Henry County meeting approves variance to let Guffey family split two parcels

At a Henry County meeting in April, officials approved a zoning variance in case No. 2351 that will let John and Deborah Guffey split two parcels so their children can build homes, the applicants' attorney said.

Jim Milliken, an attorney with Defer Veran, said the Guffeys had a survey done by Hal Ashton so lots could be carved out and that the two upper lots do not meet the zoning ordinance's required minimum frontage. "We would ask that the application be granted," Milliken told the panel, and he asked that staff recommendations be made part of the record.

The staff member who presented the case described the plan: two upper lots without road frontage would rely on deeded access along the eastern side, and a lower parcel that fronts the county road would provide crossing access. The staff member also said there had been no replies from notified neighbors.

Committee members questioned whether a shared-driveway agreement or explicit emergency-access arrangements would be recorded. The attorney and staff said the survey will be recorded and that the deeds will include the access descriptions, but no separate shared-access contract was presented at the meeting. The chair clarified: "This easement is only pertaining to this request right now," indicating the easement language under consideration applies to the current deed transfers and not to hypothetical future development.

Staff and the clerk also noted that properties without road frontage can still receive official addresses and that legal access recorded across property can enable emergency services to reach new homes even when lots do not front the county road.

A committee member moved to approve the variance "to allow development on the parcel," the motion was clarified to apply to the two parcels identified on the survey, and another committee member seconded. The body conducted a voice vote and the chair announced the motion approved. The chair directed staff (Tom) to provide the applicants with details needed for deed recording before they left.

The meeting moved on to other business and scheduling; staff said similar access and setback matters are likely on next month's agenda.

(Reporting note: the transcript records a voice vote and procedural confirmations; individual roll-call votes by name were not recorded in the transcript provided.)