Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Smyrna board unanimously approves three variances for 926 Pine Hill Drive
Summary
The Smyrna License and Variance Board on July 23 unanimously approved three separate variances for 926 Pine Hill Drive allowing an additional accessory structure and reduced driveway and side-yard setbacks; approval was conditioned on compliance with the submitted site plan.
The Smyrna License and Variance Board on July 23, 2025, unanimously approved three variances for property at 926 Pine Hill Drive requested by applicant Scott Andrews. The board voted to allow an additional accessory structure, reduce a driveway setback from 5 feet to 3.1 feet, and reduce the northern side setback from 10 feet to 3.8 feet.
The board’s actions came during a public hearing at which no members of the public spoke for or against the requests. Board members called each variance separately and voted on each request; all passed unanimously. The approvals were made subject to a condition that the applicant comply with the site plan submitted for the property.
Why it matters: setbacks and accessory-structure rules affect property layout and can influence neighboring properties’ sight lines, drainage, and access. Variances change how development regulations apply to an individual lot and are recorded in municipal files.
Details of the three approvals: the board approved variance V25-067 to permit an additional accessory structure at the address; approved V25-068 to reduce the driveway setback from 5 feet to 3.1 feet; and approved V25-069 to reduce the northern side setback from 10 feet to 3.8 feet. Each motion was seconded and carried by a unanimous vote.
Staff and applicant statements: during the hearing, staff indicated there was one condition tied to the request — compliance with the provided site plan — and the applicant, Scott Andrews, indicated agreement when asked. No members of the public provided testimony on these items.
Procedural note: the board handled each variance as a separate vote despite the requests applying to the same parcel. The board’s record will reflect the three passed motions and the site-plan condition.
A follow-up item on the agenda approved later in the meeting included a separate variance for another property (listed in the public record).
