Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Florence Board of Zoning Appeals OKs 7-foot side-setback variance for Oak Bend Lane pool
Summary
The Florence City Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance to allow a homeowner to place a swimming pool three feet from the side property line at 1052 Oak Bend Lane, finding the pool would not be in the floodplain and would be screened by a six-foot privacy fence.
The Florence City Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance Thursday to let a homeowner install a swimming pool three feet from the side property line at 1052 Oak Bend Lane.
City planning staff told the board the property—listed as tax map number 07510-01-001 and zoned NC-10 (Neighborhood Conservation 10)—is constrained by floodplain boundaries, a carport attached to the house and a detached garage, and that strict adherence to the ordinance would prevent placement of a pool on the lot.
During a staff presentation, Derek (city staff) showed aerial photos and floodplain mapping, and said the proposed pool location would be outside the 100- and 500-year floodplain. "They are keeping it out of the 500 year flood plain where no permanent structures can be constructed," Derek said. He also told the board staff received no phone calls or emails from neighbors after required signage and mailed notices were posted.
Applicant Tara Reeves of Dreamscape Pools, sworn before giving testimony, said there was an earlier drafting discrepancy between a surveyor's placement and the homeowners' request. "To be honest with you, I thought that we were still requesting the variance to be 3 feet," Reeves said, describing that the homeowners want the pool three feet from the existing fence so maintenance or fence removal would be easier than removing a brick structure.
Board member Singley read the findings of fact supporting the variance, saying the pool would be behind the house and a six-foot privacy fence and "will not affect any neighbors nor create [a change to] the character of the street." The board concluded the property has exceptional conditions—its footprint and floodplain location—that limit reasonable pool placement and that authorizing the variance would not be detrimental to adjacent property or the public good.
The board voted to approve a seven-foot variance (allowing the pool to be placed three feet from the side property line). Miss Jones moved to approve the motion; members Nolan and Valerie were recorded as making the second. The motion carried unanimously; all members present responded "aye." The chair clarified the approved variance reflected the request set out on page 5 of the written application.
City staff noted practical details discussed during the hearing: the homeowners plan to use a temporary flexible discharge pipe to route dechlorinated pool water to the city storm drain in front of the house when needed; staff indicated dechlorinated pool water is an allowable stormwater discharge. Staff also said the PowerPoint slide in the presentation contained an incorrect placement graphic (showing 7.77 feet) and that the written staff report reflected the correct original request; the board considered the written request when making its decision.
There were no other members of the public who spoke for or against the variance. With the motion approved, the board closed the item and moved to adjourn the meeting.
