Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/141606819/2013-05-15-Zoning-Board-of-Appeals-Full-Agenda-1039
Timestamp: 2017-02-26 14:34:53
Document Index: 448885289

Matched Legal Cases: ['§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§14', '§27', '§27', '§14', '§27', '§ 50', '§ 38', '§ 50', '§ 50', '§ 50', '§ 50', '§ 36', '§ 36', '§ 36', '§ 50', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27', '§27']

2013-05-15 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1039
BrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinCITY OF BROOKHAVENZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS City of Brookhaven 5/15/2013 7:00 PM Page 1 Tim Nama Chairman Corey Self Don Bolia Glenn Viers Hope Bawcom Jed Beardsley Kent Gipson AGENDA May 15, 2013 Regular Meeting 7:00 PM 3110-A Ashford Dunwoody Rd, Brookhaven, GA 30319 A) CALL TO ORDER B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. April Minutes C) ORGANIZATIONAL AND PROCEDURAL ITEMS 1. Revised Rules & Procedures D) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. AA 13-031 (Formerly DeKalb County Case # A-13-18379): Kathryn M. Zickert and Dennis J. Webb, Jr., of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP, Located at 1230 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, Are Representing Teresa Tomlinson/3770 Peachtree Road, LLC, Et Al., the Applicants, for the Following: an Appeal of an Administrative Decision to Deny Approval of an Overlay Certificate of Compliance and a Pending Application for a Land Disturbance Permit. the Addresses of the Subject Properties Are 3770 and 3804 Peachtree Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30319. the Tax Parcel Numbers of the Subject Properties Are 18 239 02 001 and 18 239 02 002. 2. ZBA 13-042, Sean Cash, of 4510 Wieuca Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 30342, Seeks the Following: a Variance to §27-788(A), to Reduce an Averaged Front Yard Setback from 71.8 Feet to 45 Feet, at a Property Located at 4142 Shawnee Lane. E) NEW BUSINESS F) ADJOURNMENT G) AGENDA ITEMS Page 1 MEMORANDUM MEETING OF: May/15/2013 DISTRICT/COMMITTEE:Zoning Board of Appeals SUBMITTING DEPARTMENT: Community Development ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE: April Minutes BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: April 2013 ZBA minutes FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under) FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of this item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the official written minutes. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENTS:  April agenda minutes - final (DOCX) B.1
AGENDA City of Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals Wednesday, April 17, 2013 – 7:00 PM Brookhaven Municipal Court – 2 Corporate Square, Suite 125, Atlanta, Georgia 30329 A. Call to Order – Chairman Tim Nama called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order. B. Roll Call – All board members were present. C. Chairman Nama read the Zoning Board preamble. D. Approval of minutes. 1. Special Called Meeting – March 4, 2013 Chairman Nama noticed two errors from the Special Called meeting on the last page of the March 4
minutes. Chairman Nama entertained the motion to adopt the minutes as amended. Board member Glenn Viers moved to approve the minutes as amended. Board member Hope Bawcom seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 2. Regular March Meeting – March 20, 2013. Chairman Nama received no comments or discussion for the March 20 minutes and entertained the motion to approve the minutes. Board member Glenn Viers moved to approve the minutes. Board member Hope Bawcom seconded. The motion passed unanimously. E. Organizational and Procedural Items- Vice Chairman Beardsley recused himself on the last four items of the application, ZBA 13-048, ZBA 13-049,04A and 04B, items 8-11 on the agenda. Mr. Beardsley has been legal counsel for Epps Heritage Investments for the past 7/8 years. B.1.a
F. Unfinished Business - None G. New Business 1. ZBA 13-041: Ted Sandler, of the Ted Sandler Law Group, located at 6400 Powers Ferry Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 30339, is representing Wilkinson Continental, LLC, the owner of the subject property, 1322 and 1355 Briarwood Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 30319, for the following: A variance to §27-356(b)(1)(b), to reduce a side yard setback from 50 feet to 27 feet and a variance to §27-358 to reduce a transitional buffer between dissimilar districts from 50 feet to 27 feet. Howard Koontz, City Planner, read a summary report: The request was to reduce a side yard setback and transitional buffer to permit the apartment complex located on 1322 Briarwood Road to transfer land from their own property to an adjacent neighbor that fronts on Telford Dr. It will allow a transfer of property and move the property line for the Telford Dr. property and the apartment complex and if approved further suggests following conditions: 1. Approval of the setback/bufferyard variance as requested and solely adjacent to Lot 1 within Briarwood Hills subdivision, Block C as shown on the survey entitle Wilkinson Real Estate, LLC & Chicago Title Insurance Company dated 1/27/12. 2. A subdivision plat should be submitted to the City for recording in Dekalb County records so that the new parcel boundaries are correctly identified and associated with respective tax parcel identification numbers. Chairman Nama opened the floor for anyone in favor of the application. Mr. Koontz also announced he received a phone call prior to the meeting from Mr. Sandler stating he had a family emergency and would not be able to attend the meeting. He sent someone in his stead. Clinton Cole, Hart & Siemens, spoke on behalf of Ted Sandler. Hart & Siemens represents Wilkinson Continental, LLC, owner of the subject property, 1322 and 1355 Briarwood Rd, Atlanta Georgia 30319. Mr. Cole referenced a letter which was mailed to the City of Brookhaven from Mrs. Wilma Roberts, adjacent property owner, stating she did not object to the variance. No one else spoke in favor of the variance. Chairman Nama opened the floor to anyone who opposed the application. B.1.a
Mr. Koontz offered to re-read the conditions on the recommendations for clarity. Angela Ambergot, property owner on Briarwood Hills, Lot #10. She voiced concerns related to the reductions and if they applied to all four sides, which they did not, only inside the fence that moves towards the east. This was confirmed by the applicant. Chairman Nama closed the public portion of the meeting and opened it up to the board for discussion. Mr. Koontz read the letter from adjacent property owner, Mrs. Roberts. The letter was sent from Canon, Mihil & Winkles, LLC who represented Mrs. Wilma Roberts located at 1332 Telford Dr. Atlanta, Georgia 30319. Chairman Nama entertained a motion to reduce a side yard setback from 50 feet 27 feet and a variance to reduce transitional buffer between dissimilar districts from 50 feet to 27 feet. Board member Glenn Viers moved to approve the variance with the two conditions the staff recommended. Board member Ms. Bawcom seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 2. ZBA 13-042, Sean Cash, of 4510 Wieuca Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 30342, seeks the following: A variance to §27-788(a), to reduce an averaged front yard setback from 71.8 feet to 45 feet, at a property located at 4142 Shawnee Lane. Mr. Koontz read the staff summary report and clarified the setback to be 45 feet not the district standard 35 feet for R100. Staff recommends the board vote in favor of the application and suggests the following: 1. Development of the lot shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development department, attached to this application. (Prepared by Gaddy Surveying & Design, Inc. dated 2/19/13). B.1.a
2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Chairman Nama opened the floor to anyone in favor of the application. Applicant, Sean Cash explained why they requested the reduction of the 71.8 set back from 35 feet to 45 feet as requested. Frank Gaddy, of Frank Gaddy Surveying and Design also spoke in favor. Chairman Nama open the floor for those who opposed the application. Bob Crochet, personal friend of homeowner Larry Beckwith, who was out of town and unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Crochet spoke on behalf of the family while referring to a letter written by Mr. Beckwith who opposed the application. Teresa Beckwith, homeowner, spoke in opposition while referring to the dimension drawings she brought to share with the board. She moved in the neighborhood in 1954 and was against the size of house submitted. Rob Weiss, developer spoke in opposition. Mr. Cash spoke again in favor, and agreed that he wanted to work with the neighbors. Mr. Cash noted he had signatures from two of the neighbors, one on the side and one neighbor in the rear who were in agreement with the application. Chairman Nama closed the public portion of the meeting and opened it up to the board for discussion. Vice Chairman Beardsley’s expressed his concern that the buildable area was over restricted and the lot was pressed on the front by the curb and pressed on the back by the lot angle which seemed to be a hardship. Mr. Beardsley also mentioned that the neighbor and the property owner have not met to try to work out a compromise. Mr. Beardsley suggested a deferral for 30 days. B.1.a
Board member Ms. Bawcom agreed. Chairman Nama agreed that the property owner and the adjacent property owners need more dialog to try to come to an agreement. Chairman Nama entertained a motion to table the item. Vice Chairman Beardsley moved to table item 13-042 and to move it between items 13-
