Columbus, Georgia

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS



REGULAR MEETING - 2:00 P.M. ? FEBRUARY 5, 2003





The Regular Meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals was held Wednesday, February

5, 2003 at 2:00 P.M., on the 1st Floor of the Government Center Annex, 420-10th

Street. Members present were:





Mrs. Leah Braxton

Mr. Larry Phillips

Mr. David Fox

Mr. James Billingsley

Mr. Billy Edwards





Also present were Mr. Danny Cargill, Secretary of the Board, and Ms. Veronica

Pitts, Recording Secretary.





VARIANCES.



Case No. 03-V15?-Granted.



Steven Booth, 10,000 River Road, presented his appeal for a variance to allow a

farm building as the principal use and to increase the height requirement of an

accessory structure (farm building) from 14 feet to 20 feet. The property is

zoned A-1.





In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr. Booth

gave the following information: He would like to put a meter on the barn and

extend the height of it. Eventually, he would like to drill a well, build a

barn and pasture for horses. Currently they are hunting on the property. The

property is approximately 125 acres and in the near future he will build a

house on it. The barn is approximately 3200 square feet from River

Road.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Phillips made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Fox, to grant this appeal

because this is a large piece of property and the barn is so far out of view of

anyone or anything. Motion carried unanimously.



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Case No. 03-V16?-Granted.



Brock Jones presented the appeal of Chuck McDaniel, 2627

Meadowview Drive, for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback

requirement from 30 feet to 8 feet and to reduce the corner side

yard setback requirement from 25 feet to 20 feet, in order to make

an addition, 22? x 32?, a three car carport, to a single family

residence. The property is zoned R-1A.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr. Jones

gave the following information: Mr. McDaniel would like to add a three car

carport on to his home. He will enclose an existing garage. The materials

used will match the house. Some renovations are being made to the home.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this appeal

because renovation is being done to the house. There was no opposition to this

request. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V17?-Granted.



Gail Aderhold, Action Buildings, presented the appeal of Carrie Buckner, 538

Fulton Avenue, for a variance to reduce the side yard setback requirement from

8 feet to 1 foot, in order to make an addition, 15? x 31?, a carport, to a

single family residence. The property is zoned R-3A.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Ms.

Aderhold gave the following information: Ms. Buckner would like to put a

carport over an existing slab. The materials used will match the house. There

are similar carports in the neighborhood. The water will flow down to the

street.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Phillips made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Billingsley, to grant

this appeal because there will be no water problem; the water will flow to the

street. There are several similar carports in the neighborhood. Motion

carried unanimously.







2

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Case No. 03-V18--Denied. Breakthrough, Inc., 2501 2nd Avenue

Case No. 03-V19--Denied. Breakthrough, Inc., 2101 2nd Avenue

Case No. 03-V20--Denied. Breakthrough, Inc., 2910 2nd Avenue



Robert Hetsler and Clint Broussard presented the appeal of Breakthrough, Inc.,

2501 2nd Avenue, 2101 2nd Avenue & 2910 2nd Avenue, from a Decision of the

Building Official that billboards are not allowed along the Gateway. The

property is zoned C-3.

In their statements and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Hetsler and Mr. Broussard gave the following information:

Robert Hetsler-Our primary arguments are focuses on the interpretation of the

ordinance. We believe that the interpretation that Inspection & Codes has

given is incorrect. Based on the fact that the first sentence indicates that

Gateways are defined as the entrances and the Inspections Department has taken

the position that Gateways being the entire 2nd Avenue as opposed to entrances

we believe the position is the Alabama state line. Our interpretation is they

are well outside of the 660 feet rule. Their argument is also on reliance.

There is a Law in Georgia that is pretty clear that zoning officials leads you

to believe that something is allowed and you spend substantial funds in

reliance on that as we did making several trips for over two months. We

engaged an engineer to meet with the Inspection Department, we have a letter

from him indicating that the Building Official advised him that the 2nd Avenue

locations were allowed and based on the work that he had done we were

permitted. Subsequently, we were denied those permits. We detrimentally relied

to extend a great deal of expense and obligate our self to three 20 year leases

based on representation. The Supreme Court in 1981 said that we acquire vested

rights based on the fact that they represented and assured us that these in

fact were going to be permitted because we submitted them in October and for

two months they kept making us go back and submit other plans and make

additional trips. After we finalized the project and hired an engineer to do

it, came back and said no, they are not even allowed on that street.

