would
want
to
desecrate
that
lawn.
N
The
way
it
would
have
to
be
done
to
put
horses
on
it.
But
that's
another
issue
that
we
can't
speak
of
because
we
don't
know
who
the
who's
going
to
buy
the
house.
So
I'm,
not
really
I,
don't
think
I
can
say:
let's
work
with
Mr
colford
Mr
colford's
moving
and
I.
I,
don't
fault
him
for
wanting
to
enhance
the
value
of
his
property
by
getting
permission
to
put
horses
on
it.
But
I
just
think
there
are
more
issues
here
other
than
the
0.99
acre.
N
N
E
N
Yes,
but
it's
not
practical
as
it's
not
practical
for
Mr
kofer
to
go
to
Coke
directly
to
Coker
Springs,
because
it's
a
steep
incline
right
and
we
have
a
garage
with
a
lean-to
off
it
and
then
there's
a
steep
incline
down
to
the
storm
water
passes.
So
it's
not
practical
without
tearing
down
our
garage
and
probably
bulldozing
something
up
to
get
up
to
Kirkwood.
E
N
N
D
I
D
N
A
C
C
I
would
hope,
and
it
hope
to
I
didn't
get
to
talk
to
Max
ahead
of
time,
because
I
think
it
would
help
for
you
all
to
see
some
of
the
pictures
of
what
they
mean
when
they
show
a
barn.
It's
a
very
much
a
shed,
nothing
that
you
as
a
horse
person
today
would
consider
a
barn
it.
It's
just
a
little
shed
that
we
all
had
little
sheds
back
in
the
day
before
you
had
a
backyard
horse.
C
My
concern
is
the
cofers,
have
moved,
are
moving
they've
moved
and
they
want
to
get
you
to
decide
on
a
use
of
a
property
in
historical
district
that
somebody
has
to
have
a
plan
for,
and
you
don't
have
any
of
that
information
before
you.
There
are
things
that
are
required
of
a
horse,
property
and
I.
Get
that
on
an
acre.
You
could,
if
it
was
appropriate,
put
a
horse,
barn
but
I
believe
this
property
is
not
one
that
lends
itself
to
that.
I
think
you
kind
of
got
a
feel
for
it.
C
C
They
would
ride
down
by
what
is
now
the
group
Farms
barn,
but
they
would
be
able
to
ride
down
like
they
used
to
ride
through
right
near
my
property,
because
there
was
a
there
was
a
horse
path
and
it's
now
eroded
where
no
one
could
use
it
and
they
would
ride
down
and
go
into
Hitchcock
Woods
right
now,
on
this
very
historic
property,
which
was
the
meat
estate,
you
can't
figure
out
a
way
to
put
that
Barn.
You
can't
access
that
Barn
unless
you
go
through
there's
no
way
right
now.
C
I
walked
it
today
and
if
you're
familiar
with
it,
there's
a
little
cul-de-sac
in
that
very
historic
piece
of
property,
the
brick
building,
that's
the
connotation
for
the
historical
nature
of
this
property
has
a
brick
curb.
You
would
have
to
violate
all
all
that.
There's
no
way
to
get
to
that
anymore.
You
can't
because
it's
the
good
Farms
access
point,
so
the
property
you
can't
get
to
it
to
where
the
paddocks
are
anymore,
without
having
to
get
arrest,
I
mean
you
have
to.
C
If
you
have
a
barn,
you
have
to
have
access,
you
have
to
have
manure.
You
have
to
have
farrier,
you
have
to
have
vet
access.
You
have
to
get
there
and
and
trust
me.
We've
learned
in
the
last
couple
years
over
people
trying
to
put
barns
in
smaller
areas
that
you
can.
You
need
to
prepare
for
that.
It's
not
it's
incumbent
on
all
of
us,
maybe
the
people
that
don't
have
horses
but
to
think
about
it.
C
C
Where
could
you
put
it
that
is,
there's
there's
a
beautiful
house
right
next
door
to
this
that
overlooks
the
little
brick
building.
It
would
impact
the
whole
neighborhood
of
these
beautiful
single-family
residents
right
there
on
burkewood
place,
because,
regretfully
the
cofers,
this
property
now
doesn't
have
any
access
to
Coker
Springs.
C
C
It's
a
drainage
nightmare
and
the
cost
of
trying
to
stabilize
this
and
on
the
back
side
over
to
the
gufarb's
property
is
a
nightmare
and
I
just
would
ask
you
all
to
to
maybe
spend
some
time
refer
to
equine.
Do
something
that
doesn't
just
give
it
so
that
there's
some
promise
out
there
that
somebody
thinks
they
can
go
ahead
and
there's
some
green
light
to
building
or
reusing
property
that
hasn't
been
used
in
40
years
and
that
the
circumstances
surrounding
that
property
has
have
fundamentally
changed
40
years
ago.
