Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gallatin Board of Zoning Appeals approves variance for garage addition at 459 Bay Point Drive
Summary
The Gallatin Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance allowing an 8.8-foot encroachment into the 40-foot front-yard setback to permit a roughly 312-square-foot front addition to extend a garage at 459 Bay Point Drive; staff had recommended denial because the application did not meet the ordinance's a–j variance criteria.
The Gallatin Board of Zoning Appeals on an oral voice vote approved a variance that allows a roughly 312-square-foot front addition to extend a garage at 459 Bay Point Drive, authorizing an 8.8-foot reduction from the city's 40-foot front-yard setback.
The variance was granted despite a staff recommendation to deny the request on the ground that the application did not meet the zoning ordinance's ten criteria (commonly cited as items a through j) for variances. The board and the applicant noted that the property will also need approval from its homeowners association before construction proceeds.
Jim Carpenter, a city staff member who introduced the item, told the board the owner and applicant requested a variance of 8.8 feet from the 40-foot front-yard setback under the Gallatin zoning ordinance section 06.04.040(C) for a 0.46-acre lot shown in the Woodhaven On The Lake Phase 3 revised final plat at 459 Bay Point Drive. Carpenter said staff recommended that the variance not be approved “due to it not meeting the 10 standards for variance laid out in the zoning ordinance.”
Andy Leath, of Greenlee Design, representing the owner Brent Woods, described the work as a “small 312 square-foot addition” to extend the garage. Leath said the owners need additional indoor vehicle storage and had considered placing an accessory (carriage) garage in the rear but ran into access and setback problems. “This is the solution that he is proposing that would allow them to expand their house to meet the needs of their family,” Leath said, adding the owners intend to repaint the house so the new work will match the existing finish.
Leath also told the board the project must still be approved by the Bay Point homeowners association; he said neighbors had been notified of the application by the legally required sign and public notice. A board member asked about neighborhood notification and Leath confirmed the HOA process remains a separate approval step.
Board discussion referenced the ordinance criteria for variances. A member noted the lot shape and location of the house on a curve in the subdivision as factors in the applicant’s hardship argument; staff and other members said the application as submitted did not satisfy all code criteria. One city staff speaker, Brian, summarized staff practice: “We always recommend denial just because the application doesn’t meet our code.”
A board member moved to grant the variance, citing the ordinance criteria (a through j) and specifically item g, which addresses the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. Another board member seconded. The board voted by voice; the chair declared the motion carried and the variance granted. The transcript records no roll-call vote or individual vote tallies.
The approval is conditional on the applicant obtaining any required HOA approvals and city building permits. Board members asked staff and the applicant to follow up with the board about the outcome of the HOA review.