Larry Phillips-You said that you already leased the property.

Robert Hetsler-Yes, from the owner.

Larry Phillips-Do you have a copy of that lease?

Robert Hetsler- I believe I submitted it with my permits, I don?t have it on me

right now. They were part of the permit process though.





3

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Leah Braxton-Danny Cargill do you know if that is true?

Danny Cargill-I do not know.

Larry Phillips-Specifically, I am wandering if there is a clause in the lease

that says that if for some reason you are not able to permit the thing.

Robert Hetsler-There is a clause in the lease that provides for that, but we

have already expended signing bonuses that we can?t get back. But, yes you are

correct that if we go through all of the appeal process and we are not able to

get it, we do have the right to rescind the contract with minor penalties. Our

detrimental reliance claim relies on the expenditures and we are a very small

company and to make five or six trips here is substantial relative to our

company. There are only the two of us.

Larry Phillips-You?re saying that the City said that this was an allowable use

of that property.

Robert Hetsler-That is correct, on a couple of occasions.

Larry Phillips-Who in the City said that.

Robert Hetsler-Mr. Danny Cargill.

Larry Phillips-Luckily he is here today, I would like to hear from him what

happened.

Danny Cargill-When we got to this point the applications were turned down, we

never had a true and accurate site plan at any point until the very end of the

process. During that time, Clint did make several trips here and several times

I spent a while with him at the counter telling him exactly what I needed.

Most of the time when we review a site plan the address really does not come

into play. We scale out a site plan and if it is not true, I stick it to the

side. That is a requirement that must be submitted when you make your

application.

Larry Phillips-You mean if it is not to scale.

Danny Cargill-If it is not to scale. I don?t know where it is going.

Larry Phillips-What were you looking at when you were at the counter discussing.

Danny Cargill-A drawing and I probably have the drawings upstairs, I would have

to double check that to see what they actually submitted to start with.

Larry Phillips-Was it a drawing or just a copy of a map of something?

Danny Cargill-It is a copy of a map, I don?t know who drew it. I don?t know

where it came from, but it was not to any type of standard scale that we would

require.







4

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Larry Phillips-It wasn?t this drawing here.

Danny Cargill-No sir. They did come back later with a letter or with a drawing

that Ben Moon did from Moon & Meeks. The question was asked to me of that

drawing was, was it to scale, would it suffice and of course it did. It met

the standard for our requirements. Upon reading the ordinance, what the

ordinance says is that Billboards are not allowed along the Gateway. Gateway

is defined as 2nd Avenue, upon that interpretation billboards are not allowed

along 2nd Avenue.

Larry Phillips-I?m trying to see where the break down in communication might

have occurred. When Mr. Cargill says that the drawings are acceptable does

that sound like the project is acceptable?

Robert Hetsler?Well, on October 2nd when we submitted them, the very first

thing you submit is an application and on all the applications they say 2nd

Avenue. We called two months, in July I have travel logs that we started in

July and we got an interpretation of the ordinance from a woman I don?t

remember her name up their in the zoning, I want to say Sherri, but I am not

sure. We talked to her and she informed me that Gateway was defined as the

Alabama state line because the purpose of the ordinance was to allow when you

come through to Georgia from Alabama that you don?t see these billboards within

660 feet. She said Gateway was synonymous, unfortunate the ordinance doesn?t

have any definition of Gateway. There is nothing in any Columbus City

Ordinance that ever exactly defines Gateway. In the dictionary I believe it

uses it synonymous with entrance. Entrance we think of possibly the Alabama

state line as our position. That was supported, I believe Sherri, I want to

use her name lightly because I can?t remember, told me that and so reliance on

that we went and did all of these things. Mr. Cargill is correct that we

didn?t provide a proper site plan. On all of the applications the very first

thing they ask when you submit, the very first thing they attach says 2nd

Avenue and all of our drawings, even the first one?s that we submitted says 2nd

Avenue and it tells the exact address because that was a requirement that we

were correct on, although all the rest were not to scale. We made several trips

up here after October 2nd because we didn?t finalize the permit process until

December when the plan was approved by him as a correct drawing. So it did

take two months and several trips in between that time and this whole time this

was on file with the City and they knew that. I find that hard to believe that

they didn?t know that it was on 2nd Avenue.





