Aiken zoning board denies variance request for 301 New Lane SW

The Aiken Board of Zoning Appeals voted unanimously to deny a request from property owners Paul and Rebecca Morgan to reduce the side-yard setback at 301 New Lane Southwest.

The request sought a variance to City of Aiken zoning ordinance requirements for the Residential Single-Family Stable (RSS) district to allow an approximately 10-foot side-yard setback for a new attached garage, parking pergola and in-law suite. City planning staff told the board that the RSS district requires a 25-foot side-yard setback for primary structures and a 50-foot front-yard setback on corner lots.

City planner Max Planky presented the staff analysis, saying the existing primary structure on the 0.71-acre lot is approximately 30 to 40 feet from the southern property line and that compliance with the ordinance would require the proposed addition to be no closer than 25 feet from the side property line. Planky also noted that detached accessory structures are typically allowed a 10-foot separation but that the applicants’ proposal was attached to the house and therefore subject to the 25-foot standard.

Rebecca Morgan, who identified herself as an owner of the property at 301 New Lane Southwest, told the board she and her husband chose the design to preserve open backyard space and neighbors’ sight lines: "We were after a design that was compact and really preserved and enhanced, not just the property, but our privacy, our mutual privacy." She said the in-law suite was intended to support extended family needs as they transition to the home.

Several nearby residents opposed the variance. Chris Lawler, owner of 443 Lawrence Street Southwest across Lawrence Street, argued the property did not meet the standard that the zoning law "prohibit or unreasonably restrict utilization of the property," and suggested alternatives that would not require a side-yard reduction. Nancy Henze, a neighboring property owner, said the proposed attached living space would affect her privacy and contrasted that with a prior case where she was required to move an outbuilding to meet setback rules.

Board members said they were sympathetic to the Morgans' goals but that the application did not meet the six statutory criteria for a variance. One board member who moved to deny the request said, "I love everything about the proposed design... but unfortunately, for the applicant, at this time... I couldn't find a way to meet the criteria." Another member urged applicants to provide a current survey and suggested exploring alternate site or building configurations, including detaching accessory spaces to meet setback standards.

A motion to deny the variance (stating the denial applied to the request to permit an approximate 10-foot side-yard building setback along the southeastern side of the property, TPN 105-12-18-001, consistent with the submitted site plan) was moved and seconded. The board voted to carry the motion unanimously; the variance request was denied.

The board and staff encouraged the Morgans to consider redesign options that would comply with the RSS setbacks (including detached accessory structures, alternate placement on the lot, or a different layout) and to submit a current survey and stake-out to clarify property lines if they return with a revised application.

The board concluded the agenda item by denying the variance and then moved to adjourn the meeting.