C
It
wasn't
like
this.
40
years
ago
there
wasn't
a
house,
the
group,
Farm's
house,
wasn't
here
it's
this
beautiful
home,
that
that
backed
up
to
another
beautiful
home,
the
cofer's
home,
that
is
the
most
beautiful
yard,
gazebo
flat
space.
That
has
not
been
used
as
a
stable
in
years.
And
if
you
look
on
the
Zillow
advertisement
for
the
for
the
property,
you
will
see.
There's
no
Barn,
it
is
a
shed
of
which
most
people
that
want
a
horse
would
not
keep
their
horse.
C
So
as
much
as
I
would
love
to
say
it's
in
the
horse,
District
I
don't
think
that
this
piece
of
property,
given
the
changes
that
has
occurred
in
the
40
years,
since
there
were
horses
and
in
the
changes
in
the
surrounding
residences
and
how
houses
have
come
up
and
the
change
in
property
lines,
property
lines
that
it
would
not
be
something
that
I
think
would
be
appropriate
for
the
neighborhood
and
I'll
answer.
Any
questions
does.
A
L
The
shed
or
the
barn
I
wish
I
speak
to
and
I
think
Bill
group
Forbes
comment
is
well
taken.
There
is
a
poll
down
there,
it's
close
to
the
property
line,
but
there's
other
areas
on
that
property
to
locate
a
barn
the
how
the
area
the
the
property
would
have
to
be.
Obviously
so
Brooke
would
be
done
to
bring
horses
in
there.
L
So
there
is
access
to
that
area
and
I
think
the
the
certainly
constraints
with
regard
to
re-establishing
the
stable
location,
the
shed
itself
would
probably
fit
the
criteria
the
roof
is
lower.
It
would
have
to
be
raised
a
bit
to
do
that.
That
shed
was
the
original
Mead
Mansion
coal
pit
and
they
built
it
and
put
a
tin
roof
on
it
years
ago.
L
L
If
you
look
at
drainage,
the
drainage
off
the
lower
Paddock
go
straight
down
into
Coker
Springs,
the
drainage
off
the
other
Paddock
goes
towards
the
good
Farms
I,
don't
know
of
any
other
questions.
I
could
respond
to
I'd,
have
to
look
at
the
frankly
I'd
like
to
see
the
written
testimony
because
I'm
having
trouble
hearing
everything
that
was
said.
Okay,.
A
H
L
Correct,
yes,
there
was
a
price
reduction,
it
was
initially
I
think
it's
a
gorgeous
property.
It
is
absolutely
and
as
I
think,
Julia
was
a
little
bit
of
sentimental
input
to
set
that
price
where
it
was
and
we've
discussed
it.
Her
son
and
the
price
reduction
was
really
to
get
it
in
the
range
where
the
our
own
appraisals
placed
it
for
the
cops.
L
L
L
H
A
O
My
name
is
Chris
Eaton
I
live
at
522,
Coker
Springs
Road
at
Ron
point
the
place
with
a
hole
in
the
wall,
I
feel
for
my
neighbors
that
they
are
that
hair
short
on
their
acreage
to
have
it
a
given
that
they
could
put
horses
on
there.
I
do
believe.
That's
a
conditional
permitting
situation
still,
even
if
they
did
have
that
acre
and
that's
my
question
to
you
is:
who
decides
that
the
conditions
warrant
or
bar
having
horses
on
one
acre
in
that
neighborhood?
J
J
O
O
So
I
am
hoping
that
you
will
leave
it
to
the
people
that
actually
buy
the
property
to
figure
that
out
and
go
through
due
process
with
a
plan
rather
than
putting
it
on
there
now,
because
I
don't
think
that's
going
to
make
huge
difference
on
who's.
Looking
at
that,
and
someone
who
has
two
horses
is
not
going
to
even
consider
putting
their
horses
on
that
piece
of
land.
O
Well,
I
shouldn't
say
that
anyone
who's
used
to
taking
care
of
horses
would
not
be
doing
that.
So
anyway,
do
you
have
any
other
questions
for
me.
I
actually
have
two
acres,
so
I
could
have
how
many
four
horses
at
my
house
I
can
assure
you.
We
would
never
do
that
and
we
have
better
land.
We
have
real
paddocks
so
and
I
field.
Any
questions.
O
A
B
I
The
following
condition
should
be
considered
a
special
exception.
Pursuant
to
sections
3.3.23
and
8.1.2
was
granted
to
commit
horses
on
property,
Zone
residential
single-family,
stable
and
generally
located
at
125
birkwood
Place
Southwest,
no
more
than
two
horses
can
be
kept
on
the
property
at
any
one
time.
