Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA grants several property variances, including contested Gulfview Drive shed
Summary
The zoning board approved multiple side-setback and de minimis variances for residential properties, including a conditional approval for a long-standing shed on Walton Gulfview Drive after neighbor testimony and legal argument over historical platting and notice.
The Walton County Zoning Board of Adjustment on May 28 approved a string of property-variance requests for preexisting and nonconforming structures, resolving disputes that featured competing legal views about historical permits and the purpose of setbacks.
Counsel for applicants argued many affected structures predate modern code changes and that removal or relocation would be impractical or costly. For the Milczyk de minimis variance (VAR26000017), counsel said the encroaching corner of a house had existed for decades and the applicant presented neighbor letters of no objection; the board approved the variance with the survey attached and a condition requiring any reconstruction to meet then-current setbacks.
A contested case on Walton Gulfview Drive (Goodman) centered on a 2001 shed and a portable hot tub that encroach on rear and side setbacks. Applicant counsel said the shed was integral storage the buyer relied on and that removing it would impose a practical hardship; neighbors and a county advocate countered that longstanding violations should not automatically swallow the code and that evidence of cost to remove or move should be submitted. The board ultimately approved a variance for the shed (vote recorded by the board as 5–2) and separately approved the hot tub placement; the board attached the latest survey to the final order and required that if the structure is demolished or 51%+ damaged it be reconstructed to meet current setbacks.
Board members imposed a standard condition used through the evening’s property-variance cases: the variance applies only to the portions shown on the approved survey and does not authorize future expansions; if the structure is substantially rebuilt it must comply with the then-current land-development code.
What’s next: planning staff will attach the approved surveys to final orders and record them; parties have a 30-day window to appeal recorded final orders.