047 and 13-048 for further discussion. Board member Glenn Viers seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. ZBA 13-043, Frank Gaddy, of Gaddy Surveying and Design, located at 1215 Pleasant Hill Road, Lawrenceville, Georgia 30044, representing Baisu and Anita Patel, owners, seek the following: A variance to §27-189, to increase the maximum allowable lot coverage of an R-75 lot from 35% to 47%, at a property located at 1103 Mendell Circle. Howard Koontz, City Planner read the staff report. Staff recommends the Board vote in favor of the application and suggests the following: 1. The project will be completed in substantial compliance with the submitted site plan documents, dated 02/26/2013. (Prepared by Gaddy Surveying & Design, Inc. 2/26/13). 2. Appropriate storm water mitigation measures will be installed, consistent with the improvements indicated on the supplied site plan. Chairman Nama clarified that the inspection of the storm water measures would be inspected by the City of Brookhaven once completed. Chairman Nama opened the floor to the public for those in favor of the application. Frank Gaddy, Gaddy Survey & Design spoke in favor. Chairman Nama opened the floor for anyone who opposed the application. B.1.a
No one spoke in opposition. Chairman Nama closed the public portion of the meeting and opened it up to the board for discussion or a motion. Board member Glenn Viers moved to approve the variance with the conditions specified by Mr. Koontz and the staff report to increase the maximum allowable lot coverage of an R-75 lot from 35% to 47% and with the amendment that the City of Brookhaven’s Community Development Department be notified to complete the inspection. Vice Chairman Beardsley seconded. Motioned passed unanimously. 4. ZBA 13-044, Kirk and Danielle Sonnefeld, owners, seek the following: A variance to §27-206(e), to decrease the minimum required rear yard of an R-60 lot from 40 feet to 30.75 feet at their property located at 2279 Coosawattee Drive. Howard Koontz, City Planner, read the staff summary report. This variance will facilitate a remodel on the rear of the home. Staff recommends the Board vote in favor of the application and suggests the following: 1. The project will be completed in substantial compliance with the submitted site plan documents, dated received 02/28/2013. (Prepared by Paul Lee Consulting Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 9/6/06). 2. This approval is not a blanket rear yard setback variance and only applies to the variance sought within the subject application. Chairman Nama open the floor for those in favor of the application. Mr. Sonnefeld, homeowner, spoke explaining the plan to extend their deck. No one else spoke in favor. Chairman Nama opened the floor for those who opposed the application. No one spoke in opposition. B.1.a
Chairman Nama closed the public portion of the meeting and opened it up for board discussion or a motion. Board member Hope Bawcom moved to approve the variance to decrease the minimum required rear yard of an R-60 lot from 40 feet to 30.75 feet, with the conditions outlined in the staff report. Glenn Viers seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 5. ZBA 13-045, Robert Barbieri, representing the Strode Group, LLC, owners, seek the following: A variance to §27-146(d), to decrease the minimum required side yard of an R-100 lot from 10 feet to 2.3 feet at a property located at 2688 Osborne Road. Howard Koontz, City Planner read the summary report which will demolish the old carport and establish in its place a garage and a second floor addition. Staff recommends the Board vote in favor of the application and suggests the following: 1. Development of the lot shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, which is attached to this report. (Prepared by Survey Land Express, Inc. dated 1/24/13). 2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home addition depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Chairman Nama opened the floor to the public for anyone in favor. Robert Barbieri, homeowner, spoke explaining the construction layout. While speaking he referenced an email he received from a neighbor agreeing to the construction while offering the board a copy of the email. No one else spoke in favor of the application. Chairman Nama opened the floor for those who opposed the application. No one spoke in opposition. Chairman Nama closed the public portion and opened it up for the board discussion or a motion. B.1.a
Board Member Glenn Viers moved to approve the variance with the conditions in the staff report. Board member Corey Self seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 6. ZBA 13-046, Reiner Rietig, representing HSC Intown, LLC, owners, located at 6650 Sugarloaf Parkway, Suite 200, Duluth, Georgia, seeks the following: A variance to §27-788(a), to allow for an averaged required front yard reduction of 8.06 feet, from 45.56 feet to 37.5 feet, at a property located at 2684 North Thompson Rd. Howard Koontz, City Planner, read the summary report. The average front yard setback for this property is 45.56 feet even though the district standard is 35 feet. The applicant would like to reduce that, not to district standard, but to 37.5 feet to fit a proposed home on the lot on the site plans submitted. Staff recommends any approval be conditioned as follows: 1. If approved staff recommends development of the lot shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, which is attached to this report. (Prepared by BH&D Engineering, Inc. dated 11/12/12). 2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Chairman Nama open the floor for anyone in favor of the application. Mike Phelps, property owner, announced that applicant Reiner Rietig was not able to attend the meeting due to family obligations therefore, he spoke in favor of the application. No one else spoke in favor of the application. Chairman Nama opened the floor for those who opposed the application. Jerry Mills, neighbor, lives 1000 feet from the property and in his opinion, due to the odd shape of the lot and the large size of the new construction home he did not agree with the application and asked that it be denied. B.1.a
Kelly and Jennifer Parker live on Lot #19 next door to the adjacent property. They also spoke in opposition of the application while showing pictures he had taken and brought to show the board. Chairman Nama closed the public portion of the meeting and opened it up to the board for discussion or a motion. After further discussion, Chairman Nama stated in his personal opinion, that the shape of the lot was irregular and therefore does create a hardship in this case. After covering several topics of concern Mr. Koontz explained that the ordinance does permit you to grant “less than” the requested variance, but you cannot grant “more than” the request that’s made. Board member Glenn Viers suggested Mr. Phelps, property owner and any opposing neighbors go back and see if there was an agreement they could reach before they received a vote. Chairman Nama entertained a motion. Board member Corey Self moved to deny the request. No one seconded. Chairman Nama entertained a second motion. Board member Don Bolia moved to reduce the variance from 8 feet to 4 feet. Vice Chairman Beardsley seconded. Chairman Nama opened the floor for discussion to reduce by 4 feet. Chairman Nama explained that the motion was to allow for an average required front yard setback reduction of 4 feet, from 45.56 feet to 41.56 feet. B.1.a
Motion passed 6-1. Yeas: Chairman Nama, Vice Chairman Beardsley, Hope Bawcom, Glenn Viers, Kent Gipson and Don Bolia. Nay: Corey Self. 7. ZBA 13-047, Reiner Rietig, representing HSC Intown, LLC, owners, located at 6650 Sugarloaf Parkway, Suite 200, Duluth, Georgia, seeks the following: A variance to §27-186(e), to allow for a required rear yard reduction of five feet, from 40 feet to 35 feet, at a property located at 2684 North Thompson Rd. Howard Koontz, City Planner read the summary report for a request for the same property as the last case; 13-046. This request is for the rear yard to reduced 5 feet which will allow the completion of the new home. The staff recommendations are as follows: 1. Development of the lot shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, which is attached to this report. 2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Chairman Nama opened the floor for anyone in favor of the application. Michael Phelps spoke in favor and offered to answer any questions. No one else spoke in favor. Chairman Nama opened the floor for those in opposition. Kelly Parker, neighbor spoke in opposition and raised the issue concerning the smaller lot #20 opposed to his lot #19. B.1.a
No one else spoke in opposition. Chairman Nama closed the public portion and opened it up to the board for discussion. Vice Chairman Beardsley made the motion to approve this application as stated with the adjustments presented in the staff report. Board member Hope Bawcom seconded. After further discussion, Vice Chairman Beardsley modified his motion to not be so restrictive on the site plan conditions and allow it to make such modifications and to be consistent with the first variance. Motion passed unanimously to allow for the required rear yard reduction of five feet to 35 feet. Chairman Nama went back to case ZBA13-042, Sean Cash, which was tabled earlier in the meeting. After further discussion, Mr. Cash requested a deferral so he could meet with the neighbor, Mr. Beckwith which was out of town at the time of this meeting. Chairman Nama entertained a motion. Vice Chairman Beardsley, moved to defer ZBA13-042 until the next regular scheduled meeting, May 15, 2013. Glenn Viers seconded. Motion passed unanimously. B.1.a
Chairman Nama announced a two minute recess so Vice Chairman Beardsley could recuse himself from the next four cases. Vice Chairman Beardsley removed himself from the proceedings. 8. ZBA 13-048, Michael Phelps, representing Epps Heritage Investments, LLC, owners, located at 637 Woods Drive, NW, Atlanta, Georgia, 30318, seeks the following: A variance to §27-186, to allow for a reduction in required lot area, a reduction of required lot width, a reduction of a required front yard adjacent to a street, a reduction of a required side yard adjacent to a street, a reduction of a required rear yard, a reduction of a required interior side yard, and an exemption from the provision for additional lot width for a corner lot, found in §14-257, at 1258 Windsor Parkway. Howard Koontz, City Planner read the staff summary report with conditions. This was the first case of four lots that were interrelated; Items E8-E11. This application is related to lot #2. Chairman Nama opened the floor for comments in favor of the application. Michael Phelps, Epps Heritage Investments spoke in favor. Jerry Mills spoke in favor. Chairman Nama opened the floor to anyone in opposition. No one spoke in opposition. Chairman Nama closed the public portion of the meeting and opened it up to the board for discussion. After further discussion from the board Chairman Nama entertained a motion. Board member Corey Self moved to approve the application, pursuant to the staff conditions: B.1.a