They're
keeping
their
horses
on
the
lot
shall
not
be
for
commercial
purposes.
The
equine
maintenance
standards
found
in
section
3.3.33
Shelby
net.
The
final
order
is
run
with
the
land
and
be
recorded.
The
Aitkin
County
RMC
office.
A
E
J
J
E
F
J
J
J
Sir,
the
subject
property
608
whipperwill
court
is
approximately
0.83
acres
in
area
and
located
on
the
south
side
of
the
city
between
Silver
Bluff
Road
to
the
East
and
Moultrie
drive
to
the
West.
The
property
is
on
residential
single-family,
RS,
15.
and
developed
as
a
detached
single-family
residence.
J
The
request
is
for
a
variance
to
zoning
ordinance,
section
414
to
permit
an
approximate
nine
and
a
half
foot
tall
fence
in
the
rear
yard
of
the
property.
Fronting
Silver
Bluff
Road
approximately
328
feet
in
length
along
the
Eastern
property
line,
approximately
24
feet
in
length
along
the
northern
property
line
of
the
subject:
property
pursuant
to
section
414c
of
the
city
of
Aiken,
zoning
ordinance
in
non-historic,
residential
districts,
no
fence
or
wall
on
any
portion
of
the
lot
May
exceed
six
feet
in
height.
J
However,
the
applicants
wish
to
increase
the
height
of
the
existing
fence
in
the
rear
yard
of
the
property,
from
six
feet
to
nine
and
a
half
feet,
thus
requiring
a
variance
information
provided
by
the
applicant
about
the
site.
Plan
and
design
of
the
proposed
fence
are
contained
in
exhibit
B
of
your
agenda
packet.
J
J
The
defense
had
previously
been
unaltered
since
the
applicant
purchased
the
property
in
2020.
Since
that
time,
there
also
appears
to
have
been
no
significant.
Excuse
me,
no
significant
changes
to
the
primary
structure,
the
shape
and
dimensions
of
the
lot
or
the
topography
changes
to
the
road
right
of
way
along
Silver
Bluff
Road
have
occurred
periodically
since
2017,
including
a
roadway,
roadway,
widening
and
utility
relocation
project
that
concluded
in
2019.
J
2021
scdot
traffic
count
data
for
the
for
this
portion
of
Silver
Bluff
Road
in
close
proximity
to
the
applicant's
property
indicate
approximately
16
700
annual
average
daily
trips
fences
in
the
immediate
area
by
and
large
conform
to
maximum
height
requirements
or
exist.
As
legal
non-conforming,
most
Parcels
are
developed
a
single-family
residential
along
the
same
portion
of
Silver
Silver
Bluff
Road.
J
J
So
these
two
along
this
block
here,
that's
one
portion,
another
app
property
owner
and
then
this
property
in
the
county.
But,
as
you
can
see,
this
property
has
a
significantly
larger
portion
of
the
piece
of
property.
That's
front
Silver
Bluff
generally,
maximum
fence
height
requirements
are
have
been
established
for
two
reasons.
The
first
is
to
promote
a
standard,
aesthetic
for
residential
and
Commercial
development
within
the
city
of
Aitkin,
which
facilitates
the
creation
of
a
convenient,
attractive
and
harmonious
Community,
while
providing
for
adequate
light,
air
and
open
space.
J
The
second
is
to
preserve
line
of
sight
along
roadways
and
sidewalks
to
minimize
accidents
that
may
occur
as
a
result
of
reduced
sight
distance.
As
depicted
on
the
attached
zoning
map
found
in
Exhibit
C.
There
are
a
variety
of
zoning
districts
in
the
vicinity
of
the
subject.
Property
adjacent
properties
to
the
West
are
Zone
residential
single
family
rs-15.
J
J
Exhibit
D
of
your
agenda
packet
contains
photographs
of
the
property
taken
by
staff
depicting
the
existing
conditions
of
the
subject
property
as
well
as
adjacent
properties.
This
is
a
picture,
looking
sort
of
I
guess:
Northeast
up,
Silver
Bluff
Road,
just
giving
you
an
indication
of
the
the
current
status
of
the
fence.
As
you
can
see,
it's
a
slightly
different
design.
J
This
is
a
portion
that
is
not
currently
the
applicant
hasn't
put
anything
up
quite
yet,
but
this
would
also
be
according
to
the
site
plan.
They
submitted
also
be
fenced
similar.
Basically,
like
the
same
as
this
up
to
the
corner
here
and
then
for
about
25
feet
going
this
way
as
well
on
the
Northern
property
line.
J
J
In
any
case,
that's
sort
of
the
planned
residential
Community
across
Silver
Bluff,
but
the
idea
is
to
to
illustrate
the
the
separation
between
the
homes
and
the
the
roadway
when
this
community
was
built.
