►
From YouTube: Board of Zoning Appeals May 26, 2020
Description
The Board of Zoning Appeals
Tuesday, May 26
5:30 p.m.
00:28 Start of Meeting
02:28 Minutes
Old Business:
05:45 (1) Application 20-92006 – Petitioners Elizabeth Ross & Morgan Milner are requesting reconsideration of a Special Exception pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 3.1.5 to permit a Bed & Breakfast Inn with four guest rooms on property zoned Residential Multifamily Low Density (RML) located at 114 Colleton Avenue SE (TPN 121-29-07-005).
New Business:
43:16 (2) Application 20-93011 – Petitioner Jeffrey Burden, on behalf of property owners Kevin & Brittany Kisner, is requesting a Variance to Zoning Ordinance Section 4.2.1 to permit a roofed patio, which would result in an approximate 3 foot rear yard setback at 832 Fermata Place SW (TPN 105-16-05-003).
Adjournment
If you have a comment at future meetings, please send it to BZAComment@CityofAikenSC.gov
A
By
May
22nd
2020
notice,
it
was
sent
to
the
city
clerk
for
posting,
on
the
finance
and
administration
building
notice
board
to
the
city
webpage
and
to
the
Municipal
Building
notice
board
at
least
24
hours.
Before
this
meeting
agenda
sheets
were
mail
are
emailed
to
interested
parties.
As
a
reminder,
it
is
unlawful
for
any
person
giving
testimony
to
this
board
knowingly
providing
false
information.
That's
according
to
section
22
9
of
the
aiken
municipal
code.
A
You
have
received
copies
of
the
minutes
from
the
April
28th
meeting.
Are
there
any
Corrections
or
additions?
I
have
one
and
I
may
be
the
only
one
I
thought
on
page
three
where
Corey
Anderson
was
talking
about
the
middle
of
the
paragraph.
I
thought
he
said,
that
is,
the
signs
were
ordered
and
displayed
for
three
months.
Instead
of
six
months,
I
thought
I
heard
three
months.
I.
C
D
B
B
F
E
E
A
D
A
D
We
referenced
to
additional
comments
in
the
memo.
However,
after
the
memo
was
written
and
before
it
got
printed.
There
was
a
third
comment
that
was,
there
were
several
clarifications
on
some
items
from
the
importance
of
property
owners,
so
that
got
included
in
your
packet
as
well.
Just
didn't
get
referenced
in
the
memo.
I
know.
D
This
meaning,
just
like
our
zoo
meetings,
I,
have
an
email
address
for
those
who
did
not
wish
to
attend
the
meeting,
but
wish
to
make
comment
and
I'll
be
monitoring
that
during
the
meeting
it
is
bza
comment
at
city
of
aiken
SC
gov
can
also
you
can
beezie
a
comment
at
city
of
aiken
SC
gov,
but
what
had
happened
during
this?
We
were
relying
on
that
for
for
kind
of
real-time
public
comments.
D
D
He
recommended
that
we
consult
with
the
applicants
whether
they
wanted
a
rehearing,
essentially
a
hearing
that
this
being
builds
off
the
previous
hearing.
But
in
light
of
that
new
information,
so
it's
information.
It
was
not
presented
to
you,
but
had
we
received
it
during
that
time?
With
the
current
protocol
in
place,
we
just
wanted
to
be
safe
and
make
sure
you
had
those
comments.
So
we
did
ask
for
them
to
have
official
comments
for
the
record
which
you
should
have
received
at
the
back
end
of
your
packet.
D
We
send
we
reposted
republished
and
re
mailed
notice
for
the
application,
and
we
received
again
one
additional
clarification,
email
on
some
items
and
one
additional
email
from
another
resident
along
the
Calton
corridor
who
was
opposed
to
the
application
in
general
just
to
kind
of
rehash
at
the
previous
meeting.
Sorry
that
the
request
is
for
a
bed
and
breakfast
in
which
is
for
guests
rooms,
in
this
case
they're,
specifically
asking
for
for
guest
rooms.