1. Development of the required subdivision plat and subsequent building plans shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, dated Received April 5, 2013, and attached to this report. (Prepared by Land Development Surveyors, Inc. dated 2/27/13). 2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home subdivision project depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Kent Gipson seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. ZBA 13-049, Michael Phelps, representing Epps Heritage Investments, LLC, owners, located at 637 Woods Drive, NW, Atlanta, Georgia, 30318, seeks the following: A variance to §27-186, to allow for a reduction in required lot area, a reduction of required lot width, a reduction of a required front yard adjacent to a street, a reduction of a required rear yard, and a reduction of a required interior side yard, at 1254 Windsor Parkway. Mr. Koontz, City Planner read the staff summary report. This is the second of four items relating to lot #3. Chairman Nama opened the floor to anyone in favor of the application. Michael Phelps, represented Epps Heritage Investments described the no access easement. Chairman Nama opened the floor for anyone in opposition. No one opposed the application. Chairman Nama closed the public comment and open the floor to the board for discussion. Chairman Nama entertained a motion. Board member Ms. Bawcom moved to approve the application, subject to the staff conditions: B.1.a
1. Development of the required subdivision plat and subsequent building plans shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, received April 5, 2013, attached to this report. (Prepared by Land Development Surveyors, Inc. dated 2/27/13). 2. Lot 3 shall be required to include a 10’ no access easement along the Antioch Road property frontage to preclude a through lot, which is prohibited by Code. The required no access easement shall be included on the recorded subdivision plat. 3. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home subdivision project depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Board member Glenn Viers seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 10. ZBA 13-04A, Michael Phelps, representing Epps Heritage Investments, LLC, owners, located at 637 Woods Drive, NW, Atlanta, Georgia, 30318, seeks the following: A variance to §27-186, to allow for a reduction in required lot area, a reduction of required lot width, a reduction of a required front yard adjacent to a street, a reduction of a required side yard adjacent to a street, a reduction of a required rear yard, a reduction of a required interior side yard, and an exemption from the provision for additional lot width for a corner lot, found in §14-257, at 1250 Windsor Parkway. Mr. Koontz, City Planner read the staff summary report. This is the third of four requests referring to lot #1. Chairman Nama opened the floor to any one in favor of the application. No one spoke in favor of the application. Chairman Nama opened the floor for anyone in opposition. No one opposed the application. Chairman Nama closed the public comment and open the floor to the board for discussion or a motion. Dan Bolia moved to approve the application, pursuant to the staff conditions: B.1.a
1. Development of the required subdivision plat and subsequent building plans shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, dated Received April 5, 2013, and attached to this report. (Prepared by Land Development Surveyors, Inc. dated 2/27/13). 2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home subdivision project depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Corey Self seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 11. ZBA 13-04B, Michael Phelps, representing Epps Heritage Investments, LLC, owners, located at 637 Woods Drive, NW, Atlanta, Georgia, 30318, seeks the following: A variance to §27-186, to allow for a reduction in required lot area, a reduction of required lot width, a reduction of a required front yard adjacent to a street, and a reduction of a required interior side yard, at 3178 Cates Avenue. Mr. Koontz read the staff summary report. This is the last of four lots referring to lot #4. Chairman Nama opened the floor to anyone in favor. No one spoke in favor of the application. Chairman Nama opened the floor to anyone in opposition. No one opposed the application. Chairman Nama closed the public comment and opened it up to the board for discussion or a motion. B.1.a
Board member Corey Self move to approve the application, subject to the staff conditions: 1. Development of the required subdivision plat and subsequent building plans shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development Department, dated Received April 5, 2013, and attached to this report. (Prepared by Land Development Surveyors, Inc. dated 2/27/13). 2. Lot 4 shall be required to include a 10’ no access easement along the Antioch Road property frontage to preclude a through lot, which is prohibited by Code. The required no access easement shall be included on the recorded subdivision plat. 3. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home subdivision project depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. Board member Kent Gipson seconded. Motion passed 6-0. H. Adjourn- Chairman Nama. B.1.a
Page 1 MEMORANDUM MEETING OF: May/15/2013 DISTRICT/COMMITTEE:Zoning Board of Appeals SUBMITTING DEPARTMENT: Community Development ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Revised Rules & Procedures BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: These are minor revisions to the previously approved Rules & Procedures. The change noted in the previous version of these rules & procedures are included in this version, as well as other changes, noted in strike-thru and underline text. The three changes pertain to the agenda order, provisions for public comment from the gallery, and the number of new agenda items to be received and processed each month. FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under) FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of this item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the official rules & procedures. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENTS:  Zoning Board of Appeals Rules and Procedures Resolution - FINAL v2 (PDF) C.1
STATE OF GEORGIA CITY OF BROOKHAVEN Rules and Procedures for Zoning Board of Appeals Meetings Page 1 of 8 A RESOLUTON ADOPTING AND APPROVING RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETINGS WHEREAS: Well-organized meetings allow a Zoning Board of Appeals to reach decisions in a fair and consistent manner; and WHEREAS: Efficiency is served when the process of planning and conducting public meetings is clearly stated and understood by public officials and citizens; and WHEREAS: Public participation and access to the governmental decision-making process is a key element of an open and transparent organization. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that all meetings of the Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this meeting organization ordinance as outlined in the attached Rules and Procedures. SECTION 1. That the Rules and Procedures for Zoning Board of Appeals Meetings are adopted and attached hereto as if fully set forth herein; and SECTION 2. That this Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption. SO RESOLVED this the 15
day of May, 2013. Approved: _______________________ ____________________, Chairman Attest: _______________________ Howard J. Koontz, Secretary C.1.a
1 RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETINGS Section 1. Open Meetings. All meetings of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be held in accordance with the provisions of Title 50, Chapter 14 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated. The public shall be afforded access to meetings in compliance with Georgia law. Section 2. Visual and Sound Recordings. Visual, sound, and visual and sound recordings shall be permitted for all public hearings, as long as such recordings are in accordance with State law. [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(c)] Section 3. Quorum. A quorum must be present for conducting meetings of the Zoning Board of Appeals. A quorum is four (4) members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Any Board Member may raise a point of order directed to the Chairman or presiding officer if he or she believes that a quorum is not present. If, during the course of a meeting, a Board Member or Board Members leave and a quorum no longer exists, the meeting may not continue. If a quorum is not attained within thirty (30) minutes, the meeting may be rescheduled by the Chairman, presiding officer, or secretary with the approval of the Board Members present. Section 4. Chairman. As provided in Article III, Section 3.01 of the City Charter, the presiding officer of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be the Chairman. As presiding officer, he or she is responsible for the orderly conduct of the meeting. In order to fulfill this duty, the Chairman shall enforce the rules of procedure that are adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Chairman shall be impartial and conduct the meetings in a fair manner. The Chairman may name a Sergeant-at-Arms to assist in maintaining the orderly conduct of the Board Meetings. As provided in Article II, Section 2.10, the Chairman is treated as one of the Board Members for quorum and voting purposes, and the Chairman may vote on all matters before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Section 5. Vice Chairman. The selection of the Vice Chairman shall be delayed until the full Board is seated. The Board shall select a Vice Chairman from the Board Members at the first meeting following each general election by a majority vote. The Vice Chairman shall fulfill the duties of the Chairman if the Chairman is not in attendance. The Vice Chairman shall serve a term of one year and until a successor is elected and qualified. Section 6. Presiding Officer. If the Chairman and the Vice Chairman are absent or otherwise unable to serve as presiding officer at a meeting and a quorum of Board Members is present, the remaining Board Members shall select a Board Member to serve as presiding officer of that meeting until either the Chairman or Vice Chairman is present at that meeting. Section 7. Parliamentarian. The Secretary shall serve as the parliamentarian for Zoning Board of Appeals meetings. Section 8. Amendments to the Rules. Any amendments to the rules of order shall be submitted by a Board Member in writing to the City Manager or his designee no fewer than seven (7) business days before a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The proposed amendment shall be C.1.a