5

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Larry Phillips-Danny can you comment on that, it sounds like a break down in

communication or misinterpretation of what you were looking at, is that

possible in that case.

Danny Cargill-Anything is possible. I don?t think from the City?s standpoint

that there is any misunderstanding about what the ordinance says about the

Gateways.

David Fox-Does it not define what those Gateways are.

Danny Cargill-Yes sir it sure does. Under Billboards #2-Section A-It says

maintaining the aesthetics of the entrances to this community, its Gateways, is

important. New or larger billboards within 660 feet shall not be allowed along

the following gateways: 2nd Avenue, J.R. Allen Parkway/U.S 80/Falline Freeway

from the Alabama state line past its intersection with the Columbus Manchester

Expressway to its intersection with the west side of Flat Rock Road and I-185

north of its intersection with the J.R. Allen Parkway/U.S.80, except for signs

which may be authorized by the Georgia DOT within the highway right-of-way. So

it defined the three Gateways to the community. Our interpretation at 2nd

Avenue, is from 4th Street to 45th Street.

Robert Hetsler-It didn?t say that, if I may comment on what he read here, all

the other one?s except 2nd Avenue extend the 660 feet line by saying from the

Alabama state line all the way over to this parkway. Ours just said from the

Alabama state line, our interpretation from the Alabama state line 660 feet and

if they meant to extend it to 45th to 4th like he is saying they did why didn?t

they just say that for all of the other ones and the first line says maintain

the aesthetics of the entrances to the community, Gateway is entrance in that

same sentence, Gateway is further defined by saying entrance and we all know

entrance is walking through a door, Alabama state line.

David Fox-185 wouldn?t be a Gateway into Muscogee County from Harris County.

You are getting hung up on the Alabama state line and it defines 185 as a

Gateway. I come from Lagrange into Columbus North South that is a Gateway

too.

Robert Hetsler-I agree with that, it is a Gateway. Since they wanted to extend

it more than the regular 660 feet they said the measuring point starts from the

Alabama state line past to this road. So that extended the 660 feet rule. Mr.

Cargill said from 4th to 45th, if that is what they meant they could have wrote

it and we wouldn?t even be here.

David Fox-The way it reads to me, you can forget the 660 feet, it means

anywhere along 2nd Avenue. My interpretation was that pertains to J.R. Allen

Parkway and or intersection of 185 and the J.R. Allen Parkway.





6

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Robert Hetsler -Your interpretation is that the whole 2nd Avenue is a Gateway

in itself.

Leah Braxton-That would be my interpretation.

David Fox-The way that it is written and being an English major in college that

is the way it is written and that is the way I interpret it.

Robert Hetsler-I agree that other people can interpret it that way and that is

why the Supreme Court of Georgia has clearly said that any ambiguity should be

construed against the City and pre-use of the land.

David Fox-If the body decides not to go with you and uphold the Building

Official that would be something you would have to go on an appeal process.

Larry Phillips-David I read it that way too, maintain the anesthetics of the

entrances to this community, its Gateways, is important and then it describes

what is Gateways. The following Gateways 2nd Avenue and so forth. You didn?t

have a copy of this when you were going through the process?

Robert Hetsler-That is why I talked to Sherri about it and asked for her

interpretation of it because I was a little unclear and then she supported my

position without even me advancing anything. She said North of 45th or

something like that is the Gateway right around the Alabama state line.

Clint Broussard-In other words if she would have told us what you guys are

telling us right now we would not be here today. We don?t want to change the

rules we want to understand them. If it was something that was that obvious to

all of you guys, it should have been told to us when we submitted the permits.

Larry Phillips-Did Sherri communicate?

Danny Cargill-I don?t know who Sherri is. We don?t have anyone that works for

our department named Sherri.

Larry Phillips-Well, who do you have that would have talked to him.

Leah Braxton-He said someone in zoning.

Robert Hetsler-Someone in the same office that I submitted the permits and I

actually called in advance to do it and I can pull the cell phone records to

show the exact date to find out who was working that day.

Danny Cargill-We don?t have anyone in our department or zoning that is named

Sherri.

David Fox-But as a matter of course as someone coming in as they did to apply

for a permit wouldn?t they be given a copy of the ordinance.







7

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Danny Cargill-Not necessarily.

Robert Hetsler-I have it right here.

Clint Broussard-Robert read the ordinance and said I wonder what this Gateway

thing is, we need to find out what this is because it could prevent us from

being permitted, so we made the proper phone call to Building Inspections to

find the proper answer and the answer was obviously what we were happy to hear.

Larry Phillips-Do you have a picture or drawing that shows what it looks like.

Clint Broussard-It looks just like the same exact ones that are currently on

2nd Avenue, the same size and structure. It is not going to be any thing

different, it is actually going to fit in with the other ones. The City has

set up certain distance requirements.

Robert Hetsler-It complies with all of the existing requirements of size.

David Fox-Generally we would like to see a computer imposed picture of the

horizons and a scaled drawing of the billboard as it would be to show how the

billboard would look if someone was coming down the street.

Larry Phillips-I would be in favor of tabling this case so that Mr. Cargill

could find out who had a discussion with them and get a better position on what

they are claiming. We need to find out what was said. It is a little bit of a

mystery right now. I guess with a few questions you could find out.

Danny Cargill-All I can do is try.

David Fox-It sounds like you have an issue with time, with your tenants.

Robert Hetsler-We have one year from the day we signed the least.

Clint Broussard-Our position is simple, why would the City of Columbus want to

say that 2nd Avenue would no longer want billboards. This is not our City this

is your City and we respect that and if you don?t want billboards on it then

that is understandable, but what was the reason for it. It is because you

don?t want to many on it, correct. We have applied for three locations. If

there is some kind of way that we could come to some sort of agreement.

Robert Hetsler-What he means is withdraw one of the applications.

David Fox-Personally, to me it is either all or none.

Danny Cargill-To answer his question on what ordinance interpreted, Robert

Teasley from Signs, Inc., is here in the audience he served on that committee

you can ask him.









8

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Robert Teasley-That was a two year process and there was a lot of give and

takes and push and pulls on the Committee. One of the major settlements to be

made was no billboards on the Gateways, which include 2nd Avenue, Veterans

Parkway.

Larry Phillips-With you guys not being from Columbus, you may not recognize

what we are trying to do. If you would have seen 2nd Avenue 10 years ago you

would wonder why we would even try to make that a Gateway. Right now you can

see about midway the transition, I suppose it is going to take another 10 years

to make it a real transition to what you would agree is a Gateway. Right now

it is not there yet, but the City is working on it.



Leah Braxton-Is there any opposition to this case?

Brent Kemp came forward, I am with Viacom Outdoors, we are the local billboard

advertising company. I have been before the Board of Zoning Appeals before

asking for a variance of 56 feet out of a Gateway. I was told that I had to

move 56 feet to maintain the 660 feet Gateway between I-185 and J.R. Allen

Parkway. 2nd Avenue is a Gateway, don?t you think in the past three or four

years that if we could then we would have gotten a billboard on 2nd Avenue. If

the decision is made to grant their variance, you burst your sign ordinance

wide open. We abide by the Gateway and the ordinance.

Larry Phillips-Mr. Kemp, I think I feel the same way. I feel if the decision

has to be made on this, it needs to be by City Council that is my personal

feeling.

Robert Hetsler-I understand, most of our arguments are legal arguments, so we

assume that it will probably end up in Superior Court one day.

Decision

David Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards to deny this appeal

because they agree with the Building Official that billboards are not allowed

along the Gateway of 2nd Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V21?-Tabled.



There was no one present to present the appeal of Bill Hart Inc., 5767 Marlette

Court, for a variance to reduce the front yard setback requirement from 20 feet

to 10 feet and to reduce the rear yard setback requirement from 20 feet to 10

feet, in order to erect a single family residence, 33? x 41? 6?. The property

is zoned R-3B.