D
The
applicants
were
wanting
the
for
room
variety,
so
it
would
be
a
bed
and
breakfast
in
the
board,
after
considering
the
information
before
them
approved
an
order
that
would
allow
for
a
bed-and-breakfast
homestay
of
up
to
three
rooms,
and
the
only
difference
is
also
instead
of
running
with
the
property.
The
the
condition
was
to
run
with
the
property
owned.
A
couple
things
from
that
other
email
that
came
in
the
meantime
were
I
think
pertinent.
D
D
D
We
can
be
more
restrictive
as
a
board
than
the
zoning
ordinance
specifies
and
that
sort
of
thing
again,
I,
think
another
thing
that
would
be
worth
clarifying
is
that
there
was
some
concern
about
the
number
of
guests
for
dinners
and
things
like
that,
because
the
bed-and-breakfast
in
does
allow
some
additional
guests
for
dinners
than
those
just
staying
on
the
property.
You
can
also
make
that
sort
of
restriction
as
part
of
a
special
exception
approval,
so
just
to
just
kind
of
clarify
those
items.
G
D
E
H
Right
so
we
are
rehearing
this
based
on
the
fact
that
the
there
was
a
resident
opposed
that
we
took
into
consideration
that
a
sense
recount
recanted
that
objection
only
to
be
replaced
by
another
neighboring
resident.
Who
now
has
a
objection
correct
right,
so
the
kind
of
come
full
circle
again
right,
I
think.
D
D
F
C
John
Bryan
an
exhibit,
be
I,
take
it
that's
how
I
read
it
and
I
just
want
confirmation
that
they
have
got
to
comply
with
one
through
nine
I,
believe
of
the
3.3.4
bed-and-breakfast
establishment,
ordinance
for
three
rooms
and
under
Oh
actually
for
four
rooms.
The
ten
everything
listed
here
they
have
got
to
comply
with.
That's
not
correct,
yeah.
D
C
A
G
I
I
Just
reading
her
letter,
she
says
designated
single-family
residence.
Actually,
she
says
largely
designated
single-family
residence.
It's
not
it's
residential,
multifamily,
low,
distant
low
density,
which
is
like
the
whole
block.
So
we're
the
house
sits
right
on
the
edge,
so
it's
own
Chesterfield
and
colleting.
I
My
idea,
the
whole
block-
and
we
have
support
now
from
every
neighbor
and
this
person
six
months
away.
Just
I,
don't
know
what
other
than
so.
She
says
that
it
will
take
away
from
the
charm
and
character
of
a
can.
I,
don't
know
how
I
think
it'll
add
to
it.
You
know:
I've
been
in
several
brett,
better
breakfast
to
go
to
a
bad
breakfast.
Do
you
want
to
go
one
on
the
fringe
of
town
or
do
you
want
to
be
in
town
I,
don't
mean
everyone
I've
been
to
spent
in
town,
so.
A
I
A
I
That's
what
I
would
finish
by
saying
we
had
the
support
of
that
current
owner
occupants
of
the
house,
the
Thorntons,
the
immediate
neighbors
being
the
Reds
now
completely
support
a
four-bedroom.
If
you'll
read
the
letter
from
him
and
then
mark
and
Betsy
Mahoney
are
right,
Mexico
were
they
completely
support
and
then
next
down
our
East
would
be
Mickey
and
Clary
owes
he
completely
supports
their
residents
in
there
I've
got
a
couple
at
least
one
letter
from
a
resident
there
that
it
was
written.
I
H
Know
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
I.
Don't
I
can't
demise,
what
Mrs
Hayes
issue
is
other
than
to
say
that
some
people,
you
know
look
I,
do
think
there
is
a
distinction
between
you
know.
Multifamily.
You
know
mental
situation.
People
are
still
living
there.
You
know,
bed-and-breakfast
is
a
transient
thing.
You
can
have
different
people
there
every
week,
so
I
try
not
to
conflate
the
two,
even
though
the
zoning
allows
you
know
for
both
of
those
to
coexist.
H
I
Would
you
if
you
live
downtown
Aiken
amongst
all
those
things
that
everybody
that
lives
downtown
they
can
they
appreciate
it?
They
appreciate
the
Wilcox.