2 included in the agenda for that meeting and distributed to all Board Members. All amendments require a two-thirds vote of the Board to be adopted. Section 9. Suspending the Rules of Order. Rules of Order may be suspended in the case of an emergency. A motion to suspend the rules requires a second, is debatable, and requires a two-
thirds vote of the Board. Rules governing quorums, voting methods and requirements (Article II, Section 2.10), the notification to Board Members of meetings (Article II, Section 2.09) and rules necessary for compliance with state law may not be suspended; provided, however, that, in the event that a state of emergency is declared by the Governor or other authorized state official, the Zoning Board of Appeals may waive time-consuming procedures and formalities imposed by state law. [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. § 38-3-54] Section 10. Regular Meetings. Regular meetings of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be held at a time determined by the City Council or their designee, and shall occur at any time that there is an agenda item to address. All regular meetings shall be held in the court chambers, provided however, that other sites are allowed prior to the opening of City Hall or as provided by other sections of this document. A notice containing the foregoing information shall be posted and maintained in a conspicuous place available to the general public at the regular meeting place of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Prior to the establishment of a regular meeting place, the public notice shall be posted at the location at which the meeting will be held. [Cross-reference: O.C.G. A. § 50-14-1(d)] Section 11. Meetings Other Than Regular Meetings. The Zoning Board of Appeals may meet at times and locations other than those regularly scheduled meetings. (a) Special Called Meetings and Rescheduled Regular Meetings. A regular meeting may be canceled, rescheduled, recessed or moved to a new location within the City by the Chairman, secretary or by a majority of the Board for any reason. As provided in Article II, Section 2.09 of the City Charter, special meetings of the Zoning Board of Appeals may be held on call of the Chairman and one (1) Board member or three (3) Board members. Notice of such special meetings shall be served on all other members personally, by registered mail or by electronic means at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Such notice shall not be required, if the Chairman and Board Members are present when the Special Meeting is called. Such notice of any Special Meeting may be waived by a Board Member in writing before or after such a meeting. Attendance at a meeting shall also constitute a waiver of notice on any business transacted in such Board Member’s presence. Only the business stated in the call may be transacted at the Special Meeting. Notice to the public shall be given in accordance with State law. (b) Meetings With Less Than 24 Hours Notice. When emergency circumstances occur, the Zoning Board of Appeals may hold a meeting as allowed by State law. The minutes shall reflect the reason for the emergency meeting and the nature of the notice given to the media and public. [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1-(d)] C.1.a
3 (c) Meetings During a State of Emergency. When it is imprudent, inexpedient or impossible to hold Zoning Board of Appeals meetings at the regular meeting place due to emergency or disaster resulting from manmade or natural causes, as declared by the Governor or other authorized state official, the Zoning Board of Appeals may meet anywhere within or outside of the city. Such a meeting may be called by the Chairman and one Board Member or three (3) Board Members. At the meeting, the Board Members shall establish and designate emergency temporary meeting locations where public business may be transacted during the emergency. Any action taken in such meetings shall have the same effect as if performed at the regular meeting site. [Cross reference: O.C.G.A. §§ 50-14-1(d), 38-3-54, 38-3-55] Section 12. Order of Business. All regular Zoning Board of Appeals meetings shall substantially follow an established order of business. The order shall be as follows: 1. Call to Order/Roll Call 2. 3. Approval of Minutes 4. Organizational and Procedural Items 5. Unfinished Business 6. New Business 7. Other Business not otherwise addressed by the agenda 8. Adjournment Section 13. Agenda. The City Manager or his/her designee shall prepare an agenda of subjects to be acted on for each meeting. Work session topics and Board agenda items shall be submitted consistent with the process established by the City Manager or his/her designee. The agenda shall be made available to the Zoning Board of Appeals at least seven (7) days before every Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. (a) Requests For Agenda Items. Members of the public may request that a particular subject be placed on the agenda for a meeting. To be considered, this request shall be submitted in writing to the City Manager or his/her designee in accordance with the Board’s adopted schedule of meetings and deadlines. (b) Changing The Agenda. The order of the agenda may be changed during a meeting as an organizational and procedural item by a majority vote of the Zoning Board of Appeals. A new item, other than a zoning decision, may be added to the agenda by a majority vote of the Zoning Board of Appeals only if it becomes necessary to address the item during the meeting. If city ordinances allow, an existing item may be removed from the agenda by the majority vote of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (c) Agenda Must Be Made Public. The agenda of all matters to come before the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be made available to the public upon request and shall be posted at the meeting site as far in advance as reasonably possible, but not less than 24 hours prior to the start of the meeting. Notice of the agenda for emergency meetings will be handled in accordance with State law. C.1.a
4 [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. §§ 50-14-1(e)(1) and 36-66-4] Section 14. Decorum. All Board Members shall conduct themselves in a professional and respectful manner. All remarks shall be directed to the Chairman and not to individual Board Members, staff, or citizens in attendance. Personal remarks are inappropriate and may be ruled out of order. A Board Member should not speak at a meeting until he or she has been recognized by the Chairman; notwithstanding the foregoing it should be understood the individual board members may ask questions of the applicants, parties, council and other speakers. Side conversations between Board members outside of the meeting proceedings during a meeting, whether on or off topic, are not allowed. All comments made by a Board Member shall address the motion that is being discussed. The Chairman shall enforce these rules of decorum. If a Board Member believes that a rule has been broken, he or she may raise a point of order. A second is not required. The Chairman may rule on the question or may allow the Zoning Board of Appeals to debate the issue and decide by majority vote. Section 15. Voting. Under normal circumstances, passage of a motion shall require the vote of at least four (4) Board Members, and must receive the affirmative vote of a majority of those voting at which a quorum is present. Voting on the adoption of ordinances shall be by voice vote and the vote shall be recorded in the record, but any member of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall have the right to request a roll-call vote and such vote shall be recorded in the journal. Except as otherwise provided in the City Charter, the affirmative vote of a majority of the Board Members present shall be required for the adoption of any ordinance, resolution or motion. Section 16. Abstentions. No Board Member shall abstain from voting except in the case of a conflict of interest or if absent when a motion being voted upon was made. If a conflict of interest does exist, the Board Member shall provide a specific explanation of the conflict, and the explanation shall be recorded in the journal. Section 17. Public Participation. Public participation in meetings of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be permitted in accordance with the provisions of this section. (a) Public Comments. The floor shall be made open for public input/comments. The final agenda item of the meeting shall include opportunity for comments from the public. Speakers’ comments during this period will be limited to three (3) minutes each. All members of the public wishing to address the Zoning Board of Appeals shall submit their name and the topic of their comments to the secretary prior to the start of any meeting held by the Zoning Board of Appeals; provided, however, that if the applicants of variance actions or individuals who wish to oppose a variance action have contributed more than $250 to the campaign of a Board Member, the individual shall file a campaign disclosure form as required by O.C.G.A. § 36-67A-3 at least five (5) calendar days prior to the hearing by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Individuals will be held to established time limits. These limits may be waived by a majority vote of the Zoning Board of Appeals. [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. § 36-67A-3] C.1.a
