Board of Zoning Adjustment - Regular Meeting

Uh, this being Hello, everyone. This being the time and place of our regularly scheduled March 30th, 2026 meeting of Board of Zoning Adjustments, I'd like to call this meeting to order. Please call the roll. Here. Here. Here. Here. All right, great. Uh, I'd like to make a note here with four members, four Board of Zoning Adjustment members present, uh, it would require your case would require four unanimous votes of yay to be approved. Uh, if you'd like to postpone till next month when there's five members, or maybe the same situation, but uh, it's your priority it's your choice to uh, postpone to next month. But, cases today would will require four favorable votes to be approved. I'd like to take a moment to introduce the Board of Zoning Adjustments and give a brief description of what we do and how this meeting will be conducted. The board consists of five regular members and two supernumerary members who are appointed by City Council and represent as closely as possible the council districts and our other areas as determined by council. My name is Tom Polk. Other members are Chester Ayers, Mark Moody, John Baggett, not present are Mark McCurry, Flora Gonzales, and supernumerary Erica Hooper. Members of the public seeking to get an item considered by the Board of Zoning Adjustments must send an application to the Planning Department not less than 21 days prior to the next scheduled meeting. The first part of today's meeting is new business. Each item will be read

separately and voted on after comments and discussion. If you wish to comment on an item, we ask that you come forward to the microphone, state your name, and whether you're a citizen of Decatur, then make your comments. We ask that you keep your comments to 3 minutes or less and sign the sign-in sheet afterwards. Please come forward when your case is called and state your name and what you would like this board to do for you today. Please read the first case. Good afternoon, board. I'm Tommy Wells with the City of Decatur Planning Department. And our first case is variance 260-430-01. The petitioners Ken Gamble and Steven Pate. The property owner is Ken Gamble. The address is 2015 Park Terrace Southeast. And their request is a variance to allow an accessory structure to encroach on the 10-ft setback by 3 ft. The current zoning is RS5, residential single family, and the location once again is 2015 Park Terrace. The surrounding land area, the surrounding land is north is residential five, south is residential mixed mixed mixed density, east is residential RS5, and west is residential RS5. There are no previous requests, and the description of the variance request is the applicant is requesting a variance to allow an accessory structure to encroach on the 10-ft setback by 3 ft. The hardship, once again, the applicant has given y'all a hardship that they have additionally added to the packet, but I'm also read what they have right here. And it's the applicant is the applicant is building a pool house. The applicant will be approximately 3 ft off the setback. When the applicant

started his project, the setback was 5 ft, and they currently have a 7 ft. The ordinance changed as of January 1st, 2026 to the setback of 10 ft. The zoning ordinance being referenced in their uh, variance form is section 25-4.3.2, letter C, accessory uses and structures. Let then that's letter C, number four. Staff analysis is the applicant is requesting a variance to permit an accessory structure exceeding 12 ft in height to encroach 3 ft into the required 10-ft setback. Per applicable regulations, accessory structures over 12 ft in height must maintain an additional 5-ft setback for a total setback of 10 ft. The applicant should have should have a valid hardship as to why he cannot make the accessory structure to accommodate the setback. A recommendation from the Planning Department is the applicant is requesting relief from the standard requiring accessory structures over 12 ft in height to maintain an increased setback. The ordinance requires a total setback of 10 ft for such structures. However, the proposal the proposal would allow an encroachment of 3 ft into the required setback. The Planning Department has determined based on visual inspection of the property that there are feasible alternatives other than the required variance. As such, staff finds that a true hardship has not been demonstrated. The applicant is here. Do y'all have any questions for the Planning Department? No, sir, not at this time. Uh, yes, Steven. Um, I guess Tommy gave you guys one of these.

Yes, thank you. My name is Ken Gamble. It It's my house. Um, and this is Steven Pate, the builder. And uh, well, you got most of the information there. One thing I would say is that the subdivision was built with 54-ft wide lots. And five Every house in the subdivision is 5 ft off of each boundary line. And there's only one vacant lot left, and all of which is right next to us, and that belongs to Carlin. Uh, the Carlin and John Deeds. Uh, our house actually has 10 ft on the other side of the house. When I bought the lot, the swimming pool was the first uh, we got the pro- the permit to tear the fence down. I tore the fence down, moved the fence over, and rebuilt it. We had it inspected and everything. It's done. Uh, the Johnson Pool Company came in, got the permit, did the pool. Our builder was supposed to start last August, and he got behind on the job he was on, and he told us he probably wouldn't be able to start it until spring. As of spring, he told us he couldn't start it. So, uh, I got in touch with Steven who had done two prior renovations for me, and he's going to do the pool house. So, we were uh, kind of blindsided when we went up and they told us that no, it's got to be 10 ft now, because we already had the pool set, and the pool pavilion house is open on that end, and it's supposed to straddle the pool. And so, if we move the pool house over, it restricts our access through the gate. It also uh, means that the pool and the pool house are no longer going to be lined up. So, we either have to come up with new plans, or just live with the