They
appreciate
the
fact
that
libraries
right
there
they
appreciate
that
they're
right
near
all
this,
so
they
can
walk
to
the
restaurants,
all
the
things
that
downtown
has
to
offer.
So
that's
what
I'd
ask
the
whole
board.
What
do
you
mind.
H
And
again,
it's
always
a
very
certainly
powerful
to
the
to
the
to
the
board.
Here
your
support
and
opposition,
keeping
in
mind
that
both
can
change
and
be
fleeting.
Your
neighbors
that
are
in
love
with
this
proposition
may
sell
their
house
next
month
and
may
prevent
other
people
from
coming
in
who
aren't
as
keen
and
having
a
transient
bed-and-breakfast
next
door.
To
that.
So
you
know
we
try
to
balance
all
that
on
pros
and
cons,
so
I.
I
G
H
A
F
Miss
Miller,
oh
there's,
a
staff
made
a
comment
regarding
the
accommodation
of
vehicles
on
the
property,
and
the
Thorntons
also
made
a
comment
to
the
number
of
vehicles
that
can
be
a
handle
on
the
property
itself
within
the
confines
of
what
you
own.
Yes,
not
counting
the
Chesterfield,
Street
right-of-way
or
the
angle
parking
that's
out
on
Collison
and
I'm
familiar
with
a
video
with
a
place
engine
in
your
lab.
So
with
that
without
trying
to
constrict
mr.
F
F
Do
you
see
a
problem
with
the
Kumbha
dating
your
guests
vehicles,
including
your
own,
and
including
your
own,
on
that
property?
Or
would
you
instruct
your
guests
to
please
park
out
on
the
public
right-of-way
on
Collison
and
not
have
any
kind
of
restrictions?
If
you
will
unintentionally
restrict
the
access
to
the
neighbor's
property,
we.
I
Do
see
the
ability
to
have
our
cars
and
for
not
a
problem,
but
fortunately
the
city
was
the
one
that
pointed
out
that
there
is
the
public
right
parking
right
out
front.
So
I
don't
see
it
being
a
necessity
to
have
that
all
the
time
damn
I'd
love
to
be
booked,
solid,
year-round
and
use
all
that
parking
excuse,
my
hands
I.
Just
don't
see
it
being
taken
more
than
a
handful
of
weeks
out
of
the
year
that
we
would
need
it.
F
And
say
is
what
nancy's
alluded
to
the
number
of
guests
that
you
have
in
a
dish
number
of
dinner
guests
you
may
have
in
addition
to
people
you
have
staying
there,
then
they
have
guests
over.
Do
you
see
a
problem
with
instructing
say
your
yes
not
staying?
There
is
talk
out
in
the
coding
public
right-of-way
as
opposed
to
parking
on
the
chest
field
street
right
away,
I,
don't.
I
D
I
B
I
But
that
is
it
that
would
be
the
only
meal.
We
would
serve
breakfast,
it's
enough
work,
so
the
and
to
add
and
like
he
said,
to
restrict
it
before
we
would
have
to
I,
don't
know
where
we
can
find
a
fifth
place
to
rent
unless
the
red
sold
us
their
house,
and
we
can
do
that
and
then
we'll
be
back
in
front
of
y'all
again.
Okay,.
I
J
J
I
I
E
A
I
I
E
H
G
I
C
D
Yeah,
mr.
chairman,
mr.
Brecht
wooden
staff,
what
we
essentially
did
is
we
took
for
reference
a
car
that
was
sitting
here
and
took
the
general
dimensions
of
the
parking
area
on
the
property
and
we
assume
you
can
fit
about
six
cars
total.
They
would
have
to
be
double
stacked,
but
again
in
some
places,
but
I
think
I.
Think
you
can.
We
figured
you
could
fit
about
six
cars
on
it
and
that's
not
counting
the
garage.
A
B
That
we
approve
application
20-9
to
double
O,
six
with
the
following
conditions:
a
special
exception.
Pursuant
to
section
3
point
1
point:
5
is
granted
to
permit
a
bread
and
breakfast
in
with
up
to
4
guests
rooms
on
the
properties
and
residential
multi-family
low-density
generally
located
at
114
Carlton
Avenue,
south
east
TPM,
121
29,
o
7-0
5
and
I
I'm,
going
to
have
to
work
through
this,
with
the
condition
that
only
breakfast
be
served.