5 (b) Public Hearings. The Zoning Board of Appeals may schedule Public Hearings for the purpose of soliciting public comment on any subject brought before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Hearings may be held immediately prior to, during or following a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals or at such other places and times as the Zoning Board of Appeals may determine. Hearings require at least ten (10) minutes per side. These limits may be waived or amended by a majority vote of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No official action on any item requiring a Public Hearing shall be taken without first having conducted a Public Hearing. Hearings on zoning decisions shall be governed in accordance with the zoning policies and procedures. [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. §§ 36-66-4 and 36-66-5] (c) Decorum. Members of the public shall not make inappropriate or offensive comments at a Zoning Board of Appeals meeting and are expected to comply with the rules of decorum that are established for Board Members. Individuals violating any rules of the Zoning Board of Appeals may be ruled out of order by the Chairman or on a point of order made by a Board Member. A majority vote of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall rule on the point of order. An individual violating the rules of decorum may be removed from the meeting at the direction of the Chairman. Section 18. Minutes. The secretary of the Zoning Board of Appeals or his/her designee shall promptly record the minutes for each Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. The minutes shall specify the names of Board Members present at the meeting, a description of each motion or other proposal made at the meeting, the name of the Board Member who proposed each motion, the name of the Board Member who seconded each motion, and a record of all votes. In the case of a roll call vote, the name of each Board Member voting for or against a proposal shall be recorded. It shall be presumed that a Board Member has voted in the affirmative unless the minutes show otherwise. More detailed information may be included in the minutes at the request of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall approve the minutes before they may be considered as an official record of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The minutes shall be open for public inspection once approved as official by the Zoning Board of Appeals but in no case later than immediately following the next regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. A copy of the minutes from the previous meeting shall be distributed to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the agenda package for the following meeting. The minutes of the previous meeting shall be corrected, if necessary, and approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the beginning of each meeting. A majority vote is required for approval. Conflicts regarding the content of the minutes shall be decided by a majority vote. Upon being approved, the minutes shall be signed by the Chairman and attested to by the secretary of the Zoning Board of Appeals. [Cross-reference: O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(e)(2)] Section 19. Procedure and Deadline. The Chairman and City Manager or their designee are authorized to establish detailed procedures and deadlines as necessary to ensure the effective organization of Board proceedings and orderly handling of business to come before the Board, in accordance with the Rules and Procedures adopted by the Board. C.1.a
Packet Pg. 25
6 Section 20. Roberts Rules of Order. This document shall serve as the rules and procedures of the Zoning Board of Appeals. In the absence of applicable rules and procedures which may from time to time be encountered during the public meetings, Roberts Rules of Order shall be followed. Section 21. Agenda order. No application shall be placed on any agenda until such time that it can be determined by the secretary that the application is complete and compliant, as required by the application documents developed and provided by the Community Development Director or his/her designee. Once determined to be complete and compliant, action items shall be placed on the agenda in the order in which they are received. Section 22. Maximum Number of Agenda Items. The Zoning Board of Appeals will hear no more than five (5) ten (10) new business items at any given regular meeting. Additional items of new business beyond the fifth tenth item will be scheduled for the next available regular meeting of the Board. The Secretary may, with the agreement of a quorum of the Board, schedule an additional Special Called Meeting for a time agreeable to all parties. C.1.a
Page 1 MEMORANDUM MEETING OF: May/15/2013 DISTRICT/COMMITTEE:Zoning Board of Appeals SUBMITTING DEPARTMENT: Community Development ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE: AA 13-031 (Formerly DeKalb County Case # A-13-18379): Kathryn M. Zickert and Dennis J. Webb, Jr., of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP, Located at 1230 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, Are Representing Teresa Tomlinson/3770 Peachtree Road, LLC, Et Al., the Applicants, for the Following: an Appeal of an Administrative Decision to Deny Approval of an Overlay Certificate of Compliance and a Pending Application for a Land Disturbance Permit. the Addresses of the Subject Properties Are 3770 and 3804 Peachtree Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30319. the Tax Parcel Numbers of the Subject Properties Are 18 239 02 001 and 18 239 02 002. BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: This item was originally heard by the Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals at their regular March meeting. At that time, while the Public Hearing was open, the applicant's representative made a presentation, and a representative of a neighborhood opposition group made a dissenting presentation. The Public Hearing was then closed. Following a question and answer session between the Board and the applicant's representative, a motion was made to defer this item until a date certain. The date chosen was the ZBA's regular May meeting. The purpose of the deferral was for the applicant's interests and the neighborhood to come together and discuss a potential resolution to everyone's concerns, and to draw up new site plans that reflected the new arrangement. As of the afternoon of May 13th, staff has received two letters of correspondence related to an update: one from the applicant and one from the neighborhood opposition's representative. Those letters are attached to this staff report. In the applicant's correspondence, it has been requested of the City to grant a deferral of six months to continue to revise the site plans related to the development of this site. FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under) FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of this item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: D.1
Agenda Item (ID # 1032) Meeting of May 15, 2013 Updated: 5/13/2013 5:06 PM by Howard Koontz Page 2 Staff recommends that the Board favorably consider a continued six-month deferral, so that the applicant can revise and adjust the development plans related to the subject site. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENTS:  Director of Planning Letter re 6 month deferral (PDF)  Opposition Update - 05132013 (PDF)  AA 13-031 Staff memo - Final (PDF)  Applicant's Appeal Brief (PDF)  Simpson letter (PDF) D.1
Promenade, Suite 3100 1230 Peachtree Street, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3592 Main: 404 815-3500 Fax: 404 815-3509 SMITH, GAMBRELL &RUSSELL, LLP www.sgrlaw.corn Attorneys at Law Kathryn M. Zickert Direct Tel: 404.815.3704 Direct Fax: 404.685.7004 kmzickert@sgrlaw.com May 13, 2013 Ms. Susan Canon Director P lanning City of Brookhaven 200 Ashford Center North, Suite 150 Dunwoody, Georgia 30338 Re: Tomlinson Appeal Dear Ms. Canon: P lease accept this letter as my clients' waiver of their right to a decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals within sixty (60) days. I am requesting a six (6) month deferral in order to investigate and pursue (if necessary) an alternative development plan for the property. of Kathryn M. Zickert Attorney-at-Law KMZ/rg Enclosure cc: Marie Garrett Tomlinson Group N E 1 1 1 1 A Atlanta, Georgia I Frankfurt, Germany I Jacksonville, Florida I New York, New York I Stamford, Connecticut I Washington, D.C. D.1.a
Packet Pg. 29
After a public hearing of the City of Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) on March, 20, 2013, regarding a property located at 3770 & 3804 Peachtree Road a decision was made by the ZBA to defer a decision on the Brookhaven Overlook appeal for 60 days. A decision on the matter was deferred to May 15
to allow the applicant and the neighborhood opposition to meet to discuss development options and seek a compromise. Following the ZBA Public Hearing, attorneys representing both parties arranged for a meeting to discuss development alternatives and compromise ideas. On Friday, April 10
