CITY OF BROOKHAVEN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS City of Brookhaven 4/16/2014 7:00 PM Page 1 Tim Nama Chairman Corey Self Don Bolia Glenn Viers Hope Bawcom Jed Beardsley Kent Gipson AGENDA April 16, 2014 Regular Meeting 7:00 PM 2 Corporate Boulevard, Suite 125, Brookhaven, GA 30329 A) CALL TO ORDER 1.Roll Call B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approval of March 19, 2014 Zoning Board of Appeals Work Session Meeting Minutes 2. Approval of March 19, 2014 Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes C) ORGANIZATIONAL AND PROCEDURAL ITEMS D) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. ZBA 13-27: JEG Family Trust and Trop, Inc. D/B/A Pink Pony - Variance to Appeal Administrative Decision Concerning Nonconformance. Property Location: 1837 Corporate Boulevard, Brookhaven, GA 2. ZBA14-07: Pats ios Homes C/O Roberts & Daughdrill, PC - I ncrease Lot Coverage, and Reduce Front and Rear Yard Setback - 3165 Lynwood Drive E) NEW BUSINESS 1. ZBA14-08: Michael Patrick - Increase Lot Coverage from 35% to 62% and Waive Lot Merger Requirement - 1082 Wimberly Road 2. ZBA14-09: HSC Intown, LLC - Reduce Rear Yar d Setback from 40' to 30', Reduce Average Front Yard Setback from 33.4' to 30.8' for Lot 26 and Waive Lot Merger Requirements - 1628 Wayland Circle
358
Embed
2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
3. ZBA14-10: Bright Ventures LLC/Hakim Hilliard - Reduce the Side Yard Setback Along
Curtis Drive from 50’ to 39’, Reduce the Rear Yard Setback from 30’ to 10’, Reduce the
Transitional Buffer Zone Along the West Property Line from 50’ to 21’ and ReduceParking from 72 to 45 Spaces - 3020 Buford Highway
4. ZBA14-11: Wayne Nicholls - Increase Lot Coverage from 35% to 53.8% and ReduceSetback for an Accessory Structure (Swimming Pool and Associated Patio) from 10’ to
1’ - 2508 Appalachee Drive NE
5. ZBA14-12: Alton Moss - Increase Lot Coverage from 35% to 39% - 1380 Sylvan Circle
6. ZBA14-13: Michalene and Gerald Donegan - Reduce Side Yard Setback from 10' to 5.2'
- 3028 Mabry Road
7. ZBA14-14: Ryan and Irina Connelly - Reduce Rear Yard Setback from 30’ to 15’ for
Deck Addition and Reduce Setback for an Accessory Structure (Fireplace) from 10’ to 3’
- 2423 Coosawattee Drive
8. ZBA14-15: Ralph Reilly - Reduce Stream Buffer from 75' to 50' to Construct a SingleFamily Home - 2465 E. Osborne Road
9. ZBA14-16: Rockhaven Homes LLC - Reduce Rear Yard Setback from 40' to 20' toConstruct a Single Family Home - 1290 Oaklawn Avenue
10. ZBA14-17: Nelson Consunji - Reduce Front Yard Setback from 109.4' to 76.6' to
Construct a Staircase - 4189 Oak Forest Drive NE
F) ADJOURNMENT
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
2. ZBA14-06: Gipco Southern Inc. C/O Jay Gipson - Increase Lot Coverage (Sec. 27-586)and Vary from the Requirements of the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District: (27-
Mr. Gipson recused himself as the applicant is a relative. Mr. Song noted that the applicant cannot request a
variance to 27-728.15.12(f)(3)(a) because of the Brookhaven Peachtree Overlay District requirements but that
the proposed project is already in compliance with that item. He then stipulated to the staff report.
Doug Dillard represented the applicant and made mention of the constitutional issues they felt were present inthe case. He requested the first amendment they had made to the application be a part of the record. They
agreed with the staff recommendations. With regard to variance #2 or staff condition #7, he stated the retail
screening has been extended from the original point on Colonial Drive all the way to the first entrance into the
parking deck. They felt the extent the staff wants to extend the screening is not practical but they will try to use
materials that will provide a transition such as landscaping to soften the impact of the parking deck. As far as
the second staff condition relative to interparcel access, Mr. Dillard stated that is no way to know what will be
built next door and to allow access to that project through this parking lot is not reasonable.
No one spoke in support of the project.
Linda Dunlavy, retained by the Brookhaven Peachtree Community Alliance, then spoke in opposition and
offered a paper submission. Ms. Dunlavy then went on to request the case be deferred. Ms. Dunlavy gave a
history of the BPCA's involvement with this address and the overlay district. She also stated that Walgreens
purchased the property 5 years ago and was denied a variance request two years ago by Dekalb County. She
continued by saying that several plans have been submitted to Walgreens which would be compliant without
variances She stated they feel the hardship is self imposed because the developer does not want underground
B.2
M i n u t e s A
c c e p t a n c e : M i n u t e s o f
M a r 1 9 ,
2 0 1 4 7 : 0 0 P M
( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Joseph Palladi, 1073 Dunbarton TracePeter Curnyn, 2257 Colonial Drive
Thomas Porter, 1420 Canoochee Drive
Ted Sandler
Lynda Martin, owns property next door
Marc Acampora, traffic engineer
Mark Miller
Robert Boyd, Bullock Manly partners
Kathy Forbes, Brookhaven Heights resident
Aaron Brown, Brookhaven Heights resident
Doug Dillard then addressed each speaker and encouraged the ZBA to think in terms of what is reasonable for
the property. He said that the current traffic is not destination traffic but through travel traffic. Mr. Dillard said
he felt like the case had already been pending for a while and they had met with staff so he thinks there is
sufficient information to make a decision tonight.
The Board then had discussion and asked questions.
Board member Beardsley asked Ted Sandler if the three curb cuts could be turned into a driveway between the
Martin property and Subway and the answer is yes, it has been proposed before. Mr. Dillard stated all partieswould need to agree on a price and the other two already have the access they need. Ms. Martin stated they have
tried since 1997 to come to an agreement.
Mr. Beardsley asked the applicant about the loading dock design and he replied that since meeting with the
staff, the design has been modified and there is a wall along Colonial Drive which would block the view of any
truck that is sitting at the dock.
Mr. Self asked about the BPOD overlay restrictions on curb cuts and Ms. Canon quoted a lengthy section from
the BPOD.
Mr. Self stated he did not feel like the application met the five criteria and did not think the application should
be approved based on them.
Mr. Beardsley moved for a 60 day deferral to May 21 with any comments and revised plans due to be submitted
by May 5. Ms. Bawcom seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
ZBA 13-27: JEG Family Trust and Trop, Inc. D/B/A Pink Pony - Variance to AppealAdministrative Decision Concerning Nonconformance. Property Location: 1837 CorporateBoulevard, Brookhaven, GA
BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: Please see attached files.
FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: See attached. The applicant has requested a 90 day deferral (Apri l 16, 2014). The staff report
wil l be updated upon receipt of revised information from the applicant expected no later than
March 21, 2014. Revised mater ial s were received on March 18, 2014 and are attached herein.
I n addition, the City's position statement is also enclosed.
ATTACHMENTS:
ZBA13-27 staff memo (PDF)
ZBA13-PP 4-9-14 City's brief (PDF)
City Exh. A, 1990 DeKalb Zoning sec 27-146 (PDF)
City Exh. B, DeKalb Sup. Court Order (PDF)
PP Variance Documentation_3-18-14 (PDF)
1837 Corporate Drive Appeal of Trop Inc and JEG Family Trust 8-12-13 (PDF)
D.1
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Applicant: JEG Family Trust and Trop, Inc. d/b/a/ Pink Pony
Request: Appeal of Director’s interpretation of Section 27-936 of ZoningOrdinance
APPEAL OF DIRECTOR’S INTERPRETATION OF A ZONING PROVISION
Section 27-956 of the Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance vests the Community DevelopmentDirector with responsibility to interpret the City’s zoning ordinance. This appeal asks the ZBA to
review the Director’s interpretation of Section 27-936, a provision that prohibits a
nonconforming use from being “enlarged, expanded, moved, or otherwise altered in a mannerthat increases the degree of nonconformity.”
POWER AND DUTY OF THE BOARD ON APPEALSection 27-912 states that the Zoning Board of Appeals has the power and duty to hear and
decide appeals where an aggrieved party alleges that there is error “in any final order,
requirement, or decision made by an administrative official based on or made in the enforcementof the zoning ordinance.” To pursue an appeal, the party must be “aggrieved”, which means:
(1) Said person or said person’s property was the subject of the action appealed from; or (2) 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.
To sustain an appeal, the ZBA must expressly find that the Director’s action was based on an
erroneous finding of a material fact, or that the Director acted in an arbitrary manner. The ZBA
may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or
determination appealed from. The ZBA shall decide the appeal within 60 days from the hearing.
SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS (1) Staff believes the ZBA should dismiss this appeal because the challenged interpretation does
not amount to a final order, requirement, or decision based on or made in the enforcement of the
zoning ordinance. No decision that has been made concerning the Director’s interpretation, nor is
D.1.a
a f f m e m o ( 1 1 4 7
: Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m
i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l A d m i n i s t r a t i v e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
BACKGROUND CONCERNING THIS APPEAL The Appellants, JEG Family Trust (owner of 1837 Corporate Boulevard) and Trop, Inc. d/b/a
Pink Pony, are suing the City of Brookhaven with respect to the City’s sexually oriented business licensing regulations, sexually oriented business zoning regulations, and alcohol regulations.
That lawsuit is pending in the DeKalb County Superior Court.
In April 2013, the Appellants (“Pink Pony”) submitted an incomplete Land Disturbance PermitApplication that proposed to expand its building by more than 2,700 square feet (from 8,308 sq.
ft. to 11,050 sq. ft.). On May 9, 2013, the Director wrote Pink Pony’s engineer to explain that the
submittal was incomplete with respect to general application requirements, planning
requirements, and engineering requirements. The Director’s letter also explained that if PinkPony were a nonconforming use, the proposed expansion might be prohibited by Section 27-936.
Pink Pony did not appeal the Director’s conclusion that its submission was incomplete.
Although no application was pending, Pink Pony’s attorney wrote a letter dated June 19 to the
Director concerning the nonconforming use issue. Pink Pony claimed it was a nonconforming
use because current laws prevent it from serving alcohol in an adult business. (Nonconforminguse status, however, relates to changes in the zoning ordinance, not alcohol or conduct rules.)
Pink Pony also outlined its efforts to obtain permission from DeKalb County to expand its building from 2008 through 2012, before Brookhaven incorporated. Pink Pony has not produced
a building permit from DeKalb County. With respect to its potential expansion, Pink Pony statedthat increasing “the floor area by close to 3000 square feet” would involve “updating the
dressing room/toilet facilities for its existing female staff and improving its office space.”
The Director replied in a letter dated July 25, reiterating that Pink Pony’s LDP application was
not pending because it was incomplete. The letter also stated that Pink Pony is nonconforming
because it is in a C-1 district, where adult businesses are not allowed (and not because alcohol is
prohibited). With respect to Section 27-936, the Director’s letter stated:
Your letter also reflects that the proposed expansion of Pink Pony’s building would
enlarge it in a manner that increases the degree of nonconformity, which is prohibited bySec. 27-936 of the Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance. Page 2 states that part of the
expansion is for “updating the dressing room/toilet facilities for its existing female
staff ….” This expansion would increase the degree of the nonconformity because itwould increase the number of dancers that could be on the premises at any one time.
More space in the dressing room allows for more dancers in the dressing room and more
dancers who can rotate to the stages and customer areas, even if the square footage of
those public areas were held constant. The proposed expansion of Pink Pony’s buildingtherefore appears to violate Sec. 27-936.
D.1.a
a f f m e m o ( 1 1 4 7
: Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m
i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l A d m i n i s t r a t i v e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
building, structure, or use of land shall be enlarged, expanded, moved, or otherwise
altered in a manner that increases the degree of nonconformity.
Pink Pony operates in a C-1 zoning district, where adult businesses are not allowed. In
correspondence, Pink Pony asserted it was a nonconforming use and that it intended to expand its
building by close to 3000 square feet in floor area. The Director interprets Section 27-936 to
mean that a 30% increase in floor area would increase the space available for the adult business,its patrons, and its employees to use, which would increase the degree of nonconformity. In
response to information in Pink Pony’s June 19 letter, the Director expressed the view that the
“proposed expansion of Pink Pony’s building therefore appears to violate Sec. 27-936.”
REASONING FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the ZBA dismiss this appeal and not pass judgment on the Director’s
interpretation of Section 27-936. A determination by the ZBA at this point is premature. PinkPony has not submitted a complete Land Disturbance Permit application, so there has been no
decision on such a permit. There has only been correspondence which led to the Director’s
opinion that a proposed expansion of a claimed nonconforming use (as described incorrespondence) appeared to violate a zoning provision. Section 27-912, which governs appeals
to the ZBA, does not make the Director’s every response that includes an interpretation of thezoning ordinance to be appealable to the ZBA. Rather, ZBA appeals are for correcting “error in
any final order, requirement, or decision” that is based on or made in the enforcement of thezoning ordinance. If Pink Pony later applies for a Land Development Permit, and if the Director
denies that application based on Section 27-936, then Pink Pony could challenge the
interpretation at that time to correct any error in that actual decision. At that point the ZBAwould have a completed application from Pink Pony to provide context for the decision. Until
then, the interpretation only concerns a hypothetical proposed expansion, which Pink Pony could
adjust or even abandon.
Alternatively, Pink Pony is not aggrieved by the Director’s interpretation. Although Pink Pony’s
property was the subject of correspondence concerning a potential expansion, there has been no
action that has applied or followed the challenged ordinance interpretation.