9

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Billingsley, to table this

appeal until the March meeting because there was no one present to present the

appeal. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V22?-Tabled.



There was no one present to present the appeal of Bill Hart, Inc., 5773

Marlette Court, for a variance to reduce the front yard setback requirement

from 20 feet to 10 feet and to reduce the rear yard setback requirement from 20

feet to 10 feet, in order to erect a single family residence, 31? 9? x 39?.

The property is zoned R-3B.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Billingsley, to table this

appeal until the March meeting because there was no one present to present the

appeal. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V23?-Granted.



Charles Crumpton (father-in-law) presented the appeal of Joy Crumpton, 7015

Winthrop Court, for a variance to reduce the side yard setback requirement from

28 feet to 18 feet, in order to erect a single family residence. The property

is zoned A-1.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Crumpton gave the following information: The existing house that was there had

a 12 feet setback. A lot of the existing homes were built before this

regulation went into affect, they have between a 10 and 15 feet setback. The

house that was previously there was 12 feet away from Ms. Ulrich, the existing

house will be 18 feet from her line. Lot number 4 is adjacent to the property

where the old driveway used to be, it has a slope that goes up. To keep from

encroaching on that line they need to move over as well as to get the space to

do the turn into the garage. A letter was submitted from Eva Ulrich, a

neighbor, who is in agreement of the variance request.









10

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Phillips made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

appeal because there was a letter from Ms. Ulrich who is not in opposition of

the request. There was a previous residence that was 12 feet from the property

line, the current home will be 18 feet from the property line. Motion carried

unanimously.



Case No. 03-V24?-Granted.



Keith Arnold, 6900 Dorsey Drive, presented the appeal for a variance to reduce

the side yard setback requirement from 8 feet to 1 foot, in order to make an

addition, 18? x 32?, a carport, to a single family residence. The property is

zoned R-3A.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Arnold gave the following information: He would like to add a carport to his

home. The carport will be over an existing slab. The materials used will

match the house. On the back side of the carport they would also like to build

a room for a small office. The way that the property sits, because of the

elevation, he catches all of the water when it rain from the other residences.

The carport is the only thing that is encroaching. The overhang will be 1 foot

from the property line.

There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Billingsley, to grant this

appeal because the carport will be over an existing slab. The foundation is 2

feet from the property line and the overhang will be 1 foot from the property

line. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V25?-Tabled.



Craig Webber and Gregory Davis, presented the appeal of Best Buy Corporation,

2925 Columbus-Manchester Expressway, for a variance to increase the maximum

height of a sign from 35 feet to 48 feet. The property is zoned C-3.











11



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





In their statements and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Webber and Mr. Davis gave the following information: They would like to

increase the height of a sign from 35 feet to 48 feet for more visibility up

and down interstate 185. Their site is in a hole, the airport property and a

hotel is higher than their property. With the height increase, they hope to

get some visibility between the hotel and the building behind it. The sign

will also be for another tenant.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Phillips made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Fox, to table this appeal

to allow the appellants to bring in photos that better represent the sign that

they would like to erect. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V26?-Granted.



Doug Harris and Roger Beck presented the appeal of DLR Associates, 3143 Macon

Road, for a variance to reduce the corner-side yard setback requirement from 20

feet to 1 foot, in order to erect a carwash. The property is zoned C-3.



In their statements and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Harris and Mr. Beck gave the following information: They are proposing to

erect a carwash facility that is similar to a full service carwash, but the

difference is there will be a vacuum canopy. This project will have two

structures on it. The carwash will be a permanent structure and the other one

will be an open air type of arrangement. The property is narrow from east to

west. The building orientation has to be the way they are showing it in order

to get the clearances needed. They believe the carport will benefit the City

as well as themselves because it will help control traffic. Currently there

are two driveway aprons that leave the property and enter Auburn Avenue, in

their development they propose to close both of those; that will relieve

congestion of traffic on the intersection.

There was no opposition presented to this appeal.











12



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this appeal

because they will make efforts to improve and maintain the site of the

location. This seems to be a logical use of the property. Motion carried

unanimously.



