Periodically, the Town of Franklin Board of Adjustment (BOA) panel convenes to address requests levied by residents or businesses concerning ordinance variances.
At the March 10 meeting, held in the Town Hall boardroom, the BOA heard two pleas for relief; one regarding a highway directional sign placement and the other for a home foundation location adjustment.
After Chair Janet Greene called the meeting to order, Jennings Builder Supply and Hardware Manager Chris Thornton addressed the board for a second time in the past four months concerning replacement of a directional sign. Thornton explained that following the submission of a request for a sign permit, his team located the old sign, which had been blown down in a storm back in 2022.
While the size of the sign, along with its proximity to the highway, was the main point in question, Thornton advised the BOA that Jennings’s request was for the exact same size sign as the previous one. Back in November, the BOA denied Jennings’s request due to a limitation of two square feet maximum size for any directional sign. The sign permit submitted by Thornton was for a 4×8 feet, or 32-square-foot sign. Thornton also attested that views from the Route 64/28 confluence are not restricted by the sign placement.
On behalf of the board, Greene advised that Jennings was originally grandfathered into the new maximum-size reduction in directional signage, which in the case of a signage, allows for previously existing signs that are larger to remain in place.
Before voting, Greene clarified the board’s vote was to “grant a variance which is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance so that the public safety is secured and substantial justice is achieved.” The request was unanimously approved.
The second request was submitted by Kristina Szikszai, who asked for a “reduction in the front setback [of her property] to a maximum of 15 feet measured from the edge of the road, or 20 feet from the center of the road.”
The hardship expressed was that under current requirements, she would be unable to build or place a home on the property that would be easily accessible from the road.
Town Planner Justin Setser addressed the board regarding the property.
“The lot has a narrow, flat area and then drops off drastically down toward Lakeside Drive, so [Szikszai] has a small area to build her cabin. When I explained the current setback restrictions state 25 feet from the front, it was going to cause a burden for her. I explained to her she would need a variance.”
Szikszai subsequently filled out paperwork and paid fees required to address the issue with the Town through the BOA.
One troubling aspect included in circumstances encountered by the property owner was that the real estate company she worked with provided inaccurate information when she purchased the lot.
“Honestly, I was misled. When I purchased this lot, my realtor told me that it will be very easy to place a mobile home or a trailer on it. But very soon I found out I can’t do any of that,” said Szikszai.
Greene responded, “You are not the first person who has come to us because it was not disclosed to them what the rules were. That is something we are trying to let realtors know; they need to be honest with people as to what they can and cannot do with a piece of property.”
In closing out the discussion, Greene advised “We are bound by laws about what we can and cannot do. It [the law] says the factors related to grant a variance include three conclusions: First, strict enforcement of regulations would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships to the applicant for the variance. Secondly, that the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and reserves its spirit. Lastly, that in granting the variance, the public safety and welfare have been secured and that substantial justice has been done.”
The Board then voted to approve the request for variance on behalf of the applicant.