Similarly, the provision at issue prohibits enlargement or expansion of a nonconforming use.
Since before Pink Pony opened, its location has been zoned C-1. Adult businesses are notcurrently allowed in a C1 zone in Brookhaven, and Pink Pony has not shown that DeKalb
County zoning allowed adult businesses in the C-1 zone. Although Pink Pony has asserted that it
is a lawful, nonconforming use, it has not met its burden of demonstrating that. If Pink Pony is
not a lawful, nonconforming use, then Section 27-936 would not apply.
D.1.a
a f f m e m o ( 1 1 4 7
: Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m
i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l A d m i n i s t r a t i v e
D 1
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
STAFF RESPONSE TO PINK PONY’S APPEAL Pink Pony argues that its proposed expansion of its building would not increase the degree of
nonconformity for its adult business because it would not increase the existing floor area devotedto adult entertainment. It contends that any nonconformity is limited to the public areas where
dancing and alcohol service occur. Pink Pony also argues that its proposed alterations were
approved by DeKalb County just before the City of Brookhaven was incorporated. None of Pink
Pony’s arguments are sufficient to reverse the Director’s interpretation.
With respect to the expansion of floor area, Pink Pony suggests that the dressing area for its
dancers does not count as part of its use. That is like a theater discounting its need for a back
stage area, a TV studio ignoring green rooms, or a retailer saying that its stockroom is not part ofits store. If the dressing area is not part of the adult business, why would an adult business
choose to expand it? It is directly related to an expansion of the use of the property as an adult
business; if this were not the case, Pink Pony would simply remodel (not expand) its currentdressing rooms. Pink Pony also objects to the common-sense observation that a larger dressing
area for dancers would allow more dancers to be at the club at a time. It does not dispute that
truism, but instead argues that it “did not say” it would hire or use more dancers than in the past.But that does not change the fact that expanding the dressing room for an adult business’s
dancers is an expansion of the adult business, which is prohibited if it is a nonconforming use.Furthermore, the expansion of public bathrooms for Pink Pony’s patrons also expands/enlarges
the adult business (to service more patrons) in a manner prohibited for a nonconforming use.
The vast majority of documents attached to Pink Pony’s a ppeal are just attachments to Pink
Pony’s June 19, 2013 letter and concern Pink Pony’s efforts to get County approval to expand its building. Those proceedings are not relevant here.1 Under a settlement agreement between
DeKalb County and Pink Pony, Pink Pony had to get approval from the DeKalb County Board of
Commissioners for any increase of the square footage of its business or the amount of floor spacedevoted to adult entertainment. That settlement agreement does not bind the City of Brookhaven.Moreover, while DeKalb County voted on Pink Pony’s proposed expansion just before
Brookhaven was incorporated, Pink Pony has produced no building permit from DeKalb County.
Further, the vote of DeKalb County does not allow Pink Pony to expand or enlarge its building inviolation of Brookhaven’s zoning ordinance. Pink Pony relied on those documents to argue for
the right to expand its building, but they do not concern the Director’s interpretation of
Brookhaven’s zoning ordinance and do not matter for Pink Pony’s appeal of that interpretation.
CONCLUSION The appeal should be dismissed, or the Director’s interpretation should be affirmed.
D.1.a
a f f m e m o ( 1 1 4 7
: Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m
i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l A d m i n i s t r a t i v e
D 1 b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
APPEAL OF DIRECTOR’S INTERPRETATION OF A ZONING PROVISION
Section 27-956 of the Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance vests the Community Development
Director with responsibility to interpret the City’s zoning ordinance. Pink Pony asks the ZBA to
review the Director’s interpretation of Section 27-936, which prohibits a nonconforming usefrom being “enlarged, expanded, moved, or otherwise altered in a manner that increases the
degree of nonconformity.”
POWER AND DUTY OF THE BOARD ON APPEAL
Section 27-912 states that the Zoning Board of Appeals has the power and duty to hear anddecide appeals where an aggrieved party alleges that there is error “in any final order,
requirement, or decision made by an administrative official based on or made in the enforcement
of the zoning ordinance.” To pursue an appeal, the party must be “aggrieved”, which means:(1) Said person or said person’s property was the subject of the action appealed from; or (2) 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.
To sustain an appeal, the ZBA must expressly find that the Director’s action was based on anerroneous finding of a material fact, or that the Director acted in an arbitrary manner. The ZBAmay reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or
determination appealed from. The ZBA shall decide the appeal within 60 days from the hearing.
SUMMARY OF CITY’S POSITION
(1) The ZBA must decide whether Pink Pony has met its burden of proving that Pink Pony was a
lawful use when it opened in 1990. Pink Pony has not met that burden, so Section 27-936 doesnot apply.
(2) Even if Pink Pony could establish that it was a lawful use when it opened in 1990, the ZBA
should affirm the Director’s interpretation of Section 27-936 because it is neither based on anerroneous finding of material fact nor an arbitrary interpretation of the zoning ordinance.
BACKGROUND
The Appellants, JEG Family Trust (owner of 1837 Corporate Boulevard) and Trop, Inc. d/b/aPink Pony, sued the City of Brookhaven with respect to the City’s sexually oriented business
licensing regulations, sexually oriented business zoning regulations, and alcohol regulations. In
December, the DeKalb County Superior Court ruled for the City on all claims. Pink Pony hasappealed to the Georgia Supreme Court, where briefing is underway and oral argument will be
D.1.b
P P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l
D 1 b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
In June, Pink Pony’s attorney wrote the Director concerning the nonconforming use issue. With
respect to its potential expansion, Pink Pony stated that increasing “the floor area by close to3000 square feet” would involve “updating the dressing room/toilet facilities for its existing
female staff and improving its office space.”
The Director replied in a letter dated July 25, reiterating that Pink Pony’s LDP application was
not pending because it was incomplete. The letter also stated that Pink Pony is nonconforming
because it is in a C-1 district, where sexually oriented businesses are not allowed. With respect toSection 27-936, the Director stated:
Your letter also reflects that the proposed expansion of Pink Pony’s building wouldenlarge it in a manner that increases the degree of nonconformity, which is prohibited by
Sec. 27-936 of the Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance. Page 2 states that part of the
expansion is for “updating the dressing room/toilet facilities for its existing female
staff….” This expansion would increase the degree of the nonconformity because itwould increase the number of dancers that could be on the premises at any one time.
More space in the dressing room allows for more dancers in the dressing room and more
dancers who can rotate to the stages and customer areas, even if the square footage ofthose public areas were held constant. The proposed expansion of Pink Pony’s building
therefore appears to violate Sec. 27-936.
In August 2013, Pink Pony appealed the Director’s interpretation of Sec. 27-936. On October 16,
2013, the Board held a hearing and deferred the appeal so Pink Pony could address deficiencies
in its LDP application. Pink Pony has since submitted additional LDP information, which Citystaff is reviewing, and Pink Pony’s attorney has tendered additional documents and argument on
the non-conforming use issue.
