Archer granted variances; to pay $5,000 fine
David Archer will be allowed to operate a used car lot on his property in South Jackson, but he will have to pay a $5,000 fine for code violations at the site. The Jackson County Board of Adjustments approved Archer’s request Thursday night for landscaping and setback variances for the business at 129 Harrison Johnson Way. A building, fence and parking lot are already in place on the property.
The property did not meet all of the county requirements for a commercial development. The board of adjustments ordered Archer to remove the fence and place it on his property. However, he will not have to move the building or make changes to the parking lot. He will have to pay a $5,000 fine for not meeting the codes.
The building has a 39-foot setback which doesn’t meet the code.
“I built the building thinking I was right,” Archer said. “When I laid it out, I went by the property pins…The county came out and inspected it. I knew it might have been my responsibility to make sure it was right, but I had no reason to doubt it when the inspector came out and signed off on it. I never had another thought about it.”
Board of adjustment chairman Joe Holt pointed out that the building was first constructed as an agriculture facility and not as a commercial development.
“You were building an agriculture building,” Holt said. “He (the inspector) was here to see if it was within the county code as an agriculture business.”
For the complete story, see the April 8 edition of The Jackson Herald.
The building has a 39-foot setback which doesn’t meet the code.
“I built the building thinking I was right,” Archer said. “When I laid it out, I went by the property pins…The county came out and inspected it. I knew it might have been my responsibility to make sure it was right, but I had no reason to doubt it when the inspector came out and signed off on it. I never had another thought about it.”
Board of adjustment chairman Joe Holt pointed out that the building was first constructed as an agriculture facility and not as a commercial development.
“You were building an agriculture building,” Holt said. “He (the inspector) was here to see if it was within the county code as an agriculture business.”
For the complete story, see the April 8 edition of The Jackson Herald.
Defined tags for this entry: zoning
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks