Board of Zoning Appeals

CITY OF NORTH MYRTLE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA NORTH MYRTLE BEACH CITY HALL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING Thursday, March 11, 2021 5:00 PM MINUTES William McGonigal, Chairman City Staff: Cynthia Lover Ben Caldwell, Zoning Administrator Roger Quinn Chris Noury, City Attorney Joe Reaves Allison K. Galbreath, City Clerk Trey Skidmore Andy Thomas, Absent Wyman Wise 1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL: Chairman McGonigal called the meeting to order at 5:01 PM. 2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Chairman McGonigal called for a motion to approve the minutes of the February 11, 2021 meeting. The motion was made by Mr. Wise and seconded by Mr. Skidmore. The motion passed 6-0. 3. COMMUNICATIONS: None 4. OLD BUSINSS: None 5. NEW BUSINESS: A. SWEAR IN THOSE PERSONS TO SPEAK: Mrs. Galbreath swore in persons to speak at the beginning of the meeting. B. VARIANCE #V4-21: Application by Barry and Cynthia Chitwood for a variance to reduce the minimum required rear setback for a proposed deck at 406 7th Avenue South zoned Medium Density Residential, R-2 District. Mrs. Chitwood stated they wanted to extend the second floor deck for additional seating. She had pictures she distributed to the Board. She stated it would not be encroaching on any other property. Ms. Lover inquired what the hardship was. Mrs. Chitwood stated they couldn’t sit on their deck. They were the first to build that model in the neighborhood and didn’t realize how small the deck would be. Mr. Caldwell read the description of the request, the ordinance, and recommended to hear the variance. Mrs. Chitwood clarified the deck was to be extended, not the roof. Chairman McGonigal explained the Board had to look for the hardship, as it related to the land. The Board, staff, and Mrs. Chitwood discussed the variance at length. Mr. Quinn inquired if Mrs. Chitwood knew she needed to demonstrate a hardship to the land. Mrs. Chitwood stated she did not realize it had to be a hardship to the land. Mr. Reaves asked if it was approved by the HOA. Mrs. Chitwood stated she had not spoken with them yet. 1  Chairman McGonigal called for a motion. Ms. Lover motioned to deny Variance #V4-21 based on no hardship within the language of the code. There was not proof of a necessary hardship. The property was developed by the variances that were established. The lot was not odd shaped, nor anything peculiar about the lot. The developer built within the confines of the plans that were submitted when the development was built, which had to adhere to certain setbacks. Granting this variance would give something to the homeowner that the developer could not get. The motion was seconded by Mr. Reaves. Mr. Quinn asked if it was a self-imposed hardship. Ms. Lover stated the owner bought the house knowing the plans for it. The motion to deny the variance passed 6-0. C. VARIANCE #V5-21: Application by William Angel for a variance to allow the placement of a swimming pool in the side yard at 1730 24th Avenue North zoned Mobile/Manufactured Home Residential, R-3 District. Mr. Angel stated the pool would be within the setbacks, but on the side of the home, not in the back. Mr. Skidmore inquired if the pie shape was the front of the yard. Mr. Angel confirmed it was. Ms. Lover asked what the hardship was. Mr. Angel stated he did not have a backyard where he could put a pool in and he would like to have a pool. Mr. Skidmore stated his yard was unique shaped. Mr. Angel agreed it was unique and the other properties in the neighborhood were square. Mr. Caldwell read the description of the request, the ordinance, and recommended to hear the variance. Chairman McGonigal stated it was an odd shaped lot and asked if the pool would be enclosed. Mr. Angel stated they planned to put a privacy fence around the pool. Mr. Wise inquired if it would be seen from the street. Mr. Angel stated it would be not be seen because the privacy fence would be around it. Ms. Lover asked if there would be enough room and the setbacks would not be involved. Mr. Caldwell stated it would only impact the location and would not need a variance on the setbacks. The Staff and Board continued to discuss the variance and fencing. Mr. Wise motioned to approve Variance #V5-21 with the contingency that a privacy fence be put up. The extraordinary and exceptional conditions were the shape of the lot and the pinnacle of the road coming together to make a unique situation on what would be the front or back lot. The variance would not be an unreasonable restriction, as it was already within the setbacks and it would be the minimum variance, because it was within the setbacks. The motion was seconded by Mr. Skidmore. The motion passed 6-0. D. VARIANCE #V6-21: Application by Robert Guyton for variance to subdivide an existing parcel of land into two lots, each having less lot width than minimally required at 2804 Diane Circle zoned Single-Family, Low-Density Residential, R-1 District. Mrs. Galbreath swore in Mr. Guyton. Mr. Guyton stated this property was located on Diane Circle and backed up to Airport Blvd. This lot was subdivided originally as a larger lot and the other lots in the area were subdivided into smaller lots. The applicant requested to subdivide this lot into two 75 foot lots. Ms. Lover asked if the lots would be parallel or perpendicular to Airport Blvd. Mr. Guyton stated it would be perpendicular, similar to the other lots. Ms. Lover clarified the size of the lot. She stated her concern would be that another variance would be requested on setbacks in order to build a larger home. Mr. Guyton stated the existing home would have to be removed and the applicant was not looking for a variance. Ms. Lover stated she would like to put a stipulation in the deed restrictions that a variance could not be requested to move the setbacks. Mr. Guyton stated he believed that would 2  not be a problem and it would also be stated it in the subdivision plat. Chairman McGonigal agreed with Ms. Lover on the stipulations to be put in the deed. Mr. Caldwell read the description of the request, the ordinance, and recommended to hear the variance. Chairman McGonigal recognized Barbara Bernetein. Ms. Bernetein lives at 2901 Diane Circle and stated she lived across the street and she was in attendance to hear what would happen to the property. Mr. Quinn inquired how this would be recorded in the deed. Mr. Guyton stated the subdivision plat that would be recorded would show the fact that the side and front/rear setbacks would be recorded on the plat. Anyone who would do a title search would see these setbacks and the requirement. Chairman McGonigal called for a motion. Ms. Lover motioned to approve Variance #V6- 21 based on the hardship the lots were plotted and divided prior to the City having minimum lot requirements. The lots would still meet the 10,000 foot requirement for R-1. The motion required filing with the Register of Deeds that the lots didn’t meet the width requirement and whomever bought them would know the setbacks would be smaller. The motion was seconded by Mr. Quinn. The motion passed 6-0. Chairman McGonigal asked for a motion to adjourn. Mr. Wise motioned to adjourn and was seconded by Mr. Quinn. The motion passed 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 5:32 PM. Respectfully submitted, Allison K. Galbreath City Clerk NOTE: BE ADVISED THAT THESE MINUTES REPRESENT A SUMMARY OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING AND ARE NOT INTENDED TO REPRESENT A FULL TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING. 3