ARGUMENT
Pink Pony operates in a C-1 zoning district, where sexually oriented businesses are not
permitted. To lawfully operate there, Pink Pony must be a lawful, nonconforming use. Pink Pony bears the burden of proof on that issue. Under Georgia law, “it is incumbent upon one seeking to
use the property for a non-conforming use after the rezoning ordinance to show that his prior use
of the property was legal and not unlawful.” Flippen Alliance for Community Empowerment, Inc.v. Brannan, 267 Ga. App. 134, 137 (2004).
Pink Pony cannot meet that burden due to Section 27-146 of the DeKalb County Zoning
Ordinance that was in place in 1990 when Pink Pony commenced operations (the full zoningdi j t tl id d t Cit t ff b Pi k P ) Th t di t t d th t “
D.1.b
P P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l
D.1.b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
adult entertainment to be in a C-2 district) in 1991. But under Section 27-146, that only proves
that an adult entertainment use was prohibited at the time that Pink Pony commenced.
Even if Pink Pony is a lawful, nonconforming use, the Brookhaven zoning ordinance prohibits
Pink Pony from expanding in a manner that increases the degree of its nonconformity. The
Director’s determination on this issue is sound: it is not based on an erroneous finding of amaterial fact, nor can Pink Pony show that the Director acted in an arbitrary manner. Thus, if the
ZBA reaches the issue that Pink Pony seeks to have reviewed, the ZBA should affirm.
I. Pink Pony is not a lawful nonconforming use.
Pink Pony opened in a C-1 zoning district in DeKalb County in late 1990. Under the 1990
DeKalb County zoning ordinance, permitted uses for the C-1 district did not include adult
entertainment. (Pink Pony Exh. 2, 1990 DeKalb County Zoning Ordinance Sec. 27-457.) Section27-146 of the zoning ordinance stated that “no land, building or structure shall be used except in
accordance with the uses and standards permitted within each district. Any use not specifically
designated as permitted shall be deemed to be prohibited.” (Exh. A at 3, 1990 DeKalbCounty Zoning Ordinance Sec. 27-146) (emphasis added). Therefore, the DeKalb County zoning
ordinance prohibited adult entertainment in the C-1 zoning district when Pink Pony opened in1990.
Pink Pony ignores Section 27-146. In doing so, it overlooks that adult businesses were prohibited
in the C-1 zoning district in 1990. Because Pink Pony’s operation of an adult business in a C-1
district was not lawful at its inception, it is not entitled to protection from Brookhaven zoningregulations as a nonconforming use. Corey Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Bd. of Zoning
Adjustments, 327 S.E.2d 178, 184 (1985).
DeKalb County did not specifically designate adult entertainment as a land use until May 1991,
and even then the County did not allow adult entertainment in the C-1 district. (Pos. Stmt. at 4.)
In 1999, DeKalb County passed an ordinance to regulate alcohol in adult businesses, and that
effort was promptly met by more lawsuits. In 2001 the County settled with Pink Pony and others,and a copy of that agreement is Exhibit 4 to Pink Pony’s Position Statement. On page 5 of its
brief, Pink Pony asserts that the 2001 settlement accorded it “legal non-conforming status to
continue providing adult entertainment in their then existing locations.” But that is false. The2001 settlement did not concern zoning or land use, but alcohol sales with nudity in adult clubs.
[T]he County hereby grants “non-conforming status” to the Adult Clubs, currently
operating as such adult entertainment establishments and/or erotict t i t/d t bli h t tl d fi d i th C d f D K lb
D.1.b
P P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n
d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l
D.1.b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
granted herein shall be for a term of eight (8) years effective January 1, 2001,
unless determined otherwise by a court of competent jurisdiction.
(Pink Pony Exh. 4 at 10 (emphasis added).) The settlement also provided for a “certificate of
non-conforming status” that depended on financial payments to the County and the adult business’s ongoing compliance with the settlement agreement.
A certificate of non-conforming status shall be issued as long as the Adult Club iscurrent with its annual fee obligation and has not violated any other provision of
this agreement.
(Pink Pony Exh. 4 at 16.) On June 19, 2001, the DeKalb County Finance Department issued an
“Adult Entertainment Certificate of Non-Conforming Status” to Pink Pony. (Pink Pony Exh. 5.)
From 2001 through the incorporation of the City of Brookhaven, Pink Pony received business
and alcohol licenses from DeKalb County. In 2007, Pink Pony and other clubs also renewed and
extended the 2001 settlement agreement with DeKalb County.
But the fact that Pink Pony offered alcohol and nudity under settlements with and licenses fromDeKalb County does not show that Pink Pony was a lawful land use under the zoning ordinancewhen it opened in 1990.
Similarly, the City’s arguments in the DeKalb County Superior Court do not meet Pink Pony’s
burden to show that it opened as a lawful use. Speaking of Pink Pony’s zoning, the Court stated:
Finally, for all of Plaintiffs’ [Pink Pony’s] reliance on lawful, nonconforming use
status, Plaintiffs did not plead facts showing that it has such status. . . . [T]heComplaint does not allege that the parcel on which Pink Pony operates is zoned
C-2. In fact, the City indicates that the DeKalb County zoning map (the zoningdistricts of the County were carried over to the City) shows the parcel is zoned
C-1. Again, this dispute is irrelevant to the resolution of this case because neither
party has pled a claim that Plaintiffs cannot operate a sexually oriented business at1837 Corporate Boulevard, Plaintiffs’ location. Rather, this case centers on the
applicability of Brookhaven’s SOB Code, including its prohibitions on nudity and
alcohol, at that location.
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants are entitled to judgment on the pleadings
on Count VIII that Plaintiffs are not grandfathered against enforcement of theCity’s SOB Code.
P P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n
d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l
D.1.b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
II. The Director’s interpretation—that the proposed expansion would increase the
degree of nonconformity of Pink Pony’s facility—should be affirmed.
Brookhaven Zoning Ordinance Section 27-936 explains that nonconforming uses are
incompatible with permitted uses and are generally disfavored. It further provides:
It is the intent of the city council to require the cessation of certain of these
nonconformities, and to permit others to continue until they are otherwise removed or
cease. It is further the board’s intent that nonconformities not be used as grounds foradding other buildings, structures, or uses of land prohibited by this chapter, and that no
such building, structure, or use of land shall be enlarged, expanded, moved, orotherwise altered in a manner that increases the degree of nonconformity.
If Pink Pony were a lawful nonconforming use, Pink Pony would then have to show that the
Director’s interpretation of Section 27-936 is arbitrary or is based on an erroneous finding of
material fact.
Pink Pony has operated in a C-1 zoning district, where adult businesses have never been
permitted, since late 1990. According to Pink Pony, there is one land use occurring at 1837Corporate Boulevard—adult entertainment. It seeks to increase its building’s footprint by close
to 3000 square feet to enhance and prolong that use.
It admits that its adult entertainment facility is aging and its adult entertainers’ dressing room and
bathroom do not meet modern standards. It wants new and additional office space to facilitate its
adult entertainment business, to provide larger and more upscale dressing rooms for its adultentertainers, and to offer additional restroom space to its adult entertainment patrons.
