Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Variance Setback topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board of zoning appeals approves variance to reduce front-yard setback at 938 Mulberry

5550435 · August 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Loudon City Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance allowing the owner of 938 Mulberry to enclose a front porch and reduce the required front-yard setback from 30 feet to 24 feet to expand waiting-room space for a medical practice.

The Loudon City Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance on Thursday allowing enclosure of a front porch at 938 Mulberry, reducing the front-yard setback from 30 feet to 24 feet to expand waiting-room space for the medical practice occupying the building.

Applicant Juan Garcia told the board the enclosure will increase waiting-room capacity so the clinic can serve more patients and add a second provider. Garcia said the existing waiting area currently fits about four people and can accommodate fewer when a patient uses a wheelchair or walker.

Board members who visited the site described the location as appropriate for the modest change, and one member called the request “reasonable,” emphasizing the benefit for handicapped accessibility. The board voted to approve the variance; the transcript records the motion and carries by voice vote.

Why it matters: the variance allows an existing healthcare provider to expand usable customer space within an existing footprint to better serve patients, including those with mobility needs.

Details The property is zoned C‑2 Highway Business District. The work requested is an enclosure of an existing front porch area; the applicant said this is not a new addition beyond the existing porch footprint and that it will add two patient rooms.

No roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript; the decision was adopted by a voice vote after a motion and second. The board did not list special conditions in the meeting transcript beyond approval of the requested setback reduction.