Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Florence City BZA denies variance to subdivide lot behind 814 Sherrill Drive
Summary
The Board of Zoning Appeals denied a request to subdivide the rear of a corner parcel at 814 Sherrill Drive after neighbors raised concerns about density, infrastructure and precedent. The board found the request inconsistent with the Unified Development Ordinance’s minimum-lot requirements.
The Florence City Board of Zoning Appeals denied a request to subdivide a parcel behind 814 Sherrill Drive, rejecting a variance that would have created a 7,196-square-foot lot for a new single-family house while leaving the remainder at about 9,825 square feet.
City planning staff told the board the parcel sits at the intersection of Sherrill Drive and Langston Avenue in the NC-10 zoning district and is currently occupied by a nonconforming duplex. Staff said the NC-10 rules require new lots to be at least 10,000 square feet with an 80-foot street frontage, and that the applicant’s proposed new lot would fall short of that minimum while meeting the frontage requirement.
The applicant, Louis Hopkins, told the board he intends to build a single-family house on the subdivided rear lot and sell it to a new owner. “This home on this new lot would still give a lot of area green space for a family,” Hopkins said, and he described the proposed setbacks as generous compared with more recently developed lots.
Neighbors who spoke in opposition said the subdivision would increase neighborhood density, worsen traffic and strain aging infrastructure. Clyde Khan, a nearby resident who said his backyard faces the proposed new lot, said water service problems are already common in the area and warned that adding another house would worsen conditions: “There are water leaks on Edisto frequently. My bathwater for my children is yellow,” Khan said. Other nearby residents expressed concern that subdividing deep corner lots would set a precedent for further lot splits.
Reeves Cannon, who identified himself as a local real estate agent affiliated with Smith and Cannon Real Estate LLC, urged approval and said the intent is to sell the new house to an owner-occupant, not retain it as a rental. “It would not be another rental property. We would be selling the property and provide an attractive home,” Cannon said.
Board member Poston moved to deny the variance request, reading findings that the request would be contrary to the public interest, would undermine the intent of the Unified Development Ordinance and could set a harmful precedent. Board member Moses seconded the motion. The board voted by voice; the chair announced, “The motion carries. The variance request is denied.”
The board’s decision preserves the NC-10 minimum-lot requirements in this block, leaving the existing duplex as a legal nonconforming use that remains occupied. No further applications related to this parcel were decided at the meeting.
