Mint Hill board denies variance for Elkington Lane accessory structure

The Mint Hill Board of Adjustment voted to deny a variance request for 6213 Elkington Lane, rejecting a plan to keep a detached accessory structure (described in the record as a pool house) 2 feet from the side property line instead of the 8-foot setback required by the Mint Hill Unified Development Ordinance. A board member moved to deny the request, saying the applicant’s design choices—not a unique property condition—created the need for relief; the motion passed by a 5–2 tally.

Board members split during fact-finding over whether the property's topography and recurring drainage problems limited feasible building sites or whether the hardship was self-created. In deliberations a board member said, “You can't get a fire truck down through there,” citing public-safety and access concerns at the reduced setback. Another member concluded the lot’s small size and the applicant’s placement of a pool, outdoor kitchen and pool house meant the hardship arose from the design rather than an inherent, unique condition of the parcel.

The application record identifies the property as 6213 Elkington Lane (tax parcel references offered in the hearing). The board’s motion to deny recited the ordinance standard that a variance should not be granted where the need results from the owner’s design choices; the chair announced the variance request was denied. No additional mitigation or conditional approval was adopted; the meeting then moved to adjournment.