Case No. 03-V27?-Granted.



Robert Teasley, Signs Inc., presented the appeal of Whatley Oil Company, 8050

Beaver Run Road, from a Decision of the Building Official that an additional

sign is not allowed, 4 signs are existing. The property is zoned C-3.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Teasley gave the following information: The state is widening the road and

they just need to put the sign back up. The sign will be 3 feet beyond the

right away.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Edwards made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Billingsley, to grant this

appeal because D.O.T. is widening the road and the sign needs to go back up.

Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-V28?-Granted.



Eddie Miles, A.C.E. Construction & Drafting Co. presented the appeal of Donald

Pendleton, 4337 Kennesaw Drive, for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback

requirement from 30 feet to 17 feet, in order to make an addition, 16? x 23?, a

sunroom, to a single family residence. The property is zoned R-1A.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr. Miles

gave the following information: Mr. Pendleton would like to add a sunroom to

his home. The roof will have a slope incline with a conventional gable. There

is an existing slab that will be extended 3 feet on one side. The material

used will be vinyl siding.



There was no opposition presented to this appeal.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Billingsley, to grant this

appeal because the addition will be over an existing slab and there will be no

windows facing the rear neighbor. Motion carried unanimously.



13

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





HOME OCCUPATIONS.



CaseNo. 03-H20?-Granted.



Anne Stanford, 5517 Rogers Drive, presented her application for a Certificate

of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for selling jewelry,

clocks, watches, porcelain dolls & accessories (internet), Stanford Mall.Com.

The property is zoned R-1A.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work. The

items will be dropped shipped to the customer?s home.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO21--Granted.



Charles Andre, 3456 Hiawatha Drive, presented his application for a Certificate

of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for remodeling &

construction, Mr. Fix-It. The property is zoned R-1A.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work. There will be no

work material stored at the residence. He will also be a general contractor.



There was no opposition to this application.











14



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003







Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition, but with the stipulation that there will be no storage of work

material at the residence. Motion carried unanimously.





CaseNo. 03-HO22?-Denied.



Patricia Davies, 1312 Virginia Street, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for an

erosion control business, Davies Erosion Control Services, Inc. The property

is zoned R-3A.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. This will be full time work. She will have

employees.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to deny this

application because she will have employees. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO23--Granted.



Arlen Mott, 4443 Shamrock Glen, presented his application for a Certificate of

Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for web design & digital

slide shows, Christian Media. The property is zoned R-2.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: Clients will gather photos and then

he will create digital slide shows. He will be using one room of his home as

an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work.



There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.







15

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





CaseNo. 03-HO24?-Granted.



Jaime Fernandez, 1016 Manley Drive, presented his application for a Certificate

of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for home repairs, Build 2

Last. The property is zoned R-2.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his

home as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition, but with the stipulation that there will be no storage of work

material at the residence. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO25--Granted.



Ambroes Pass-Turner, 510 Baxley Way, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for

consulting, APT Counseling Service. The property is zoned R-2.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.













16



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





CaseNo. 03-HO26?-Granted.



Jerome & Karen Keyton, 1014 Chalbena Avenue, presented their application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for a

cleaning service, Keyton?s Quality Cleaning. The property is zoned R-1A.



In their statements and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicants gave the following information: They will be using one room of their

home as an office only. There will be no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO27--Granted.



Edwin Basilio presented the application for Sharon Denice Smith, 3081 Poppy

Seed Loop, for a Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office

only for Christian music events, dramas and motion pictures, Hip Hop

Productions Presents. The property is zoned R-2. (Sharon was present, but

could not speak because her voice was hoarse)



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, Mr.

Basilio gave the following information: She would like to do promotions and

set up different events in Columbus. She will be using one room of her home as

an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.











17

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





CaseNo. 03-HO28?-Granted.



Tonya Mason, 6023 Crystal Drive #37, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for designing

calendars and cards. The property is zoned C-3.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO29--Granted.



Franklin Bates, 4301 3rd Avenue, presented his application for a Certificate of

Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for selling ceramics (at

stores), Red Step Ceramics. The property is zoned R-4.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work. The ceramics will

be made in the basement of his home.



There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.