This request is completely contrary to the presumption in Section 27-936 that nonconforming
uses are disfavored and will cease over time. Pink Pony wants to enhance its ability to attract
adult entertainment workers and patrons—to extend its viability as an adult entertainment
establishment for another quarter century—through expanding its adult establishment by close to3000 square feet.
The Director interprets Section 27-936 to mean that a 30% increase in floor area would increasethe space available for Pink Pony’s adult entertainment business, its patrons, and its employees
to use, and that such an expansion would increase the degree of nonconformity. That
interpretation is neither arbitrary nor based on an erroneous factual finding. Rather, it isconsistent with the rest of Section 27-936 in that nonconformities may continue only until they
are otherwise removed or cease. To allow the expansion of a twenty-plus-year-old adultP
P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n
d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l
D.1.b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Pink Pony argues that the proposed expansion of its adult entertainment building would not
increase the degree of nonconformity for its adult entertainment business because it would not
increase the existing floor area devoted to adult entertainment, but that claim is wrong becausethe floor area for adult entertainer dressing rooms and restrooms is necessary for the adult
entertainment use to which the entire building is devoted. Pink Pony contends that any
nonconformity is limited to the public areas where dancing and alcohol service occur, but that isequally wrong because the entire building services the adult entertainment use—the only land
use occurring on the property. Pink Pony also argues that its proposed alterations were approved
by DeKalb County just before the City of Brookhaven was incorporated. None of Pink Pony’sarguments are sufficient to reverse the Director’s interpretation.
With respect to the expansion of floor area, Pink Pony suggests that the dressing area for itsdancers does not count as part of its adult business use. That is like a theater discounting its need
for a back stage area, a TV studio ignoring green rooms, or a retailer saying that its stockroom is
not part of its store. If the dressing area is not part of the adult business, why would an adult
business choose to expand it? It is directly related to an expansion of the use of the property asan adult business; if this were not the case, Pink Pony would simply remodel (not increase the
size of) its current dressing rooms.
Pink Pony also objects to the common-sense observation that a larger dressing area for dancers
would allow more dancers to be at the club at one time. It does not dispute that truism, but
instead offers to stipulate that it would not hire more dancers as a condition on the landdisturbance permit. But that is a red herring, because even if the total number of dancers on the
Pink Pony’s payroll (or independent contractor list) stays the same, a larger dressing room would
allow more to work (and perform adult entertainment) at one time. Again, Pink Pony’s requestfor an increase in floor area for adult entertainment dancers, as opposed to a simple remodeling
of the dressing room, belies their argument. Indeed, Pink Pony’s offered stipulation presupposesthat expanding the dressing room for dancers allows for the expansion of the nonconforming
adult entertainment business. Furthermore, the expansion of public bathrooms for Pink Pony’s
patrons—who are there for adult entertainment—also expands/enlarges the adult business in a
manner prohibited for a nonconforming use.
Most of Pink Pony’s exhibits concern its licensing and litigation history with DeKalb County and
Pink Pony’s efforts to get County approval to expand its building. Those proceedings are notrelevant here. Under the settlement agreement with DeKalb County, Pink Pony had to get
approval from the DeKalb County Board of Commissioners for any increase of the square
footage of its business. Although DeKalb County voted on Pink Pony’s proposed expansion just before Brookhaven was incorporated, Pink Pony has produced no building permit from DeKalb
County. Further, the vote of DeKalb County does not allow Pink Pony to expand or enlarge itsP
P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2
7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n
d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p p e a l
D.1.b
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
statute has been interpreted to include governmental contracts as well as ordinances.” (Exh. B,
DeKalb County Superior Court Order at 5.)
The Director’s interpretation of Section 27-936 is correct based on the language of the ordinance
and the facts in Pink Pony’s letter. Pink Pony claimed it was a nonconforming use that proposed
to expand its floor area by close to 3000 square feet. It admitted that the expansion wouldincrease the dressing room/toilet facilities for its dancers, the very dancers that make Pink Pony
an adult business. It is consistent with the material facts, and it certainly is not arbitrary, to
conclude that such an expansion would increase the degree to which Pink Pony can offer adultentertainment. Thus, there is no basis to reverse the Director’s interpretation.
CONCLUSION
Pink Pony wants to enlarge, by close to 3000 square feet, its purported nonconforming adult
entertainment use to provide improved facilities for employees and patrons. But this is preciselywhat Section 27-936 prohibits a nonconforming use from doing. Because no adult business was
permitted in the C-1 zoning district under the 1990 DeKalb County zoning ordinance when Pink
Pony opened, Pink Pony cannot show that it was lawful at its inception; therefore, Section 27-
936 has no application to Pink Pony. Even if Pink Pony could meet its burden of proving that itis a lawful nonconforming adult entertainment use, the Board should affirm the Director’s
interpretation of Section 27-936.
P P 4 - 9 - 1 4 C i t y ' s
b r i e f ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2
7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n
d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k
P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o A p
p e a l
D.1.c
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
including the Pink Pony, entered into a Settlement and Release Agreement with DeKalb County. The
establishments dismissed pending damages actions against DeKalb County in exchange for the right to
continue their operations for a term of eight years. The establishments also agreed to pay an increased,
graduated licensing fee as consideration for the Agreement. See Plaintiffs' Complaint, Exhibit A .
In May 2007, the eight remaining DeKalb County adult entertainment establishments entered into
the First Amended and Extended Settlement and Release Agreement, which provided, in salient part, that
the original Agreement would be extended for a minimum of fifteen years with an option to renew for an
additional ten years. The Agreement was expressly binding upon any governmental body to which the
County transfers regulatory control over matters therein; expressly including any municipality which
obtains jurisdiction by incorporation or annexation. As consider for the Amended Agreement, the Pink
Pony and the other adult entertainment establishments agreed to pay an increased, graduated licensing fee
in excess of $100,000 per year, per club. See Plaintiffs' Complaint, Exhibit B
Until recently, the Pink Pony was within the boundaries of unincorporated DeKalb County;
however, that section of the County was incorporated into the new City ofBrookhaven in December
2012. At the time ofthe incorporation, the Pink Pony had a valid alcohol license, business license, and
adult entertainment license from DeKalb County for 2012 and it had renewed its 2013 alcohol license
from DeKalb County. The new City adopted a Sexually Oriented Business Ordinance ( SOB
Ordinance ) on January 14,2013 that, inter alia requires licensure of SOBs, prohibits appearing in a
state of nudity and prohibits the possession, use, or consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises
of an SOB after January 2, 2014.
