The City of Clayton Board of Zoning Appeals on Nov. 5, 2025, approved variance application VAR25-07, allowing a 10-foot addition at 18 Granite Drive to extend into the required 25-foot rear-yard setback. The board approved the request unanimously with two conditions: the addition must be at least 12 feet from the southern property boundary and the two existing parcels (lots 14 and 15) must be combined before construction begins.

Planning staff introduced the application and said VAR25-07 was received Oct. 10, 2025, from property owner and applicant Kevin D. Miller. Miss Snyder, planning staff, said the combined parcels total approximately 0.4906 acres and are zoned MSD (Main Street District); notices to property owners within 300 feet were mailed Oct. 20, 2025, and a public notice ran in the Eaton Register Herald on Oct. 22, 2025. Staff recommended approval, stating the variance would provide the minimum necessary relief and would not adversely affect the public interest if the conditions were met.

In staff materials, the applicant proposed a 10-foot rear addition to expand the kitchen and add a bathroom; the addition would encroach into Clayton Planning and Zoning Code setback requirements (staff identified the relevant code provision as section 1111.15(e)(1)). The plans included demolition areas, foundation and floor plans, elevations and a partial electrical plan. Staff told the board there was no recorded easement within the proposed construction footprint discovered in their review, but noted a title search could reveal a private easement of record.

Kevin D. Miller, the applicant and property owner, told the board the house was built in the 1960s and that the addition was intended to modernize the home and provide a desperately needed second bathroom for his growing family. “We desperately need a second bathroom,” Miller said, adding he had construction access to the rear of the property and would combine the two lots if the variance was granted.

Neighbor Cynthia Richards of 26 Granite Drive spoke during public comment and said her chief concern was preserving the integrity of the drainage system behind the houses. Richards said heavy rains have caused problems in the past and asked that the project not worsen drainage. The board and staff responded that inspections during construction would review any potential drainage impacts.

After questions and a recitation of the findings of fact — including that special physical conditions exist because the structure straddles two lots and that strict application of the code would deprive the owner of rights commonly enjoyed by others in the district — a board member moved to approve the variance consistent with the staff recommendation. The roll-call vote was Mister McGinnis: yes; Mister Madewell: yes; Mister Perrin: yes. The motion carried.

The conditions recorded on the approval require the addition to be located at least 12 feet from the southern property boundary and that the two existing parcels (lots 14 and 15) be combined into a single property before the addition commences. The board noted that building inspections during construction should address drainage and other on-site impacts.