Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

Thank you, I'm sorry. Questions for applicant by the board, persons, okay. And then the floor is closed. Motion requested by the chairperson. And if we need, and I ask for a discussion. And then we have a motion, and if it is seconded, the city will call the roll for the vote. Let's see, next is Unified Development Ordinance Update, Tim.

All right. For the board members and the general public, as you all know, we're working on a rewriting or zoning ordinance. And we are right at the, not at the beginning anymore. We're actually at the end of the beginning, so to speak. We're getting ready to receive the first set of zoning districts and uses for staff to review on October 1st. We will be having a public outreach event at, let's see, do I have that in here? Nope. So it's on the city's website, onenorecharleston.com for the UDO rewrite. We would hope that anybody who's interested will come on out, listen to the framework of the proposed zoning so that you're informed and you can be aware of what is coming down and through the pipeline. on this project and help inform that for the general public. So we've been doing extensive outreach. We actually had a meet the planner event at the Dorchester County Library last night. We had pretty good turnout, had about 12 to 15 people who came out just to ask some questions about what's going on in the city from a planning and zoning standpoint. We're going to be doing those going forward once a month after hours, and we'll also be doing coffee with a planner once a month going forward as we do this project, and hopefully we get good turnout, and maybe we can continue doing that as we go through and make that a standard operating procedure for the planning department. So trying to reach the people where they're at and give them an opportunity to to talk to us when they haven't had that very often in the past. So that is the UDO update. Please stay tuned. There's gonna be more to come.

Thank you. Consideration of the August 3rd, 2026 meeting minutes. Motion to accept. Do I have a second?

Second. Okay.

All those in favor? Aye. Minutes have been approved. And with that.

So the first item on the agenda is a request for variance from article six, section six one C3A relating to the minimum rear setback requirement for the property addressed as 4323 and a half Whitney Drive, Charleston County TMS number 411-06-00001 in the R1 Single Family Residential Zoning District in Council District 5. So as we can see here, property was properly noticed with public hearing notice. You can see the property here highlighted in blue, or at least I hope you can. I'll outline it here. It is at the end of Whitney Drive and Spur Street. You can see here in the aerial photo, current condition, and this is the general site plan. As we can see, there are a number of easements on the property, as well as a very large 36-inch oak tree here, and that is part of the basis for the requested setback reduction of the rear yard. The applicant is requesting to move the house back, encroaching on that rear yard to take into account the large easements as well as the large oak tree in the front and preserve that. So, go to the staff report. The representative John Barringer on behalf of the property owner is seeking a variance of article six, section six one C3A relating to the minimum rear setback requirement for the property addressed as 4323 and a half Whitney Drive in the R1 single family residential district. That section specifies setbacks for R1 property zoned stating that in Class R1 district, the least dimension of a rear yard shall be at least 15% of the depth of the lot, but such least dimension need not be more than 30 feet. Section 3.2 defines a rear yard as a yard, which is not intended as a public front extending the full width of the lot in the areas between the rear lot line and the rear building line and or areas that abut back alleys. The applicant is seeking to construct a new single family residence on the parcel. The property is approximately 70 feet wide by 185 feet long, totaling approximately 12,754 square feet and is located at the intersection of Whitney Drive and Spur Street. Based upon the 15% lot depth rear setback requirement for property zoned R1, The rear setback for the subject parcel is 28 feet from the property line bordering 4360 Dorchester Road. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the rear setback from 28 feet to 20 feet. So per section 7-7.3 of the city's zoning regulations, the board may make the following findings to grant the variances. There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property. So the application states that the extraordinary and exceptional conditions that apply to the property is the preservation of the grand oak tree that is located within the front buildable area of the lot. The application notes that the owner would like to preserve the grand tree while also allowing for the proposed building to be positioned appropriately on the lot. Staff notes that there are multiple grand trees and multiple easements on site that make positioning of the proposed building somewhat difficult. Staff also finds that this property is located on an unusual corner where Whitney Drive ends and intersects with Spur Street, creating a deeper lot which triggers a greater rear setback than other lots on this street. Staff believes that the multiple grand trees in the front yard of the property, the drainage and sewer easements, and unusual location and depth of the lot should be considered extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to this piece of property. Two. These conditions do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity. The application states that the 31-inch grand oak tree is unique to this property and that the proposed variance is only for this property and is due to the location of the grand tree. Staff notes that the presence of grand trees on site and the drainage and sewer easements are unique hardships that do not pertain to other properties in the general vicinity. Three, because of these conditions, the application of the ordinance to the particular piece or property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. The application states that without a reduction of the rear setback from 28 feet to 20 feet, the available building area is substantially restricted and would make the positioning and construction of a reasonably sized residential home rather difficult if the grand tree on the site were to be preserved. The application also states that if the requested variance were to be granted, the limited amount of additional buildable area would allow for the residence to be constructed while preserving the 31 inch grand tree on site. Staff agrees that the application of the ordinance would effectively restrict the utilization of the property due to the canopy of both grand trees as well as the easements that run through the property. Staff finds that the reduction of the rear setback would allow for a larger buildable area that would avoid the trees as well as the easements. Four, the authorization of a variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property or to the public good, and the character of the district will not be harmed by the granting of the variance. The application asserts that the granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the adjacent properties or to the public good. Per the application, the preservation of the 31-inch grand tree will provide benefits to the property by maintaining established natural features of the tree canopy and maintaining residential character. The application also states the proposed house will remain consistent with the residential uses and character of the surrounding neighborhood while also noting that the reduced setback would not adversely affect neighboring parcels, public access, or the general welfare of the area. Steph does not believe that the proposed variance request would be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties or to the public good and notes that the character of the area would not be harmed by the granting of the variance. Staff also finds that the reduction from 28 feet to 20 feet is appropriate and allows for an adequate rear yard while also allowing for a single family residence to be constructed without any interference with the existing easements and canopies of the grand trees on site. As noted, staff agrees that there are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to this piece of property due to the location of the two grand trees in the front yard of the property as well as the pre-existing easements on site. Staff also finds that these conditions are unique to this parcel and do not generally apply to other properties within the vicinity and that the application of the zoning ordinance does restrict the utilization of the property as the canopy of the grand trees and easements onsite allow for a very limited buildable area for a single family residence if the rear setback requirement were to be met. Additionally, Staff finds that a reduction of this setback to 20 feet would not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties or the public good and that the character of the district would not be harmed by the granting of the requested variance. Staff believes that the setback reduction to 20 feet is an adequate size for a rear yard and allows for adequate distance between the subject parcel and the commercially zoned property to the rear. Accordingly, staff recommends approval of the requested variance from section 6-1 to reduce the 15% lot depth rear setback requirement from 28 feet to 20 feet. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions for the city?

No.

The applicant, are you here? Would you like to come up and speak, say anything? Any questions for the applicant?

No?

I call for a motion. Motion to approve. Second. Zach Beeching. And then would you call the roll?

Oh, man. Sorry, I don't have the vote sheet. So, Mr. Klosser? Yes. Mr. Calhoun? Ms. Harper?

Yes.

McAveen, Mr. McAveen? Yes. Thank you. And Ms. Morrow? Yes. So that is unanimous.

Your variance has been granted, sir. You're welcome. And with that, this meeting is adjourned. Excellent.