Adult Cabarets, such as the Pink Pony, are considered sexually oriented businesses pursuant D e K a l b S u p . C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y
T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c . D
/ B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o
D.1.d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
governmental interest. Id. at 697 (rejecting aduJt businesses' claim of a vested right to continue offering
alcohol despite newly-enacted ban on alcohol in such establishments). Numerous Georgia appellate (as
well as federal appellate) decisions uphold ordinances prohibiting alcohol with adult entertainment. See,
~ Goldrush II v. City of Marietta, 267 Ga. 683 ( 1997); Quetgles v. City of Columbus, 268 Ga. 619
(1997); Flanigan's Enters., Inc. of Georgia v. Fulton County, 596 F.3d 1265 (11th Cir. 2010).
Their reliance on the Agreement fails for several reasons. First and foremost, the DeKalb County
Agreement is ultra vires because it violates O.C.G.A. § 36-30-3(a), which forbids local government
councils from binding themselves or successor councils so as to prevent them from legislating freely. This
statute has been interpreted to include governmental contracts as well as ordinances. City ofMcDonough
v. CamJ?bell, 289 Ga. 216, 217 (2011) ( To the extent that a governmental contract impinges on a
municipal ity's ability to legislate freely, the contract is ultra vires and void. ); Madden v. Bellew, 260 Ga.
530, 531 (1990) (noting same limitation applies to counties). According to Plaintiffs, the DeKalb County
Agreement allows the County to legislate in all matters relating to the regulation of Adult Clubs with the
exception o he specific exclusions set forth elsewhere in the greement such that the County was not
binding the hands of future bodies to otherwise legislate freely in connection with Adult Entertainment ..
. . (Plaintiffs' Response Brief at 14) (emphasis added). In other words, Plaintiffs concede that the
DeKalb County Agreement prevents future bodies from legislating freely in the areas of adult business
regulation covered by the Agreement. This is a textbook example of what O.C.G.A § 36-30-3(a) forbids.
Brookhaven did not exist when DeKalb County reached the Agreement with the Adult Clubs, so
Defendants could not have been party to the Agreement. Plaintiffs provide no authority to support their
contention that Brookhaven's ability to regulate sexually oriented businesses under its jurisdiction can be D e K a l b S u p . C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y
T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c . D
/ B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o
D.1.d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Unified Gov t of Athens-Clarke County, 285 Ga. 637, 638 (2009) (holding that plaintiffs lacked standing
to challenge noise ordinance on free speech grounds where ordinance had not been enforced against
them).
With respect to the SOB Code and its licensing requirement for sexually oriented businesses, it is
well-settled that [a] city may enact an ordinance, for legitimate purposes, requiring those who would
exercise their freedom of speech to obtain a license in advance. Airport Book Store, Inc. v. Jackson, 242
Ga. 214,220 (1978). Licensing sexually oriented businesses is constitutional provided that the ordinance:
(1) avoids unbridled discretion in the licensing decision, (2) requires the licensing decision within a
specified and reasonable period oftime during which the status quo is maintained, and (3) provides the
possibility of prompt judicial review in the event that the license is erroneously denied. City of Littleton
v. Z.J. Gifts D-4, L.L.C., 541 U.S. 774, 786 (2004) (internal citation omitted).
Cmmt IV does not specify any particular part of the SOB Code that Plaintiffs allege to be a prior
restraint, but their brief presents a single prior restraint argument against the SOB Code. According to
Plaintiffs, they are unable to qualify for a Temporary License or a Provisional License because they
are not a preexisting sexually oriented business. Plaintiffs assume that an applicant must have a
Temporary or Provisional license to qualify for an annual SOB license. Their premise is flawed, and so is
their reading ofthe SOB Code.
Under§ 15-403 of the SOB Code, Brookhaven has 30 days
to process a license application, and
the City may deny a sexually oriented business license only based upon neutral, nondiscretionary
standards that are unrelated to the content of expression, such as whether the applicant is underage, is in
an improper location, or has been convicted of specified crimes (and then only within the last five years). D e K a l b S u p . C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y
T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c . D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o
D.1.d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
SOB license. The licensing provisions, which are modeled after the ordinance upheld in City of Littleton,
easily satisfy the relevant constitutional standards. City of Littleton v Z.J. Gifts D-4, L.L.C., 541 U.S.
774 (2004); Club S Burlesque, Inc. v City of Carrollton, 265 Ga. 528, 531-32 (1995) (upholding
ordinance with 13 standards for licensure, including one providing for consideration of the health, safety
and welfare of the citizens and preservation of the neighborhoods and concluding that [t]he ordinance
sets forth ascertainable standards which control the City's exercise of its discretion and provide a standard
for determining whether that discretion has been abused. ) As a matter oflaw, Defendants are entitled to
judgment against Plaintiffs' prior restraint challenge to the SOB Code.
Plaintiffs also attack the Alcohol Code, but they lack standing to do so In Granite State Outdoor
Advertising, Inc. v Citv of Roswell, 283 Ga. 417 (2008), recons. denied (Ga. April II, 2008), cert.
denied 555 U.S. 882 (2008), the Georgia Supreme Court held that a billboard company had standing to
challenge only those portions of a city's sign ordinance that had caused it injury, i.e., that had been
enforced against it. See also Manlove v Unified Gov t of Athens-Clarke Cmmty, 285 Ga 637, 638
(2009) ( Whether proceeding under federal law or the law of this state, in order to challenge the
constitutionality of an ordinance on First Amendment grounds, the party before the court must show an
injury in fact. ). Plaintiffs have not applied for a Brookhaven alcohol license, so no provision of the
Alcohol Code has been applied to them.
In sum, Plaintiffs operate a sexually oriented business that is required to be licensed under the
SOB Code; thus, Plaintiffs have standing to challenge the SOB Code. However, that challenge fails as the
SOB Code easily satisfies the standards for licensing ordinances set forth in City of Littleton v Z.J. Gifts
D-4, L.L.C., 541 U.S. 774 (2004). Plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the Zoning Code and Alcohol D e K a l b S u p . C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 : Z
B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y
T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c . D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o
D.1.d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Count V challenges Brookhaven ordinances on facial overbreadth grounds. Whether a law is
lmconstitutionally overbroad is a legal issue that is properly addressed in a judgment on the pleadings.
To sustain a facial overbreadth claim, Plaintiffs must show that a law punishes a 'substantial'
amount of protected free speech, 'judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep' . . . .
Virginia v. Hicks, 539 U.S. 113, 118-19 (2003). The facial overbreadth doctrine is an exception to
standing principles and is strong medicine that should be employed only as a last resort. Broadrick v.
Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 613 (1973). The overbreadth of a statute must not only be real but substantial
as well, judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep. Id. at 615 (emphasis added). The
claimant must make the substantial overbreadth demonstration from the 'text of [the law] and from
actual fact. ' DA Mortgage v Miami Beach, 486 F.3d 1254, 1270 (11th Cir. 2007) (quoting Hicks, 539 at
122). Finally, an overbreadth claim fails if the law can be narrowly construed. Virginia v. Am.
Booksellers Ass'n, 484 U.S. 383, 397 (1988); Gravely v Bacon, 263 Ga. 203, 206 (1993).
