Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Camden County planners table setback variance for White Oak parcel after safety and measurement concerns
Summary
Commissioners tabled a request to reduce side and front setbacks for a 0.44-acre White Oak parcel to allow time for measurement verification and neighbor outreach; safety concerns about Highway 252 and inconsistent survey dimensions were central to the discussion.
The Camden County Planning Commission on April 29 tabled a requested setback variance for a White Oak parcel after commissioners raised safety concerns about nearby Highway 252 and questioned inconsistencies in the submitted survey. The commission moved to delay action on VAR-26-0005 until its May 27 meeting to give the applicant time to verify dimensions and consult adjoining landowners.
VAR-26-0005 sought to reduce the required side yard setback from 40 feet to 25 feet and the front yard setback from 50 feet to 20 feet for a 0.44-acre lot at 6149 Burnt Fort Road (Tax parcel 027 011A). Patti Manning, who identified herself as the owner of Elite Homes of Wayne County, said the variance was necessary to place a 28-by-56-foot home on the irregularly shaped lot and said she was "willing to negotiate" the dimensions if needed to secure the project.
Commissioner Manning expressed strong safety concerns about allowing structures that close to the roadway and said she could not support a 20-foot side setback on that stretch of road, citing higher vehicle speeds. "Some kid gets hit out there because we gave him the 20', and then it's going to be on my conscience," she said. Vice Chairman Randal Morris and Commissioner King also urged prudence, noting traffic growth on Highway 252 and recommending the applicant obtain written approvals from contiguous landowners where possible.
Applicant Quentin Jones, who said the property has "been in my family for years and generations," told the board he had not yet solicited neighbors’ views but was willing to do so. Commissioners and staff noted discrepancies between the variance application and the survey drawing; Patti Manning said the surveyor prepared the drawing and she could not explain the conflicting measurements.
Commissioner King moved to table the request; Vice Chairman Morris seconded the motion. The commission voted to table VAR-26-0005 to the May 27, 2026 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant to verify measurements and gather additional neighbor input.
The commission did not take a final vote on the variance at the April 29 meeting; the item remains pending further documentation and outreach.