18



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





CaseNo. 03-HO30?-Granted.



Veronica Smith Videau, 1 Playfield Court, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for medical

billing, Peach State Medical Billing. The property is zoned R-2.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO31--Granted.



Gloria Richardson, 2923 E. 7th Street, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for private

duty nursing, TBC The Best of Care. The property is zoned R-4.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work.



There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.















19



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





CaseNo. 03-HO32?-Granted.



Carla Stickles, 7636 Gray Shoals Drive, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for selling

art, antiques and doing appraisals, Art, Antiques & Appraisals By Penguin. The

property is zoned R-1.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO33--Granted.



Norma Rebout, 6912 Upperville Court, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for a

cleaning service, Affordable Cleaning. The property is zoned R-2.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Billingsley made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Phillips, to grant

this application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation

definition. Motion carried unanimously.













20



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





CaseNo. 03-HO34?-Granted.



Michael A. David Sr., 901 Joy Road D-28, presented his application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for low

voltage repair & installation, TMT Services. The property is zoned C-3.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition.

Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO35--Granted.



Raymond Thorn, 5532 Saratoga Drive, presented his application for a Certificate

of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for catalog sales

(internet) & bookkeeping, Variety Catalog Merchandise. The property is zoned

R-1A.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition.

Motion carried unanimously.





CaseNo. 03-HO36?-Granted.



Pamela Bedsole, 6821 Fawndale Drive, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for a

bookkeeping service, Bedsole Bookkeeping Service. The property is zoned R-1A.





21

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room in her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition.

Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO37--Granted.



Taneshia Fitch-Ingersoll, 4903 River Road, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for a salon, Uptown

Multicultural Salon. The property is zoned R-2.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room in her

home. She will have no employees. This will be part time work. She will have

no more than 2 clients Wednesday-Friday from 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. and Saturday

from 7:00 a.m. ? 2:00 p.m. She has off street parking for four vehicles.



There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application with the stipulation that she will have no more than 2 clients

Wednesday ? Friday, 4:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m. and Saturday 7:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.

Motion carried unanimously.





CaseNo. 03-HO38?-Granted.



Ronald Pate, 4807 Moores Mill Court, presented his application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for marketing

and selling products on the internet, The Miromark Company. The property is

zoned R-2.













22

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room in his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition.

Motion carried unanimously.



CaseNo. 03-HO39?-Granted.



Cartrie Harris Irby, 406 Henson Avenue, presented her application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for tutoring

and writing educational programs, Innovative Learning Enhancement on the Rock.

The property is zoned R-1A.



In her statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: She will be using one room of her

home as an office only. She will have no employees and there will be no

additional traffic in the neighborhood. This will be full time work.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition.

Motion carried unanimously.



Case No. 03-HO40--Granted.



Raymond Phillips, 5003 St. Francis Avenue, presented his application for a

Certificate of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for a lawn

service, Phillips Lawn Service. The property is zoned R-2.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work.





23

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003





There was no opposition to this application.





Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition,

but with the stipulation that there will be no storage of work material at the

residence. Motion carried unanimously.





CaseNo. 03-HO41?-Granted.



Robert Page, 5955 E. Heights Drive, presented his application for a Certificate

of Occupancy for a Home Occupation for an office only for retail internet

sales, American V-Twin New & Used Parts. The property is zoned R-1.



In his statement and in response to questions from the Board Members, the

applicant gave the following information: He will be using one room of his home

as an office only. He will have no employees and there will be no additional

traffic in the neighborhood. This will be part time work. He will sell

motorcycle parts over the internet.



There was no opposition to this application.



Mr. Fox made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Edwards, to grant this

application because it does meet the intent of the Home Occupation definition,

but with the stipulation that there will be no storage of work material at the

residence. Motion carried unanimously.



END OF HOME OCCUPATIONS.





























24



BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ? 02/05/2003









The minutes of the regular meeting of January 8th were approved as presented.



There being no further business to come before the Board,

the meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m.















____________________ __________________

Leah Braxton, Bill Duck,

Chairperson Secretary





_____________________ __________________

Larry Phillips, Danny Cargill

Vice Chairperson Acting Secretary















































25