Votes at a glance: Walton County ZBA tables two items, approves subdivision and several variances

The Walton County Zoning Board of Adjustment took a series of procedural and final actions on variances and conditional uses, tabling or continuing a few requests while approving several others, including a subdivision‑wide community variance and multiple lot‑level variances.

Why it matters: the board’s votes resolve land‑use and permit questions that determine whether property owners can build or keep existing designs that predate county standards or that conflict with current setbacks and parking rules. Several approvals are blanket or community variances intended to prevent repeated piecemeal petitions for the same technical code deviations.

Key votes and outcomes - Rassmeier variance (agenda item 1): tabled. County staff said the applicant must correct several outstanding violations before proceeding; the board voted to table and continue the item.

- Barford variance (agenda item 2): continued to the ZBA meeting on April 24, 2025 so the applicant could refile and coordinate advertisement and notice.

- Boyd variance (agenda item 6): continued to the April 24, 2025 ZBA meeting for application updates and to re‑advertise all requested relief.

- Godwin Creek Road cell tower (agenda item 3): conditional‑use permit approved (see separate article). The board recorded a motion, second and an approval with one dissenting vote; planning staff stressed that subsequent development‑order and federal/military frequency approvals are required before construction.

- Royston variance (agenda item: Royston): approved with amended motion and the final order to attach the survey. Applicant Richard Royston said he owns both parcels at 351 Marion Drive and a foundation survey showed a corner of the completed house encroached on the standard side setback; the board approved variance relief to allow a 5.1‑foot setback from the property line (a 2.4‑foot reduction from the 7.5‑foot standard) and attached the final survey to the approval.

- Martinez (Gross) variance (presented by Marilyn Hanzels for Martinez Gross): approved with conditions. The board granted a variance for a small encroachment (reported as about 4–5 inches into a 7.5‑foot setback) for a nearly completed house and attached a condition requiring the homeowner to install a privacy fence and to include the survey with the final order.

- Grove By The Sea community variance (applicant Dunlap & Shipman on behalf of the Grove by the Sea HOA): approved with exclusion. The board approved a blanket variance to Walton County code section 5.02.06(c) to allow side‑yard parking and driveway patterns consistent with the subdivision’s recorded covenants and design guidelines. The applicant’s packet and planning staff noted the subdivision was largely built to those covenants, and staff expressed no objection; one homeowner (Robert Powers) asked to be removed from the blanket variance and the board agreed to exclude his parcel from the approved blanket variance per his request. The county attorney and staff said the variance protects long‑standing subdivision design and is intended to avoid dozens of repeated individual variance applications.

- Village of White Cliffs variance: approved. The board granted variances to allow setbacks consistent with the subdivision’s original 1993 covenants and adopted design manual (reduced front, side and rear setbacks and a one‑foot ancillary setback for garages) and required that the recorded covenant pages be attached to the final order.

Procedural and staff notes Planning staff repeatedly noted that a director’s determination in 2015 ended the previous practice of treating subdivision covenants as automatic county approval for building permits; since then, many communities have sought blanket variances to align county approvals with recorded covenants. Staff supported the Grove by the Sea blanket request and recommended recordation of covenants for subdivisions that seek blanket relief.

Votes: where the transcript does not record a roll call, the minutes and audio show motions, seconds and a voice vote. For several items the transcript records only “all in favor, aye” and does not list each commissioner’s name in roll‑call form. Where a recorded roll call was not provided in the transcript excerpt, the article lists outcomes rather than a member‑by‑member roll call.

What’s next Approved variances will be embodied in final orders that attach the applicable survey or covenant pages as directed by the board. Continued items will return to the ZBA calendar after applicants satisfy staff comments and re‑advertise as required.