Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident asks whether variance can allow single‑wide home outside floodplain; staff advises formal application
Summary
Michelle Finley asked the commission whether a variance could allow a 14x52 single‑wide home to sit outside the floodplain by placing it closer to Peach Street; staff and a county adviser said setbacks and floodplain make a variance likely based on unique lot shape but noted hardship must be physical, not economic, and advised filing a formal application.
A county resident asked the Washington County Planning and Zoning Commission during public comment whether a variance could allow a single‑wide mobile home to be placed outside a floodplain on a small lot near Peach Street.
Michelle Finley, who said she lives at the corner of Peach and Wynn and that the subject parcel sits across Wynn Drive from her, told the commission she is considering placing a 14 by 52 single‑wide and sought guidance about whether a variance to the county’s 35‑foot front setback might be possible on that lot.
County staff and a county adviser explained the relevant standards and the application process. Staff said the county requires a 35‑foot front setback for property in the unincorporated area (subdivision standards would allow 25 feet); Finley said parts of the lot are in floodplain and that placing the home on the front of the lot would keep it outside the floodplain but closer to the road.
From a legal or land‑use standpoint, an adviser in the meeting said that a variance is typically available when a physical characteristic of the parcel — such as an unusual shape or floodplain constraint — makes literal application of the setback create a hardship. “It looks like your property meets the criteria for the granting of a variance because of the unique shape and the floodplain issues on the property,” the adviser said, while noting the county cannot pre‑decide or pre‑vote on an application and that economic hardship alone does not qualify.
Staff advised Finley to file a formal application so the commission and staff can consider the specific lot configuration and evidence of hardship. Finley said she sought the guidance before spending money negotiating with the property owner; staff reiterated that no pre‑vote could be given and provided setback numbers (35 feet from the property line to structure; 22 feet from the ditch to the front of the house in the example discussed).
The commission did not take formal action on the variance question; staff and the adviser directed Finley to submit a formal variance application for consideration.
