Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board allows shed to remain on corner lot at 73 Sweet Pine Circle, ties variance to submitted map
Summary
After lengthy testimony about corner‑lot setbacks and septic constraints, the Board of Adjustment allowed a shed at 73 Sweet Pine Circle to remain in its current location as shown on applicant drawings, conditioned on maintenance only and expiration if removed.
The Chatham County Board of Adjustment voted Oct. 8 to allow a 12‑by‑12 accessory shed at 73 Sweet Pine Circle to remain where it sits, resolving a months‑long enforcement dispute that began with a complaint in November 2024.
Angela Plummer, Chatham County zoning administrator, summarized the enforcement timeline: a complaint on 11/11/2024 prompted a site investigation on 12/02/2024; the owner later applied for a zoning compliance permit on 12/05/2024; staff issued a citation and civil penalty ($50) on 04/21/2025 that the owners paid on 05/01/2025; a variance request was filed on 06/03/2025 and noticed to adjacent residents on 09/16/2025. Staff told the board there was ambiguity about whether the applicants were seeking a 15‑foot variance (to yield 25 feet from the property line) or a 30‑foot variance (to yield 10 feet from the front line). Plummer said staff’s measurements suggested the shed might be closer than 25 feet to the front property line.
Applicants Chris and Christie Palin described the parcel as a corner lot constrained by septic and well locations, a pool and mature trees that they said left no feasible place to reposition the shed without clearing vegetation or disturbing septic infrastructure. Christie Palin said their intent was to minimize visibility and that the subdivision’s Architectural Review Board (ARB) supported keeping the structure; ARB member Joshua Minnerix testified to that effect.
Because the county ordinance’s definition of front setback created uncertainty on corner lots, outside counsel TC Morphis advised the board that an atypical solution would be to authorize the shed to remain "in its current location as shown on the map submitted with the application" rather than specify a single numeric distance. The board adopted that approach, conditioned the variance on ordinary maintenance and repair, and made the variance expire if the shed is later removed. The motion passed by voice vote.
Next steps: County staff will retain the submitted site diagrams in the case record for future enforcement and the variance stands with the property until the structure is removed.
