Witt request to build closer to Lakeside Trail property line returns to Stephens commissioners

A request by Mark and Nancy Witt to place an accessory structure in the front yard of their property at 1272 Lakeside Trail in Martin and build it closer to the right-side property line returned to the Stephens County Board of Commissioners’ agenda May 12. The listing again asked commissioners to approve a variance reducing the required right-side setback from 10 feet to 4 feet.

The decision matters because it would alter the usual placement rules for a Residential Single-zoned lot, allowing a structure in a part of the property ordinarily treated differently and six feet nearer the side boundary than the standard setback permits. For nearby residents and county officials, the case is a routine but concrete land-use decision about how closely development may sit to a property line.

Commissioners first placed the Witts’ request on their April 28 agenda, identifying the same property and the same two requested exceptions: a front-yard accessory structure and a six-foot reduction in the right-side setback. When the matter appeared again on the May 12 agenda, the proposal had not changed in the record, indicating that it remained before the board rather than documenting that an earlier agenda listing had resolved it.

The applicants are Mark and Nancy Witt, whose request seeks the two site-specific variances at 1272 Lakeside Trail. The Planning Commission recommendation was to approve the request as submitted. The May 12 agenda record notes no applicant comment and no speakers either supporting or opposing the request, so it does not provide a broader public case for or against the variance.

The variance remained a proposal on the two agenda records, not a documented construction approval or completed change to the property. The Planning Commission’s favorable recommendation is distinct from a final decision by the Board of Commissioners. Neither the April 28 nor May 12 agenda establishes whether commissioners voted, approved the request, denied it, postponed it or imposed conditions.

The next public record to watch is Board of Commissioners meeting minutes or a later official action document that identifies what the board did with the Witts’ request. Until such a record appears, the central question remains unresolved: whether the county authorized a front-yard accessory structure and the proposed 4-foot right-side setback for parcel 072F 066.