thing. And it since every other house in the subdivision is already at 5 ft, we're not adding any safety concerns or anything else to the the uh, existing structures all through the the property. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gamble. You want me to sign something, right? Are there any questions from the board for Mr. Gamble? Okay. Not sure. All right, thank you. Were there any questions? No, sir. Okay, thank you. I think Ken said it pretty well, and the paperwork that he gave y'all is very detailed. Um, Yeah, thank you for that.

the one thing that I think he was trying to say, but you didn't cut right to the chase, is this this pool house is going to be uh, let's see, a foot and 5 in more than every other house in the neighborhood away from the lot line already. So, that's that's the point that I wanted to make. All right, thank you, Steven. Any further questions from the board? Is there anyone from the public wishing to make comments? I guess I'll make a comment. Sure, just after Steven's done. I didn't know I come prepared, but I just wanted to make sure that uh, y'all understood on the on the lot that we have, State State your name, please.

Oh, I'm sorry. Carlin Deeds. And we own the lot next door. Okay. And so, uh if if we want to help Ken with this variance because uh if if this is you know, we should be grandfathered in or whatever and we don't want to have to it would render our lot sort of worthless if we had to go 10 ft if they don't get the variance. Does that make sense? Uh so, you're a neighbor and you don't have any plans for a house. It's a vacant lot right next to his. Okay. And and she she

We own the lot and we have plans for a house. We're going to start building hopefully in July. So, she would be the one who would have the most view of the of the uh Okay. Yeah, well I can't speak to your future build, but um you don't have any opposition to this today or any No. to this specific No, I I'm I'm I'm in agreement with it because it would affect we had to have the 10 ft then I don't know. We don't want to make Ken move his pool. He said we could use it. That is good negotiation. [laughter] I'm kidding, but you know. Yeah. So, that's all.

Sure. Thank you. Any comments from the planning department? No comments. All right. Uh please call the roll. Ayers Yes. Cole Yes. Voting Yes. Baggett Yes. All right, your case has been approved, Mr. Gamble and Stephen. Thank y'all. Pardon? We need a motion. We need a Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. Uh Mr. Mr. um Gamble Mr. Gamble Um Stephen, we may I made a procedural mistake. We didn't have a motion. Oh, okay. And I have a vote. I'm I'm sorry. I'll make a motion that we approve. I'll make a motion approve and second. All right, got a first and a second. Now call roll. Now call roll. Ayers Yes. Cole Yes. Voting Yes. Baggett Yes. Thank y'all. I'm glad nobody changed their mind.

[laughter]

It is just a uh formality. It's been a long time. Yes. All right, next we have variance 260430-02. The applicant is Danita Strong. I mean, excuse me, the petitioner is Danita Strong. The property owner is Danita Strong and Carrie Wiggins. The subject address is 323 Memorial Drive and their request is to allow a lot area that is 3,497 sq ft less than the minimum required by the zoning district RSF-7. The current zoning is RS-7 residential single family. And the location is 323 Memorial Drive. The north south is uh surrounding land is residential single family 7,000 sq ft. To the and to the west is also 7,000 sq ft and to the east is 5,000 sq ft. There are no previous requests for this. And the description of the variance request is the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a non-conforming lot area that is 3,497 sq ft less than the minimum required by the zoning district of RSF 7. The applicant hardship is that the hardship was not self-imposed, but rather originated when the uh dwelling was built and constructed. The presence of two dwellings on a single parcel is not ideal for a home ownership. Therefore, the applicant is requesting approval to subdivide the property. One resulting property will conform to current district requirements, while the second parcel will require a variance of 3,497 sq ft to meet the lot requirements. This is zoning ordinance that's referenced that they are trying to get a variance from section 25-3.2

