Milton BZA approves four existing-structure variances and later approves garage variance for 315 North Court

The Milton Board of Zoning Appeals on April 15 approved four setback variances tied to existing backyard structures at 315 North Court and later approved a separate variance allowing the homeowner to build a two-car garage that reduces the north side setback from 7 feet to 4.47 feet.

The applicant, Ron Presswood, told the board he and his wife bought the Arbor North home in September 2024 and want a 22-foot-wide garage like other houses in the subdivision. Presswood said the previous owner converted the original garage into interior living space, and he asked the board for relief to build a new side-entry garage while retaining several pre-existing backyard structures.

The request included five variances: A) reduce the 7-foot side-yard minimum to 4.47 feet for a proposed garage; B) reduce the 7-foot side-yard minimum to 1.0 foot for a remaining portion of an existing shed after partial removal; C) reduce the 50-foot rear-yard minimum to 0.5 foot for the remaining portion of the shed; D) reduce the 50-foot rear-yard minimum to 12.7 feet for an existing covered grill and wet bar; and E) reduce the 50-foot rear-yard minimum to 11.1 feet for an existing covered patio.

Michael, Community Development staff, presented the site and exhibits, noting the 0.35-acre lot is in the Arbor North subdivision (zoned R4, Crabapple form-based code) and showing aerials and construction-timeline evidence from Fulton County GIS that the backyard structures were constructed under prior ownership. Staff recommended conditions: partial removal of the shed per the submitted site plan and that the shed, covered patio, and covered grill/wet bar receive Community Development–approved building permits.

During public comment, three neighbors spoke in support, and additional written support from adjacent property owners was placed in the record. The Parkview Community Association submitted a letter opposing the variances; one previously opposing homeowner rescinded opposition before the hearing.

Board discussion separated the pre-existing backyard structures from the new garage. The board voted unanimously (motion by Hodge; second by Zach Middlebrooks) to approve variances B, C, D and E with the staff conditions and the variance site plan from JD Grace Land Surveying LLC (received Feb. 28, 2025). The board then considered variance A (the new garage). A motion to deny variance A (moved by Hodge; second by Adam Daniella) failed. A subsequent motion to approve variance A (moved by Lauren Holmes; second by Nick Horton) passed. The board asked the applicant to continue working with city staff on final plan details.

The decisions mean the applicant may remove the required portion of the shed, obtain building permits for the listed accessory structures, and construct a two-car garage that reduces the north side setback to 4.47 feet, subject to the approved site plan and the city’s permitting process.

Why it matters: The case shows the BZA distinguishing between noncompliant work done by a prior owner and new construction proposed by the current owner; the board granted relief for the pre-existing accessory structures while closely debating whether the property’s configuration and alternatives met the strict variance standards for a new garage. The board emphasized alternatives the applicant was asked to explore and required permits for existing structures to address public-safety and code-compliance concerns.

Votes at a glance: - Variances B, C, D, E (existing shed, covered patio, covered grill/wet bar): Approved unanimously (6–0) with two conditions: partial removal per the approved site plan and required Community Development building permits for the shed, covered patio and grill/wet bar. - Variance A (new garage reducing 7-foot side yard to 4.47 feet): After an initial denial motion failed, the board approved the garage variance (final recorded vote 4–2).