Plaintiffs claim that definitions of nudity, semi-nudity, and specified anatomical areas in
the SOB Code are unconstitutionally overbroad. Their brief also tags six sections (that span twelve pages
of the SOB Code) with the overbreadth label, but Plaintiffs fail to explain how any part is overbroad. This
failure is fatal. t is Plaintiffs' duty, not Defendants' and not this Court's, to state how a law violates the
constitution. In re D.H., 283 Ga. 556, 558 (2008) (noting challenger's duty to specifically show wherein
the statute, or some designated part of it, violates such constitutional provision ).
In any event, Plaintiffs ' overbreadth claim also fails because the SOB Code does not punish any
protected free speech, much less a substantial amount when judged in relation to the plainly legitimate D e K a l b S u p . C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 : Z
B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y
T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c . D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o
D.1.d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
acts, the touching or caressing of particular body parts, and partial or total nudity. 259 Ga. at 702.
Because the statute applied at non-sexually oriented business venues (i.e., museums, opera houses,
mainstream theaters, etc.) where it would not further the governmental interest (preventing illegal activity
associated with nude dancing and alcohol establishments), the Court held that it was not narrowly
tailored. Id. at 703-04. In Great Amer ican Dream, the Court was not even addressing a nudity ban, and
merely held it was error to apply the rational basis test when evaluating free speech claims. 290 Ga. at
751.
t is telling that Plaintiffs do not cite Gravely v. Bacon for their nudity cannot be regulated
argument. There, the Georgia Supreme Court cited Barnes and upheld an ordinance as a
carefully and nar rowly drawn regulatory scheme which makes appropriate distinctionsbetween public and private behavior and which impacts only those modes of expression
which, in the experience of local governments, tend to be the focal points of negative
effects such as increased crime, [and therefore passes] constitutional muster
notwithstanding some restriction of protected expression.
Gravely, 263 Ga 203, 205 (1993).
Here, the e m n m s pasties and G-string requirement applies only in sexually oriented
businesses, i.e., commercial establishments open to the public that regularly feature sexually oriented
entertainment. The on-point case law and the legislative record cited in the ordinance demonstrates that
such establishments, in the experience oflocal governments, tend to be the focal points of negative
effects including crime and illicit sexual behavior. The ordinance requires covering of only some of
those parts ofthe human body associated with sexuality. S.J.T., 263 Ga. at 269. The minimal covering
serves the City's interests in preventing illicit sexual behavior involving the covered body parts, and the
D e K a l b S u p .
C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 : Z
B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a r i a n c e t o
businesses is a valid conduct regulation with only an incidental e f f ~ t on erotic dancing that passes muster
D.1.d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
But there is nothing in HB 636 to suggest that any precincts or geographic units mentioned in the
Brookhaven charter are somehow taken away from DeKalb County, or that the enabling act ofDeKalb
County has been amended by reducing the precincts within County Commission districts. Precincts that
fall within any of the Brookhaven council districts do not thereby cease to be a part of DeKalb County or
the underlying county commission districts. There is therefore no basis to conclude that HB 636 amended
either the not-yet-existent Brookhaven charter or the enabling act ofDeKalb County. Thus, O.C.G.A.
§ 28-I-14 b) has no application in this case. Cmmt XV fails as a matter of law, and Defendants are
entitled to judgment on the pleadings as to this claim.
So Ordered ~ o December 2013.
Cc: Alan Begner
Begner Begner
5180 Roswell Road
South Building, Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30342
Linda Dunlavy
I 026 B Atlanta A venue
Decatur, Georgia 30030
Aubrey T Villines
Magarahan, Villines, Honis
Courtney L. son, udge
Superior Court of DeKalb County
Stone Mountain Judicial Circuit
D e K a l b S u p
. C o u r t O r d e r ( 1 1 4 7 :
Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p ,
I n c .
D / B / A P i n k P o n y - V a
r i a n c
D . 1 . e
P a c k e t P g .
6 5
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : P P V a r i a n c e D o c u m e n t a t i o n _ 3 - 1 8 - 1 4 ( 1 1 4 7 : Z B A 1 3 - 2 7 : J E G F a m i l y T r u s t a n d T r o p , I n c .
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Location: 3165 Lynwood Drive, Brookhaven, GA 30319
Tax Parcel # 18-275-06-048
Property Owner: Alan and Margaret Roberds
Applicant: Patsios Homes c/o Roberts and Daughdrill, PC
Request: A variance from the 1967 Lynwood blanket variance related to front
yard setback requirements from 50 feet from centerline of right-of-way to 16 feet, a variance to increase lot coverage from 36.39% to
45% and to reduce the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 18 feet
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting three variances associated with this case as noted:
A variance from the 1967 Lynwood blanket variance related to the front yard setbackrequirement of 50 feet from centerline of right-of-way to 16 feet.
Increase the lot coverage from 36.39% to 45%.
Reduce the rear yard setback requirements from 40 feet to 18 feet.
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The property exists as an interior lot located along the northeast side of Lynwood, approximately500 feet northwest of its intersection with Silver Lake Drive. The property is zoned R-75
(Single-Family Residential District) and is immediately surrounded by R-75 properties on all
sides. The subject lot contains a single-family residence that was built in 1958. The applicant
plans to construct a new 2,272 square foot home on the property. In order to accomplish theconstruction the applicant seeks to demolish the existing house and request variances to lot
D.2.a
P a t s i o s H o m e s C
/ O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e , a n d R e d u c e F
r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
construction, the applicant seeks to demolish the existing house and request variances to lot
coverage and front and rear yard setbacks.
Similar to neighboring lots, the subject property is a legal nonconforming lot of record, as the
property lacks the lot frontage of 75 feet and lot size of 10,000 square feet required of R-75
zoned districts. Additionally, the existing house is also a nonconforming structure as itencroaches into the front, side and rear yard setbacks, and exceeds the allowable lot coverage at
36.39%. The subject property is substantially smaller in size (3,505 square feet; 0.08 acres)
compared to majority of the lots fronting on Lynwood Drive. The property maintains a depth of
105 feet with a frontage of 44.79 feet that narrows to 33.52 feet moving towards the rearf f
m e m o ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P
CRITERIA TO BE USED BY THE BOARDThe applicant seeks variances to the development standards. Consideration of this request should
be made under the terms of the following criteria, found in the City Zoning Ordinance: 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 samezoning district;
Staff Comment:
By reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape and size, which were notcreated by the owner, the strict application of the zoning regulations concerning setbacks
and lot coverage would appear to preclude development on the property. As previously
noted, the subject lot is 3,505 square feet in size, which would equate to one third of the
size of a conforming R-75 lot. Furthermore, the minimum dwelling size requirement foran R-75 zoned property is 1,600 feet, which would translate to 46 percent coverage (11%
above the 35% maximum) on the lot. The applicant has attempted to further reduce lot
coverage associated with the property by proposing a pervious driveway. However, in
order to build a dwelling of similar form and character consistent with the neighborhood,the applicant seeks to increase lot coverage from 36.39 percent to 45 percent..
