The 36.5-foot setback is still a request, not a documented authorization. The March 2 minutes confirm that the Board deliberated after the postponement, but the cited account does not say that commissioners adopted, approved, denied, deferred or conditioned the variance. As a result, it remains unknown whether the owners can proceed with a home at the proposed location.
IssueFranklin Countyunder consideration
Carnesville home setback request remains unresolved after county hearing
Commissioners discussed whether a Highway 326 home may sit 36.5 feet from the front property line, far closer than the usual 100-foot requirement.
What happens next
The next public sign of resolution would be a later Board of Commissioners meeting record or written decision addressing V-2025-012. Until the county records a final action, residents cannot tell from the March 2 minutes whether the exception will be allowed, rejected, postponed again or resolved through action not reflected in those excerpts.
At a glance
What this means now
The story
A request to place a home much closer to Highway 326 than Franklin County’s normal zoning rule allows remained unresolved after the Board of Commissioners discussed it March 2. The proposal, identified as variance V-2025-012, concerns Courtney Long and co-owner Jeremy Long’s roughly 12.3-acre property at 699 Highway 326 in Carnesville; the meeting minutes record deliberation but no Board vote or final ruling.
The decision would determine whether the owners may locate a residence 36.5 feet from the front property line on the Agricultural Intensive-zoned District 3 tract, map and parcel 030/034. Residential construction there ordinarily must meet a 100-foot front setback, making the requested site 63.5 feet nearer the front line than the standard allows.
The matter did not reach its March hearing on its original timetable. On Feb. 19, commissioners postponed consideration of the variance to their March 2 new-business meeting, keeping the requested reduction from 100 feet to 36.5 feet before the county rather than resolving it at that earlier meeting. When the Board took it up March 2, commissioners were advised to deliberate the request.
The March 2 discussion showed disagreement within the commission rather than a recorded consensus. Commissioner Busby expressed support for approving the variance, according to the minutes, while Commissioner Smith raised concerns about where the home would be placed and its intended use. Those statements describe individual positions; they do not establish how the full Board acted.
The 36.5-foot setback is still a request, not a documented authorization. The March 2 minutes confirm that the Board deliberated after the postponement, but the cited account does not say that commissioners adopted, approved, denied, deferred or conditioned the variance. As a result, it remains unknown whether the owners can proceed with a home at the proposed location.
The next public sign of resolution would be a later Board of Commissioners meeting record or written decision addressing V-2025-012. Until the county records a final action, residents cannot tell from the March 2 minutes whether the exception will be allowed, rejected, postponed again or resolved through action not reflected in those excerpts.
Arguments in the record
Positions presented publicly
Busby expressed support for approving the requested setback variance during the March 2 deliberation.
Smith raised concerns about the proposed home’s placement and intended use; the minutes do not record a final Board decision.
What happened
How this issue got here
Open any step for its supporting record. A proposal remains labeled as proposed until later evidence establishes an outcome.
DiscusseddiscussedCommissioners deliberated Carnesville setback variance
On March 2, commissioners began deliberating V-2025-012. Commissioner Busby voiced support for approval, while Commissioner Smith questioned the home's placement and whether it was intended as the owners' primary residence.
+
Commissioners deliberated Carnesville setback variance
On March 2, commissioners began deliberating V-2025-012. Commissioner Busby voiced support for approval, while Commissioner Smith questioned the home's placement and whether it was intended as the owners' primary residence.
7 supporting records
MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Public Hearing Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 4, text surrounding 'approved'MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Public Hearing Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 5, text surrounding 'approve'MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Public Hearing Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 5, text surrounding 'issued'MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 2, text surrounding 'adopted'MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 4, text surrounding 'public hearing'MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 4, text surrounding 'request'MinutesMarch 02, 2026, Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting Agenda. Minutespage 5, text surrounding 'approve'TabledconfirmedCommissioners postponed Carnesville setback request to March 2
The Board of Commissioners postponed variance V-2025-012 to its March 2, 2026 new-business meeting. The request seeks to reduce the residential front setback from 100 feet to 36.5 feet for a 12.3-acre tract at 699 Highway 326.
+
Commissioners postponed Carnesville setback request to March 2
The Board of Commissioners postponed variance V-2025-012 to its March 2, 2026 new-business meeting. The request seeks to reduce the residential front setback from 100 feet to 36.5 feet for a 12.3-acre tract at 699 Highway 326.
Still unresolved
What is not yet known
These are evidence gaps, not assumptions. They remain open until a dependable source closes them.
- The cited March 2 minutes excerpt records deliberation and individual commissioners' views, but not a final Board vote or decision.
Newsroom notes1 open check on the record
How the newsroom is still working this matter. These are process notes, not reported facts.
- openThe retained records do not establish the final outcomeLocate later official minutes, resolutions, contracts, payments, or implementation records that resolve the matter.
Research the record