Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madison zoning board continues Sparks’ deck variance after applicant cites larger lot measurements
Summary
The Madison Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 17 continued a variance request from William ("Hal") and Anna Sparks for an 8-by-6 deck at 1346 Conway Road to July 15, asking the applicants to supply contractor-verified measurements or a certified plot plan before a final decision.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Madison Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 17 continued a variance request from William ("Hal") and Anna Sparks for property at 1346 Conway Road so the applicants can provide reliable measurements linking the house to rear lot pins.
Colleen read the hearing notice for Case 2605, citing Madison zoning ordinance Article 5, §5.9(e), which sets a 40-foot rear-yard setback for dwellings. The applicants asked for permission to place an 8-by-6 deck closer than that rear lot line requirement.
One applicant told the board that, according to the tax map and a neighbor’s recent survey, the lot measures about 0.36 acre and "I've got 87 feet from my house to my back line," arguing that earlier stakes had misstated the boundary. The board noted the packet contained an older septic plan rather than a certified plot plan and that drawings in the file contained inconsistent dimensions.
Chair (S1) and other board members explained the board’s usual practice: when a certified plot plan is not supplied, they will sometimes accept measurements from a licensed, bonded contractor that are clearly tied to boundary pins as a waiver alternative. The board emphasized any waiver must be supported by reliable, documented measurements; a casual sketch or an unverified family measurement would not be sufficient.
The board advised the applicants to have their contractor document measurements referenced to known pins and then present those drawings to the building official, Bob Boyd. If the building official confirms the measurements and issues a building permit, the board said it will close the file without issuing a variance. If the building official identifies problems, the applicants will return to the board with corrected, re-noticed materials.
Chair moved to continue Case 2605 to July 15 at 06:00 at the same location; the motion was seconded and approved. The board asked applicants to notify Colleen in the office when they obtain a building permit so staff can administratively close the case if appropriate.
Why it matters: The board’s guidance clarifies how Madison will handle incomplete applications for dimensional variances—either a certified plot plan or contractor-verified measurements tied to boundary pins are required to ensure accurate setback determinations.