A
D
D
D
A
C
Library,
if
you
will,
my
original
concern
was
with
the
parking
which
I
asked
them
about,
and
I
was
looking
at
just
the
property
itself,
because
the
lot
next
door,
even
though
there
is
an
easement
that
provides
egress
and
ingress,
it's
not
their
property.
And
so
therefore
we
shouldn't
consider
that
as
a
factor
in
granting
this,
so
I
shifted.
My
focus
back
to
just
the
property
and
I
have
and
I
still
have
my
doubts
about
being
able
to
fit
six
cars.
Five
cars
in
the
backyard
around.
C
But
that's
my
reservation
at
this
point
and
the
other
ones
I
can
overlook
from
last
time.
But
I
would
like
to
say
one
thing:
whether
a
neighbor
six
blocks
away
or
twelve
blocks
away.
We
all
have
equal
say
because
we're
all
neighbors
in
the
city,
so
I
didn't
like
discounting
a
neighbor's
point
of
view
from
six
blocks
away.
I'm.
Sorry,
that's
so
we
all
people
says
so
just
like
to
say
that.
E
H
I
can
only
surmise
because
that
what
I
wrestle
with
is
number
two
consistent
with
the
character
and
purpose
taken.
While
it
is,
as
I
explained
to
the
applicant,
you
know
multifamily
blend.
If
you
will
with
a
lot
of
single-family.
You
know
that,
and
breakfast
is
a
transient
deal.
It's
not
you
know.
A
renter
is
one
thing,
but
they
at
least
have
a
stake
in
the
neighborhood
they
do
live
there.
H
Again
sympathetic
with
the
applicant
I
thought:
we'd
come
up
with
a
good
compromise
last
time
just
trying
to
skate.
You
know
allowing
a
bed-and-breakfast
concept,
but
keeping
it
to
a
minimal
footprint
and
scale
and
again
with
the
with
the
removal
of
one
opposition
to
be
replaced
by
another,
regardless
of
the
juxtaposition
of
the
the
living
situation,
I'm
still
right
back
where
we
were
last
time.
So
that's
where
I
stand.
A
E
Ben
breakfast
stair,
the
property,
in
my
opinion,
should
have
more
space
than
this
property
has
and
when
you
double
stack
cars
that
causes
a
problem
when
the
car
in
the
front
wants
to
leave
and
the
car
behind
is
downtown
walking
and
they
aren't
there.
I.
Just
don't
think
that
this
property
for
item
number
three,
what
it
should
be
for
that
breakfast
is.
C
That
were
double
stack.
You
used
parking
behind
one
car
behind
the
other,
because,
according
to
this
on
four
point,
five
point:
four
we've
got
it.
You
can't
double
stack
with
the
city
ordinance.
Well,
you've
got
to
have
room
to
back
out
and
go
forward.
You
can't
double
stack
according
to
this
in
the
city,
ordinance.
A
B
D
A
A
D
Please
so
the
subject
property
again
is
is
about
halfway
down
from
out
of
place
amount
of
places
wraps
around
at
the
end
of
Barry
Road
wraps
around
and
one
side
of
the
the
cul-de-sac
is
is
bordered
by
it's
got
woods.
The
other
side
of
the
coldest
AG
gets
to
back
up
to
meadow
golf
course.
So
my
50s
subdivision
with
very
few
homes,
the
subject
property
was,
has
been
renovated,
a
a
couple
different
times
or
in
phases,
since
the
the
current
owner
is
bought
it
in
2011.
D
The
toad,
though,
has
provision
that
we
can
give
15
days
notice
to
surrounding
property
owners,
and
if
it
meets
one
of
several
conditions
about
the
property,
the
property
characteristics,
then
we
can
consider
a
reduction
in
setback.
So
in
2015
this
was
constructed
with
a
setback
of
roughly
three
feet,
because
it's
against
land
being
the
golf
course
which
is
highly
unlikely
to
be
developed
for
at
least
a
structure
being
placed
directly
behind
it
and
in
in
staffs
argument.