, a meeting of the parties was held at 10 am. The attorneys for the respective groups (by agreement) were not present. The group was comprised of Walt Moeling (a property owner adjacent to the proposed development in the City of Brookhaven), Kerry O’Brien (another adjacent property owner in the City of Atlanta), Will Shearer (a resident of Bellaire Drive), Bob Connelly (board member of the Brookhaven Peachtree Community Alliance ("BPCA") and the Historic Brookhaven Neighborhood Association ("HBNA") and Mike Elliot (board member of the BPCA and the HBNA) (collectively, the "Brookhaven Group") met with Teresa DeRosa (one of the owners of 3770 & 3804 Peachtree Road , the "Tomlinson Properties"), Jim Nevin (a trust officer with SunTrust Bank representing another Tomlinson Properties owner) and Brand Morgan (a partner of the development group and representative of the proposed developers) (the "Tomlinson Group"). Mr. Morgan began the meeting by indicating that the developers understood the position of the neighborhood and neighbors, who maintained that the RM-75 density governed the property, and that they were not willing to be engaged in several years of litigation to obtain the approvals being sought only to create ill will, anger the neighborhood, and miss the current development market. The Brookhaven Group, in response to a direct question, stated that they remain confident in the legal position that the existing RM-75 zoning sets the maximum allowable density of 18 dwelling units per acre for the Tomlinson Properties located in the City of Brookhaven and would support nothing greater; however, would be supportive of a redevelopment of the entirety of the Tomlinson Properties, that was compatible with the adjacent Brookhaven residences and the neighborhood, that made adequate allowance for traffic, transitional buffer and that appropriately addressed related issues. More specifically, the Brookhaven Group indicated that it would support a rezoning of the parcel of the Tomlinson Properties located in the City of Atlanta from the R3 single family residential zoning to the RM-75 zoning on the City of Brookhaven parcels in an effort to allow one integrated development of the entire tract allowing the higher density limitations as discussed to apply to the City of Atlanta parcel as well. The Tomlinson Group indicated that it appreciated the opportunity to meet and that Mr. Morgan and the other developer partners would pursue a redesigned development plan for the Tomlinson Properties consistent with the RM-75 densities as discussed and see how the redesign may also affect the purchase price offer for the Tomlinson Properties. The Tomlinson D.1.b
Group also indicated it would then meet to review the redesigned development plans and decide how to proceed. The meeting was cordial and candid. Following the meeting, Rick Asbill, a resident of Bellaire Drive, initiated discussions with Fritz Rybert, one of the initial proposed partners working with Mr. Morgan and John Mears, the other partners of the developer to maintain contact and stay informed as to whether a revised development plan had been prepared and presented to the Tomlinson Property Owners. Mr. Asbill was told by Mr. Rybert that the developers proposed a revised plan for development they were prepared to pursue consistent with the density limitations, that the developers discussed the revised plans with the Tomlinson Group and that the developers made a revised purchase offer for the property based on the revised plans. Mr. Rybert further informed Mr. Asbill that the Tomlinson Property Owners did not agree to proceed with the proposed revised development plan due to the reduction of value of the property and reduced sale proceeds to the Owners and that the Tomlinson Property Owners had indicated that they would not take any further action until after the ZBA decision on May 15. Following the initial meeting between the Brookhaven Group and the Tomlinson Group, the only response from the Tomlinson Group was through the indirect communication from Mr. Rybert to Mr. Asbill. There was no direct response from the Tomlinson Group. On May 9
, our counsel, Linda Dunlavy was contacted by counsel for the property owners, Kathy Zickert. She requested that the neighborhood groups join in a request for a 6 month deferral of any decision of the ZBA to allow for further negotiations. Given the posture of the Tomlinsons after the first meeting, the desire not to clog up the docket of the ZBA, and the fact that nothing prevents the owners from continuing to negotiate with the neighborhood after any decision from the ZBA, Ms. Dunlavy advised Ms. Zickert that the neighborhood was not willing to join in a request for a 6 month deferral before the ZBA but the neighborhood remained willing to engage in compromise discussions regardless of the decision made by the ZBA. D.1.b
MEMORANDUM To: Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals From: Howard J. Koontz, AICP – City Planner Date: March 20, 2013 Subject: AA 13-031 (formerly DeKalb County case # A-13-18379): Kathryn M. Zickert and Dennis J. Webb, Jr., of Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP, located at 1230 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, are representing Teresa Tomlinson/3770 Peachtree Road, LLC, et al., the applicants, for the following: An appeal of an administrative decision to deny approval of an Overlay Certificate of Compliance and a pending application for a land disturbance permit. ITEM DESCRIPTION This request is an official appeal of an administrative decision, based on a December 6, 2012 DeKalb County Planning & Sustainability denial of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (CoA) and subsequently a Land Disturbance Permit (LDP). A submittal was made in November that was deemed neither complete nor compliant, and was therefore not reviewed or approved for a CoA. Later, a second submittal, this time for an LDP was made and rejected as incomplete and non-compliant for the same reasons. BACKGROUND All new LDP applications must provide complete and correct submittal documents, pursuant to the list of required submittals contained in the Overlay District text (§27-
728.15.4(b-d)), and all new LDPs issued in the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District must meet the terms of the Overlay District requirements before they will be issued (§27-728.15.4(a)). On November 8, 2012, Michael Hoarth submitted a set of plans for CoA approval to the DeKalb County Planning & Sustainability office. Those plans were determined by the DeKalb County staff to be incomplete and non-compliant as failing to provide the necessary documentation required by Section 27-728.15, for having density above the maximum authorized density for the underlying zoning district and for not having the D.1.c
appropriate buffers required by the Overlay District. The submittal was not reviewed for appropriateness, as it was deemed incomplete. On November 30, 2012, the same applicant applied for an LDP for this same project. The county’s development staff provided to the planning staff one set of plans. Many of the same deficiencies noted in the November 8 inventory and assessment of the plans remained for the LDP submittal, and no review occurred for the same reasons. ANALYSIS The primary issue of this appeal is whether or not the application was complete and compliant, and whether or not the application displayed compliance with the terms of the Brookhaven–Peachtree Overlay District requirements, which would merit a review for an LDP approval. From the information that was present in the initial application, DeKalb County staff noted that the intended residential density grossly exceeded the underlying RM-75 district allowable 18 dwelling units per acre, and the intended structure was too tall by virtue of its location near the boundary of the district. Both of these observations are sufficient to deny the requested CoA. One week following the initial denial of the submittal request, a review of the all the submitted plans (CoA and LDP) was released. Thirty-two, and possibly one more, deficiencies are noted in the full report, authored by David Cullison, DeKalb County’s Senior Planner. The full report is contained in an exhaustive record of e-mails, submittals, reports, replies, correspondence and code sections, all of which are included in this report for detailed review. The Planning staff agrees with DeKalb County Planning Department’s assessment of the application as incomplete and non-compliant with the requirements of the underlying RM-75 zoning and the Overlay District for the reasons detailed in the DeKalb County Senior Planner’s report and included attachments. Additionally, there is also a brief in opposition to this appeal in this agenda packet that has been filed by attorney Linda Dunlavy on behalf of her clients: Walter Moeling, the Brookhaven-Peachtree Community Alliance (BPCA), and the Historic Brookhaven Neighborhood Association (HBNA). This brief summarizes the same statutory reasons for denial as detailed in the DeKalb County report, concerning details of the incompleteness of the application, non-compliance with the maximum density requirements of the underlying zoning, and non-compliance with the building height and buffer requirements of the Overlay District. D.1.c
CONDITIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE The applicant seeks an appeal of an administrative decision, pursuant to the following section of the city Zoning Ordinance: §27-912. - Power and duty of the board to hear appeals of decisions of administrative officials. The zoning board of appeals shall have the power and duty to hear and decide appeals where it is alleged by the appellant that there is an error in any final order, requirement, or decision made by an administrative official based on or made in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. A failure to act shall not be construed to be an order, requirement or decision within the meaning of this division. All such appeals shall be heard and decided following the notice requirements of section 27-917, and pursuant to the following criteria and procedural requirements: (1) Appeals of decisions of administrative officials. Appeals may be filed by any person aggrieved by, or by any city official, department, board or agency affected by, any final order, requirement, or decision of an administrative official, based on or made in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance, by filing with the secretary of the board an application for appeal specifying the grounds thereof, within 15 days after the action appealed from was taken. A failure to act shall not be construed to be an order, requirement or decision within the meaning of this division. A person shall be considered aggrieved for purposes of this subsection only if: a. Said person or said person's property was the subject of the action appealed from; or b. Said person has a substantial interest in the action appealed from that is in danger of suffering special damage or injury not common to all property owners similarly situated. (2) Appeal stays all legal proceedings. An appeal stays all legal proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from unless the official from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the board, after notice of appeal has been filed, that by reasons of facts stated in the certificate, a stay would, in that official's opinion, cause imminent peril to life and property. In such a case, proceedings shall be stayed only by a restraining order granted by the superior court on notice to the officer from whom the appeal is taken and on due cause shown. D.1.c