There's
a
much
larger
area
here,
as
that
was
designated
as
a
buffer
between
the
roadway
and
the
homes,
and
this
is
similarly
across
the
street
just
to
indicate
how
the
the
difference
between
the
space
between
the
roadway
and
the
the
buildings
on
the
other
side
of
the
street.
J
This
is
towards
the
south
end
of
the
property.
Just
to
give
you
indication
of
the
difference
between
the
pre-existing
fence
on
the
neighboring
property,
it
appears
that
there's
some
increased
height,
similar
in
design
in
the
lattice
work
here,
but
I
was
unable
to
determine
when
that
was
was
put
up
and
it
looks
fairly
old,
but
it's
probably
a
little
bit
higher
than
six
feet
as
well.
But
in
this
case
it
would
be
legal
non-conforming.
J
J
A
J
J
C
J
J
So
again,
this
this
would
also
also
be
fenced
okay
and
then
going
West
on
the
North
property
line,
as
indicated
by
this,
drawing
this
was
submitted
by
the
applicant.
But
again
it
kind
of
illustrates
the
the
extent,
the
basically
the
whole
Silver
Bluff
Frontage
and
the
portion
of
the
northern
Frontage.
There
too,.
D
D
J
J
J
J
J
J
D
L
M
What
Max
was
saying
with
this
fence
is:
not
only
did
we
want
to
add
the
lattice
we've
gone
ahead
and
we've
purchased
Evergreen
vines
that
we
would
like
to
grow
up,
so
it
will
be
a
wall
of
green
which
we
don't
think
detracts
takes
away
from
any
of
the
look
of
the
neighborhood
and
it
would
actually
make
it
look
nicer.
We
take
our
daughter
every
morning
to
the
school
bus
at
the
end
of
our
street
and
even
at
6
30
in
the
morning
you
see
cars
just
zooming
by
the
back
of
the
house.
M
There's
our
house
red
lights
again
max
said
there
were
16
700
cars
that
go
by
a
day,
as
the
D.O.T
has
said,
and
that
was
several
years
ago
now
with
the
traffic
with
the
increased
traffic
because
of
the
new
grocery
store
going
in
and
more
development
at
Silver
Bluff
we're
going
to
continue
to
have
more
and
more
people
If
somebody
walks
past
our
house.
You
can
see
shoes,
you
can
see
people's
tires,
you
can
see
their
whole
car
and
they
can
see
everything
the
road
was
when
it
was
widened.
M
M
M
M
The
raised
Road
surface,
we
talked
about
the
topography,
our
house.
Our
lot
is
on
a
hill,
but
the
road
is
now
raised
and
some
places
three
feet.
Some
places
six
feet
up
from
the
backyard
across
from
us,
even
though
we
are
in
a
residential
section.
We
have
a
business
on
one
side,
there's
a
business
across
the
street
that
Woods
Market
they
frequently
have
music
outside.
M
M
D
D
M
Yes,
ma'am
now
now
that
they've
moved
the
power
lines
further
closer
into
our
property,
so
they
have
an
easement
which
I
was
explained.
It
would
be
about
three
feet
but
they've
gone
about
10
feet
into
our
property
and
cut
down
our
previous
shrubs,
which
we
were
pleased
with
how
they
were
growing
and
satisfied
that
they
would
one
day
block
the
noise
and
the
lights.
M
H
D
H
A
D
M
M
E
B
J
F
F
F
Fronting
Silver,
Bluff
Road
and
approximately
24
feet
along
the
northern
property
line
originating
at
the
northeast
corner
property
that
the
location
of
the
improvements
be
consistent
with
the
submitted
site
plan
that
the
final
order
shall
run
with
the
land
and
that
the
final
order
shall
be
recorded
at
the
RMC
at
Aitkin
County
RNC
office.
A.
I
A
F
D
F
C
F
A
F
E
I
would
hope
that
once
Mr
chairman
wants
the
should
this
variance
be
approved
that
the
applicant,
once
they
plant
the
Jasmine
and
so
forth,
I
just
hope
that
the
scdot
or
d-s-c-e-n-g
or
Dominion
Energy
or
whoever
runs
the
power
lines
and
maintains
the
right
of
way
out.
There
doesn't
go
mowing
down
your
Jasmine.
A
J
I
can
I
can
certainly
pass
it
along
generally
speaking
of
it.
If
it's
not
in
the
right
of
way,
though
they
they
tend
to
not
care
too
much,
but
I
can
certainly
pass
that
information
along
again,
largely
it's.
Their
main
concerns
are
typically
on
on
at
intersections
for
visibility's
sake,
but
in
this
case
it's
there's
only
one
Frontage
on
the
rear
lot,
I.