D
So
what
we
have
is
an
interesting
case
where
now
they
wish
to,
they
have-
and
you
can
see
it
in
the
photos
here,
a
rear.
So
this
is
the
the
shed
in
question
and
they
have
a
kind
of
a
nice
rear
patio
utilized
and
they
wish
to
cover
a
portion
of
it
that
spans
between
that
building,
the
accessory
building
and
the
primary
building.
Even
though
it's
open
sided,
our
code
has
interpreted
or
we've
always
interpreted
the
code
as
being.
D
If
you
have
an
attached
roof
structure,
then
that
becomes
part
of
the
primary
structure,
so
the
accessory
setbacks
essentially
are
no
longer
the
applicable
setback.
The
applicable
setback
is
the
primary
structure,
setback
which
is
20%
a
lot
depth
or,
in
this
case
I
think
we
estimated
at
26
feet
roughly
from
the
rear
property
line.
D
So
it's
an
interesting
case
that
the
structure
to
which
the
the
setback
apply
its
it's
not
moving,
but
it's
being
attached
to
the
primary
structure,
making
it
a
different
section
of
the
code
that
I
cannot
grant
an
administrative
waiver
for
and
they're
forced
before
you
as
a
variance
request.
So
I'd
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
Also,
we
have
the
napkin
and
one
of
the
owners
here,
I
believe
yeah.
H
All
right,
so
if
the
extension
of
roof
did
not
connect
to
the
shed
that
it's
by
definition
of
connecting
to
the
shed,
which
brings
it
to
that
three
foot
setback,
which
is
the
rear
of
the
shed
to
the
property
line,
correct
okay,
so
mooring,
the
roof
any
other
way
in
front
of
the
shed
its
that's.
Not
that's.
Clearly,
no
issue,
then
correct
right.
D
H
Thing
the
other
setback
question
I
have
is
making
sure
that
coming
off
the
end
of
the
house
towards
the
house,
that's
I,
guess
roughly
north
of
that
the
yellow
house
that
you
see
there
that
yes
yeah
so
going
down
that
side
to
connect
to
that
to
the
shed
that
all
stays
within
the
setback
to
that
property.
Correct,
desperate.
D
D
C
D
D
K
K
Can't
think
of
any
embellishments
I
might
in
the
process
of
questions
really
as
I
understand.
It's
not
changing
anything
that
was
originally
approved,
so
the
play
shed
is
remaining
where
it
was.
The
setback
to
the
side.
Neighbor
is
remaining
intact.
It's
not
visible
from
the
street.
It's
not
visible
from
the
golf
course
and
the
play
shows
is
actually
contributing
to
the
support
of
the
structure
and
it's
something
that's
important
for
the
fan,
I
think
in
terms
of
outdoor
space.
H
K
F
Yeah
I
thought
you
just
make
them
comment
to
see
you,
sir.
Oh
I
will
say
that
the
landscaping
back
there
that
the
kids
have
done
and
even
extending
beyond
quote
their
property
line.
Just
absolutely
wonderful
and
I
can
understand
why
they
would
want
to
maybe
enclose
that
patio
area
so
I,
just
as
a
comment,
I
think,
they're,
tastefully
done
and
and
what
you
designed,
and
it
looks
like
to
me
that
it
blends
right
in
with
with
everything
else
that
you've
done
for
the
kids
nurse
as
well
as
accentuate
that
back
in
the
general
area.
K
K
L
L
L
L
L
C
B
H
K
K
K
H
G
A
C
D
C
A
E
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
for
application:
20-9,
3,
0,
1
1
approval
of
the
variance
to
section
4.2.1
of
the
zoning
ordinance
to
permit
an
approximate
28
foot
by
21
foot
patio
roof
addition
which
will
connect
a
primary
of
residents
to
an
accessory
shed,
resulting
in
a
primary
structure.
Setback
of
approximately
3
feet
to
the
eastern
rear
property
line
at
the
reach
from
out
of
place
and
that
the
final
order
shall
run
with
the
land
and
shall
be
recorded
at
the
Aiken
County
RMC
office.