(3) Time of hearing. The board shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal and give notice thereof pursuant to the requirements of §27-917 as well as due notice to the parties in interest. Any party may appear at the hearing in person, by an agent, by an attorney or by a written documentation. (4) Decision of the board. Following the consideration of all testimony, documentary evidence, and matters of record, the board shall make a determination on each appeal. The board shall decide the appeal within a reasonable time but in no event more than 60 days from the date of the hearing. An appeal shall be sustained only upon an expressed finding by the board that the administrative official's action was based on an erroneous finding of a material fact, or that the administrative official acted in an arbitrary manner. In exercising its powers, the board may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or determination appealed from, and to that end shall have all the powers of the administrative official from whom the appeal was taken and may issue or direct the issuance of a permit provided all requirements imposed by all other applicable laws are met. In addition to the above procedural requirements, and as a result of this appeal originating from the decision of the DeKalb County Planning Official, the substantive provisions of the DeKalb County Zoning Ordinance shall control the Board’s decision, including the requirements of the RM-75 zoning provisions, Chapter 27, Article II, Division 16 of the DeKalb County Zoning Ordinance, including applicable Section 27-
377 discussing density requirements in the RM-75 underlying zoning, Section 27-381, and Section 27-383, as well as the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District, Article III, Division 28 of the DeKalb County Zoning Ordinance on which the decision of the DeKalb County Planning official was based. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board affirm DeKalb County staff’s finding, in accordance with the terms of §27-912, based on the evidence of there being no error of fact or law in the decision being made, as documented herein and in the attached reports of the DeKalb County Planning Director. D.1.c
ATTACHMENTS  Application materials, including a boundary survey, site plans, rendered elevations, and a copy of the LCI design guideline text submitted by the applicants.  Rebuttals and correspondence from the DeKalb County Planning & Sustainability staff, both inter-departmental and between the staff and applicant  Written opposition to the appeal from Linda Dunlavy, representing Walter Moeling, the Brookhaven-Peachtree Community Alliance (BPCA), and the Historic Brookhaven Neighborhood Association (HBNA). D.1.c
A t t a c h m e n t : S i m p s o n l e t t e r ( 1 0 3 2 : A A 1 3 - 0 3 1 : 3 7 7 0 a n d 3 8 0 4 P e a c h t r e e R o a d N E )
Page 1 MEMORANDUM MEETING OF: May/15/2013 DISTRICT/COMMITTEE:Zoning Board of Appeals SUBMITTING DEPARTMENT: Community Development ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE: ZBA 13-042, Sean Cash, of 4510 Wieuca Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 30342, Seeks the Following: a Variance to §27-788(A), to Reduce an Averaged Front Yard Setback from 71.8 Feet to 45 Feet, at a Property Located at 4142 Shawnee Lane. BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: This item was originally heard by the Brookhaven Zoning Board of Appeals at their regular April meeting. At that time, while the Public Hearing was open, the applicant's representative made a presentation, and a representative of a neighborhood opposition group made a dissenting presentation. The Public Hearing was then closed. Following a question and answer session between the Board and the applicant's representative, a motion was made to defer this item until a date certain. The date chosen was the ZBA's regular May meeting. The purpose of the deferral was for the applicant's interests and the neighborhood to come together and discuss a potential resolution to everyone's concerns, and to draw up new site plans that reflected the new arrangement. In the interim, staff has not received any new information, be it from the applicant, the applicant's representative or the neighborhood oppostition. FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under) FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of this item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board view the application favorably, and if approved, further suggests the following conditions: 1. Development of the lot shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development department, attached to this application. (Prepared by Gaddy Surveying & Design, Inc. dated 2/19/13). D.2
Agenda Item (ID # 1033) Meeting of May 15, 2013 Updated: 5/10/2013 12:14 PM by Howard Koontz Page 2 2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENTS:  ZBA 13-042 Staff memo (PDF)  4142 Shawnee Lane Variance Application & Photos (PDF)  4142 Shawnee Lane Site Plan (PDF) D.2
Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing April 17, 2013 – 7 pm Case: ZBA13-042 Location: 4142 Shawnee Lane, Brookhaven, GA 30319 Tax Parcel # 18-201-01-023 Property Owner/ Applicant: Sean Cash Request: To reduce an averaged front yard setback from 71.8 feet to 45’. DESCRIPTION The subject property contains a single family home lot located at 4142 Shawnee Lane, on the west side of Shawnee just south of its intersection with Navajo Trail. The property is zoned R-100 (Single family residential district) and borders properties similarly zoned on all sides. The applicant’s request is to reduce the required “average” front yard building setback from 71.8 feet to 45 feet. SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The lot on which the home sits totals 0.45 acres (19,633 square feet). The area is zoned R-100, and the lot in question has 110 feet of street frontage on Dunwoody Lane. The lot generally slopes downhill from north to south, with concentrated tree cover in the front and rear yards. A one story home currently exists in the middle of the lot. The existing home is an older, one-story low-pitched roof structure in a neighborhood that is being incrementally redeveloped with newer, larger, multi-
story infill homes. The property in question abuts single-family home development, zoned R-100, along all of its property lines. The proposed new home, intended to replace the existing home, is proposed approximately 62 feet from the edge of pavement, and 45.2 feet from the right of way. This is a reduction of 37.3% to the city’s “average” required front yard setback on a block with 60% or more developed lots. The applicant seeks to move the front building setback line forward toward the street, to create a larger footprint on which to build a new home, away from the greatest slopes on the lot while still respecting the rear building setback line. The home proposed for the lot is over 40 feet deep, which is nearly 17 feet more than the existing buildable area at its most narrow point. D.2.a
RELEVANT TEXT FORM THE ZONING ORDINANCE: “Sec. 27-788. - Yard requirements. “The following regulations shall apply relating to yard requirements: “(a) Average setback. When a lot (or lots) is (are) located within a block where sixty (60) percent or more of the lots within said block have been developed, and where there are existing buildings fronting on the same street and within the same zoning district within seventy-five (75) feet of the side lot lines of such vacant lot (or lots), then set back averaging shall be required. The minimum required building set back line for said vacant lot (or lots) shall be determined by averaging the existing building setbacks of buildings within seventy-five (75) feet of the side lot lines of such vacant lot (or lots). The minimum setback for additions to existing structures may be the average of the existing setbacks.” CRITERIA TO BE USED BY THE BOARD The applicant seeks a variance to a development standard. Consideration of this request should be made under the terms of the following criteria, found in the Zoning Ordinance: Sec. 27-916. - Criteria to be used by the board in deciding applications for variances and special exceptions. No relief may be granted or action taken under the terms of this division unless such relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantial impairment of the intent and purpose of this chapter and the comprehensive plan text. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall apply the following criteria to the types of applications specified below as follows: (a) Variances from the provisions or requirements of this chapter shall be authorized only upon making all of the following findings: (1) By reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a specific lot, or by reason of exceptional topographic conditions, which were not created by the owner or applicant, the strict application of the requirements of this chapter would deprive the property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district; Staff Comment: The utility of the lot is greatly diminished with the existing buildable area. The awkward topography on the lot, in concert with the prevalent trend of newer, larger homes being built on the site, makes moving the proposed home to the east more agreeable with the character of the neighborhood and would allow for the rights and privileges being enjoyed by other property owners in the district. 2 D.2.a
