Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Jefferson County Board of Adjustment approves variance for covered deck at 6430 Stallion Drive

Jefferson County Board of Adjustment · July 10, 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 Jefferson County Board of Adjustment approved a variance (BOA25005) to reduce the rear-yard setback for a covered deck from 30 feet to 22 feet at 6430 Stallion Drive. Staff recommended denial citing the Unified Development Order; the homeowners and HOA supported the request and the board voted to approve.

The Jefferson County Board of Adjustment approved a variance for a covered deck at 6430 Stallion Drive, allowing the structure to sit 22 feet from the rear property line instead of the 30 feet required under the county Unified Development Order.

Planning staff urged the board to deny the request, saying the variance "is not consistent with the intent, purpose, or integrity of the UDO," and noting that a covered deck is treated like an addition and therefore subject to the full 30-foot rear setback. Staff’s presentation included the property description (approximately 0.16 acres, single-family home) and a reminder that uncovered decks have a different standard (15 feet).

Property owners Tom Kutz and Carla Kutz testified that they are replacing an existing, weathered deck and are not expanding the footprint beyond what already exists. Tom Kutz said the design is modeled on nearby covered decks and noted the lot backs up to common ground and a pond. The applicants submitted a letter from Mayfield Farms Homeowners Association and a neighbor letter from Mr. Medlock supporting the project; the board accepted those letters into the record.

During discussion, board members cited several nearby houses with similar covered decks and debated whether the lot’s configuration and neighborhood precedent justified relief from the UDO. One member characterized the requested change as roughly a 20–27 percent reduction of the required setback. After discussion a member moved to approve BOA25005, a second was recorded, and the chair announced the motion carried.

The approval grants the requested relief for the covered deck; the board did not specify additional conditions on the record. Planning staff noted denial would not deprive the owner of residential use because the lot already contains a single-family home. The board completed the variance decision and moved on to routine administrative items.