Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance Property Split topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oconee County BZA approves variance to split Seneca parcel at 2036 Sandifer Boulevard
Summary
The Oconee County Board of Zoning Appeals approved a frontage setback variance allowing a property at 2036 Sandifer Boulevard in Seneca to be split between an existing storage area and a shop building; the board voted to require the new property line be divided equally between the structures.
The Oconee County Board of Zoning Appeals on an unrecorded date approved a setback variance that will allow a property at 2036 Sandifer Boulevard in Seneca to be split into two parcels between existing storage units and an existing shop building.
Applicant Wyatt Fulbright, who identified himself as the property owner, told the board the property contains an 8-foot ravine and that the land historically was two parcels but was recorded as one by the surveyor. "We're requesting to split the land along the current topography of the land. It has about an 8 foot ravine that runs down the side and through the middle on the back of that shop," Fulbright said at the hearing.
Board members discussed measuring options and maintenance access; one board member, James, said the 22-foot variance in the application related to meeting setback requirements measured from the proposed new property line. After discussion the board agreed on verbal conditions rather than fixed footage and adopted wording to allow the new property line "to be divided equally between the existing storage buildings and the shop building." The board then went through the four statutory variance criteria on the record and voted to approve the variance; the votes were recorded as unanimous.
Why it matters: the change separates two distinct business uses on the parcel—storage units and a warehouse-type shop—and formalizes a property line that applicants said follows an existing ridge and elevation change on the site. Applicant testimony said the split would support separate maintenance and business operations for the two areas.
Details and next steps: the application listed TMS number 252-00-01-005 and the hearing record shows the board’s motion uses the "divided equally" wording; the applicant said surveyor measurements will formalize the actual line when recorded. The board’s approval included the required findings that extraordinary conditions exist, that the conditions are unique to the property, that denial would unreasonably restrict use, and that the variance would not harm adjacent uses. The applicant and staff are expected to follow up with final survey and recording documents consistent with the approved verbiage.