base district requirements and residential single family -10. Analysis done by the planning department is the applicant is requesting a variance to allow lot 2B that is 3,497 sq ft smaller than required in the RS-7 zoning district. The dwellings on both parcels already exist and the variance would bring lot 2A into compliance regarding the size of the lot more than 7,000 sq ft. This subdivision and consolidation would also allow for the wastewater infrastructure to not be shared by splitting the residential property and the commercial property. By splitting the Okay. The recommendations the city of Decatur planning department recommends approval of the requested variance of the lot area of that is 3,497 sq ft less than the minimum required size of the RS-7 zoning. The proposed subdivision will separate two existing dwellings creating a creating a more practical and typical ownership pattern. One resulting parcel will meet all applicable zoning requirements, while the second parcel, though undersized, will accommodate an existing dwelling and maintain the established character of the area. Both uses are considered legally non-conforming and both uses will remain legally non-conforming. Neither structure can be expanded whether this change takes place or not. Therefore, this there isn't any adverse impact from from this property change and at least one of the properties will come into conformity as it relates to the lot size. Do y'all have any questions from the planning department? No, sir. Not that I know of. Who's representing this case? Yes.

Um I'm Johnny Strong. Yeah. Yeah. Name is Strong. This is Danita Strong. Uh-huh. That's her brother. All right. So All right, we yeah, we just trying to separate the properties um for the store to the store to have that property and us to have our property from the house just separating it from the um from the commercial property. From the store? Convenience store there? All right, and and y'all are aware that your your case would require four favorable votes to to be approved. Yes. Okay, you do have an opportunity to postpone to next month if you like. No, I I want to go ahead and All right, good deal. All right, so Um Now would the the building the structure that's on there now, it would pretty much have to stay the way it is?

Yes. No no additions or anything?

No additions or anything. Yes. We agree with that. Okay. Yes, sir. All right. Any more questions from the board? No, sir. All right, questions or comments from the public? Any questions or comments from the planning department? No comments. No comments, okay. All right, do we have a motion? Motion to approve. Second. All right, we have a first and a second to approve. Please call the roll. Ayers Yes. Cole Yes. Voting Yes. Baggett Yes. All right, your case has been has been approved. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Have a good day. We need to ask people to stay. Is there any other business to discuss? No, he's fine. All right. I got a question. Yes. Our bylaws, did we say anything about attendance? No, we have not. Um when we passed the new uh BZA rules or bylaws Yes, sir. I was wondering if we had said anything about attendance because it seemed like you four are always showing up and and Mark. And so, the other two or three, how many others are missing? I haven't seen them in months. Well, one is a supernumerary. Right. So she's like a alternate. So, you have to call her. You have to call her and tell her we really need her. Like if two of us are here, then you probably won't call her because Mark would be here to make four still. So Yeah. Yeah. You guys got a wife and Yeah. Just we just missing Mark this time. Yeah. So Yeah. So, it's only No, he's I told him

it's six or seven. He's talking about uh attendance basically. Uh we we to be more attentive to Yeah, like we need to be more attentive to meetings. Supernumeraries only come when called though, is that Is that correct or Right. Right. I I I show up just to be here regardless just in case y'all need me to be involved. The way And he got he's a supernumerary, right? He's a supernumerary. Yes. Yeah, okay. So, if he wasn't here, we would Y'all had any contact with him or heard from him or heard from him? So, that's what we're trying to say. We're not having contact with all our five members. So, do you So, do you motion for the supernumerary to move into a position? You got the case? Well, we we don't even have to do that, but

We're coming up with the way we have to do this per our bylaws. Do we need to stick to what our bylaws say? What What's in the bylaws? about attendance. Did we put something about attendance in the bylaws? Yeah. Yeah. Just bring it to their attention about being here. Okay, okay. There's nothing in here about Yeah, I don't see it. Now, this just an idea when y'all send out the meeting invite. And I hope I don't know how those quickly those are responding to, but a couple days later could you give us an update as to who has responded and maybe who has not? Just as a I guess a reminder. Yeah, that's great idea. Yeah, cuz mine's on my calendar for unless unless I unless I got something going on, I'll be here. Yeah. Yeah, I know Mark was here Tuesday as myself as well. Yeah, cuz if he was chairman he was Once I got past January and February, I'm good. And next February I'll be out of here. Well, I think we were saying that in case we do need to make a quick change to help, you know, accommodate the supernumeraries and the uh and some of the full-timers. Do y'all have Chad, do y'all have any thought Is two supernumeraries good or are you thinking? Yeah, two supernumeraries are

good. It's just that I feel like we start to put more and more attention on our planning committees and we want to see people. You know, I know you gentlemen show up almost every time. Yeah. And I was wondering about some of the other people we haven't seen. Well, well, last year I was supernumerary and uh I got to sit down there the whole time. Yeah. So, we had plenty. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Any other business? Do we have a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. All right. We are adjourned.