(2) The requested variance does not go beyond the minimum necessary to afford relief, and does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Staff Comment: The requested variance is to reduce the front yard setback to 45 feet; the submitted drawings indicate the new home will be located 45.2 feet from the right of way line, a difference of 2.4”, a suitable margin of error for the construction of a new home. (3) The grant of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the zoning district in which the subject property is located; Staff Comment: Granting the variance will not be detrimental to the surrounding properties; the request is made to better match the emerging neighborhood character. (4) The literal interpretation and strict application of the applicable provisions or requirements of this chapter would cause undue and unnecessary hardship, not merely impose a casual/discretionary inconvenience upon the applicant or his/her assigns; and Staff Comment: The literal interpretation and strict application of the average setback provision is not a hardship, and yet the code requirement is more than an inconvenience to the applicant, who would have to redesign the architecture and site layout of the lot. There would be no assurances that the product produced would be marketable among the other homes being built on the same street. (5) The requested variance would be consistent with the spirit and purpose of this chapter and the DeKalb County Comprehensive Plan text. Staff Comment: The requested variance has very little to no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board view the application favorably, and if approved, further suggests the following conditions: 1. Development of the lot shall occur in substantial accordance with the site plan submitted to the Community Development department, attached to this application. (Prepared by Gaddy Surveying & Design, Inc. dated 2/19/13). 3 D.2.a
2. The granting of this variance is to accomplish the completion of the proposed new home depicted in the attached development plans, and is not to be considered a “blanket variance” to any/all future construction on the property. 4 D.2.a
City I f Brookhaven 200 Ashfor Center North, Suite 150 DUll' cody, GA 30338 (404) 637-P 00 Fax (404) 637-0501 n-..sh. Con-. o Variance (Administrative ,., -I DO ide Minimum Setback Proposed Re uirements I Re uirements .-#
7/. IFront 'fS' Other Rear . rookhavenga.gov Required: See Chart.to the Riqht uest: lication To the best of my knowledge, this variance application is correct and complete. If additional materials are determined to be ecessary, I understand that I am responsible for filing dditional materials as specified by the City of Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance. I understand that failure to supply all requi d information (per the relevant Applicant Checklists and Requirements f the Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance) will result in the ifection of this application. I have read the provisions of the Georgia !Code Section 36-67A-3 as required regarding Disclosures. My Signed Campaign Disclosure Statement is included with he Aoolication. o Aooroved 0 Aooroved with Conditions 110 Denied IDate: Variance A
• * one sign required per street frontage ar1d/or every SOO feet of street frontage Variance Application Page 4 of 7 D.2.b
Brookhaven Center North, Suite 150 oody, GA 30338 \ 00 Fax (404) 637·0501 •. prookhavenga. gOY y Owner(s) Certification The owner and petitioner acknowledge variance application form is correct and complete. By completing this form, all of the subject property certify authorization of the filing of the application for variance(s), r, d authorization of an applicant or agent to act on their behalf in the filing of the application ding all subsequent application amendments. Date: ZiD: Date: Zio: City. State: ..-­ . I , day of tetr LAbtfL1 ·"Swom to and subscribed before me this I day of , 20 ·-Sworn to and subscribed before me this II __ day of , 20 : I • Variance Application Page 5 of 7 D.2.b
City rBrookhaven 200 Ashfo( Center North, Suite 150 Dun oody, GA 30338 (404) 637- 00 Fax (404) 637-0501 www brookhavenga.gov campaibn Disclosure Have you, within the two years immediately the filing of this application, made campaign contributions aggreg ting $250.00 or 0 YES more to a member of the City of Brookhaven City Councilor a member of the City of Brookhaven Planning Commission? If the answer above is yes, complete the followin9 section: .. Date Government Official icial Position 0 Description Amount I
I I I I I Variance Application Page 7 of 7 I D.2.b
Sean Cash 4510 Wieuca Road, Atlanta, GA 30342 Phone: (678)662-6462 City of Brookhaven Bureau of Planning 200 Ashford Center North Suite 150 Dunwoody, GA 30338 Phone: (404) 637-0500 Dear Sir or Madam, We are requesting a variance from the City of BrOO!aVen Zoning Ordinance to allow for a 26.8' encroachment into the front yard required average setback reducin the setback to 45 feet. The "subject property" is located at 4142 Shawnee Lane. Brookhaven. GA 30319, taxlpar el I.D. number 18 330 08 009. The property is zoned R-I 00. The subject property is owned by Aycock Properties! Kevin Aycock. President. There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions ertaining to the subject property which cause an unnessecessary hardship. Sec. 27-788 (a) of the Zoni g Ordinance requires an average front yard setback in relation to other homes within 75 feet from side lot I nes. This will reduce the normal R-I 00 front yard setback per Sec. 27-146 (c) (4) from 35 feet to 71.8 feet. The reduction would create a buildable area of +/- 28 feet at its shortest point and +/- 84 feet at its longest point. An proposed new home conforming to the ordinance would be very long and have an unusual look. The existing lot is also on an inward curve on Shawnte Lane therefore pushing the front yard setback inward. The rear yard comes to a point inward therefore pushingfhat buildable area inward also. This creates a very "thin" area for a new home. We are not proposing to encr ach into the rear yard. The required side and rear setbacks remaining intact will provide a buffer between existin homes. The current topography of the lot slopes downward Foward the southwest corner making the optimal location of the new home more northerly. Unfortunately, this is ~ I s o the most narrow section of the buildable area. Please also note that the proposed location of the nejN home will still be 10 feet further setback in the front yard from the standard 35 foot R-I 00 zoned property guidelines. The proposed home will be similar to other existing ~ o m e s in the immediate area. We are not going beyond the minimum necessary to afford relief and the granting df this variance will not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties +this zoning district in our opinion. We also believe that this request is consistent with the intent and purpose of e City of Brookhaven Comprehensive Plan and will protect D.2.b
Microsoft against blight and depreciation within the neighborhdod. Thank you for your kind consideration in this matter Sincerely. Sean Cash Applicant 2/17/2013 Page 2 D.2.b
.. 'VJJMJ.Y CMlIlI U\lIHAl. Ita '0'" 1 SlllllOft IAI01WtSH, ---------­
,,". "" ... .-<.-,., tllA ... P" pulIll 8,AOlUd ... '.--•.-..d II IWIIIIIIIII "'" "'" '\WI lAOqIII8 .. pual\lllllta plMfIll.-allj put QIYI. iK1 ONY I......
,-' " , , 'l1dftJI l1li "-.at ptII'lll jII "" ' .. ,_....,. At- ... at ,. -.- '1111811 till ""Ill. Pile II _ 'pt/II ,. II8ftIII • lftII ". IlIi a-10M o.a. aNY IA'IM Ol , '3OtmELIaI All NmQI4 Gill,WOol1tIO:IM • .ww HOI+Wo A.IHnOO I'MIllO - iiDW" .LYV HI J.V'1oIIHJ. Q.\ ONl<IWOOOV NOU01I .•..;.-r. ;- UHIIliH )iBlI) AOfftIN '.0. went " J.01 IlNUlll 'YleIIoie • :;,:, lUll iIM.L 10 0If jO'1 0HV1 HI DNmlI llN¥ 1IN1A1 CINW'1 10 ........ "".. - ...... 'UIp 'lUUI .a ptIlt PIIIll " .... '.oOl.,oct ow·NlU ' ...t .. IIOfIMPl- III ,... . - : L. _', 1qlulI_ ... ....... JIIlI ....................... ...,. JlIIIIO , ',,", '. Y"Iilnvtl put 'V CllAW pili'
,:" ae ........ AaaII'tII!' .........q '.mt1Cl " IIll,. '1'11WD1 or "'.. III·,teqw'-",. IPOI
,," •. .>it: ,", ," ...- . 'T, ....; •••._... . ., .. c- f 0::130 fMIiQ 110 .1011WlIO lIC) .iOWi. J.VM.L ".. .... .....
...................... ,.... ............... IJoNJ.LI 'OMJ,"'IIIN IpWI "'ft&U"J'Ul lII'U. , . --:---......
. D.2.b
·'1f- PJ!V J.:1 <J""'oH 1.'.11',<0(3 ·'"'s a , J .I adO .I d J f : J o 3 A ~ ~ ~ -
Packet Pg. 69
Packet Pg. 70
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot useful2013-05-15 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1039 by The Brookhaven Post0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentMore informationShow less
RelatedMalton BIA DRAFT Constitution - January 2013by MaltonBIASB CIP 2010-2011 as of 062610by Jonathan BabaranSANGGUNIAN CIP 2012-2013by Tru GlamsLemonwood Neighborhood Council by OxnardNewsOrchard Park Neighborhood Councilby OxnardNewsState Central Dispute Decisionby kevinhfd061016 Aac-ncdp Petition to Remove Patsy Keever-Aycock-final-3 by LL1885July 20, 2015 Agenda Outline.draftby Michael AllenComparative Analysis of Composition of Board of Directors Ofby NishantAsset by-laws (1)by Eugene AsanoThe Rules of the Provincial Board of Palawanby SarahLeeDPNM Rules as Amended 4-24-12by Stephen JonesAgenda for the Thursday, August 15, 2013 NCCFD Regular Board Meetingby YubaNetParty Rules Amemded 9.24by john6715Agenda for February 16th Wakulla County Commission meeting by Michael AllenSigma Constitutionby abernathyalliConstitution of HYSS Alumni Associationby hyssalumniOctober 19, 2015 Draft Agenda Outlineby Michael Allen2014 TDP Rulesby Tom BlThe Amended Constitution and by Chessby Eddie Resurreccion Jr.EUBGF Statutes 08Jan16by Leonardo JerkovićUntitledby eurolexAlliance Global Acgr 2014by ArleneCastroStatutes Engby Milan MosurovicNotice: Meetings; Sunshine Actby Justia.comUntitledby M-NCPPCApec Constitution 1by deanRotaract Handbookby JennySimilar to 2013-05-15 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1039Skip carouselMalton BIA DRAFT Constitution - January 2013SB CIP 2010-2011 as of 062610SANGGUNIAN CIP 2012-2013Lemonwood Neighborhood Council Orchard Park Neighborhood CouncilState Central Dispute Decision061016 Aac-ncdp Petition to Remove Patsy Keever-Aycock-final-3 July 20, 2015 Agenda Outline.draftComparative Analysis of Composition of Board of Directors OfAsset by-laws (1)The Rules of the Provincial Board of PalawanDPNM Rules as Amended 4-24-12Agenda for the Thursday, August 15, 2013 NCCFD Regular Board MeetingParty Rules Amemded 9.24Agenda for February 16th Wakulla County Commission meeting Sigma ConstitutionConstitution of HYSS Alumni AssociationOctober 19, 2015 Draft Agenda Outline2014 TDP RulesThe Amended Constitution and by ChessEUBGF Statutes 08Jan16UntitledAlliance Global Acgr 2014Statutes EngNoticeUntitledApec Constitution 1Rotaract HandbookJul 16, 2014McMillan_Zoning_Notice 2014 03 102013-05-15 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1039