Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals approves variance allowing McMillan shed to remain 6 feet from rear lot line
Summary
On July 7, 2026, the Plymouth Board of Appeals unanimously approved variance BZA2026-20 to reduce the required rear-yard setback from 20 feet to 6 feet for a shed at 11866 Red Bud Drive, following a staff recommendation and neighborhood opposition voiced at the public hearing.
The Plymouth Board of Appeals voted 5-0 on July 7 to approve variance BZA2026-20, allowing a homeowner to keep an existing accessory shed 6 feet from the rear property line at 11866 Red Bud Drive.
Ty, a staff member who presented the case, told the board that the applicant, identified in the record as Kirk J. McMillan of 11866 Red Bud Drive, seeks a reduction from the standard 20-foot rear setback to 6 feet to legalize the shed's current location. Ty said the shed appears to have been constructed in 2007, no variance is on record, and the request arose after enforcement letters prompted administrative appeals and the current variance application. Staff recommended approval based on the board's decision criteria: impact on general welfare, effect on adjacent properties, and practical difficulty.
The petitioner, who gave his address for the record but did not state his name on the transcript, said he purchased the property last year, had a survey that showed the shed sits 6 feet from the rear lot line, and asked the board to grant the variance so he could keep the structure.
During public comment, Diane Quistle of 11905 Sunset Court told the board she and other neighbors oppose the request. "I'm sure it will get approved, but I just feel the obligation for the entire neighborhood that has been put through the loop," Quistle said, adding that the dispute has affected elderly neighbors in the area.
A board member moved to accept staff's recommendation and approve the variance. After brief discussion referencing prior, similar cases, the board took a roll-call vote: Board members Darren (yes), David (yes), Reggie (yes), Wendell (yes) and Jacobs (yes). The chair declared the motion passed.
Following the vote, the chair emphasized that each case is considered on its individual merits, regardless of neighborhood disputes.
The variance authorizes the rear-yard setback reduction to 6 feet to accommodate the existing accessory structure. No additional conditions or enforcement actions were recorded in the meeting minutes for this case. The board did not specify a timeline for filing or recording the variance in municipal records during the meeting.
The board moved on to a building-commissioner update after the vote; the next Board of Appeals meeting with pending applications was announced as August 4, 2026.