It should be noted that a blanket variance for setbacks was approved for the Lynwood Park Neighborhood in 1967. Under this variance, 3165 Lynwood Drive is subject to a
front setback of 50 feet from the centerline of the property Additionally the applicant is
D.2.a
P a t s i o s H o m e s C
/ O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e , a n d R e d u c e F
r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
front setback of 50 feet from the centerline of the property. Additionally, the applicant is
required to comply with a 40 foot rear yard setback per the R-75 zoning district. Asnoted, the property is only 105 feet at its deepest point; thus, if both the front and rear
setbacks were strictly applied, the buildable area of the site would be reduced 1,330
square feet. Given the reduced buildable lot area, it would appear that the setback provisions would prevent the construction of a home similar to privileges enjoyed by
other property owners in the same zoning district.
(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
f f m e m o ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 :
were approved for an increase in lot coverage to 46.44 percent and 48.51 percent,respectively for an infill development. Both of the aforementioned lots maintain a larger
lot size than the subject property.
The reduction in front yard setback would be acceptable by staff as requested, since the
proposed setback of 16 feet would be consistent with the average setback requirement
and the home would be set back further from the right-of-way than the adjacent neighborto the south. The proposed reduction in setback of the rear yard from 40 feet to 18 feet
would meet the minimum necessary to afford relief and would be found to be consistentwith other properties in the zoning district that exist with similar exceptional conditions pertaining to the shape of the lot.
(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:
Based on the applicant’s request, the granting of the setback reductions and increase inlot coverage to 45 percent would not appear to be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in the zoning district. It shall be noted that the
average front yard setback on the property is 16.23, so the request for variance to the
Lynwood blanket variance would be consistent with the average setback requirement. Although increase in lot coverage may contribute to additional stormwater run-off, the
applicant would be conditioned to administer appropriate water detention and soil
erosion control measures on the property.
(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; andStaff Comment:
The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance may cause undue and unnecessary
D.2.a
P a t s i o s H o m e s C
/ O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C - I n c r e a s e L o t C
o v e r a g e , a n d R e d u c e F
r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
hardship, due to the relative lot size of the property. If the required setbacks were to beapplied, the applicant would not have the ability to construct a dwelling of similar size
and character of the neighborhood unless variances were granted to the setbacks and lot
coverage.
(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 no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan.
f f m e m o ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 :
2.
The portion of driveway within property limits shall be constructed in a manner that provides stormwater infiltration capability and that maintains infiltration capability by
preventing compaction of driveway surface and shall be subject to acceptance by the CityEngineer.
3. For the portion of proposed rooftop that will drain to the rear of the lot, development
shall include practice(s) that will capture 1.2 inches of runoff from rooftop to bedischarged in no less than 24 hours. If discharge is to be accomplished through
infiltration into soil, prior to issuance of building permit for the proposed development,the owner/developer shall provide substantiation that soil infiltration rate is no less than0.25 in/hr or owner/developer shall provide amended soil stratum to foster infiltration,
subject to acceptance by the City Engineer.
D.2.a
P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C - I n c r e a s e L o t C
o v e r a g e , a n d R e d u c e F
r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 5:03 PMTo: External-Zoning Board of Appeals
Cc: Susan Canon; Becky Apter
Subject: FW: 3165 Lynwood Drive
Board Members,
Below you will find an email from Mr. Powell who would like to withdraw his opposition to ZBA14‐07 and have suggested the
following conditions for your consideration.
Thank you,
Ben Song
Deputy Director of Community Development City of Brookhaven | www.brookhavenga.gov O: 404-637-0536F: 404-637-0537
This e‐mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). The City of
Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated §§ 50‐18‐70 to 50‐18‐76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and
This message and any attachment are solely for the use of the individual or entity to which this message is addressedand contains information that is confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are herebynotified that any review, retransmission, disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on thecontents of this communication by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you havereceived this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
D.2.b
o s H o m e s C / O R o b
e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e , a n d R e d u c e F r o n t a n
d R )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
I am confident that you all see builders come before you every month with proposed variances that are not really the minimum
necessary. By
way
of
contrast,
Mr.
Patsios
spent
an
enormous
amount
of
time
carefully
planning
a marketable
house
with
features that would promote privacy for the adjacent neighbors, such as the placement of the covered porch, while also only
asking for what is truly the minimum necessary to build a home on a very tiny lot. We hope you will listen to the adjacent
neighbors and acknowledge Mr. Patsios’ efforts by granting approval of his requested variances at your next meeting. Thank
you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
i l ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o
NOTICE: This e‐mail correspondence, including any attachment, is being sent by or on behalf of an attorney, is intended exclusively for the
designated recipient(s) in the "To","Cc" and "Bcc" lines of this e‐mail and may contain confidential, privileged or other legally protected
information. If you are not a designated recipient of this e‐mail correspondence, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy,
disseminate or rely upon this e‐mail correspondence in whole or in part. If you have received this e‐mail correspondence in error, please
notify the sender by reply e‐mail and delete or destroy all copies of this message and attachments in all media. NO DUTIES ARE INTENDED
OR CREATED
BY
THIS
COMMUNICATION.
If
you
have
not
executed
a fee
agreement
or
engagement
letter,
this
firm
does
NOT
represent
you
as your attorney. You are encouraged to retain counsel of your choice if you desire to do so. All rights of the sender for violations of the
confidentiality and privileges applicable to this e‐mail correspondence and any attachments are expressly reserved. Pursuant to U.S. Treasury
Department Circular 230, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot
be used, for purposes of (i) avoiding any tax‐related penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
recommending to another party any tax‐related matter addressed herein.
This e‐mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictlyprohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). The City of
Brookhaven is a public entity subject to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated §§ 50‐18‐70 to 50‐18‐76 concerning public records. Email is covered under such laws and
thus may be subject to disclosure.
D.2.c
i o s H o m e s C / O R o
b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C
- I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g
e , a n d R e d u c e F r o n t a n d R )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
I am a resident of Lynwood Park and I am in opposition to the variance requested byPatsios Homes to minimize the required setbacks and significantly increase the lotcoverage of this property. I am asking you to share with the Zoning Board of Appealswhy I am requesting a denial of the applicant's petition.
1. The builder does not own the property and just has an option to build if he can
get the variances approved. The builder will not be burdened with this propertyshould he not obtain the variances. There is no hardship to Patsios Homes.2. The builder's request will excessively reduce the specific zoning requirements
established to protect existing homeowners. As the homeowner of 3161Lynwood Drive, the neighboring property to the subject property, approvingthe variance would negatively impact my family's quality of life and bedetrimental to the marketability of our property. Please see photos included.
3. The requested variances are excessive for the lot and would diminish theaesthetics of Lynwood Drive. At 2,272 square feet, the proposed home would,in effect, be jammed in between a 4,400 sq. ft. home and a 3,300 sq. ft. homecovering nearly every part of the lot. This home will not be in scale with theexisting homes.
4 Fi ll th A li t' L tt f I t t it " t h d hi th O f
D.2.d
i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C
- I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g
e , a n d R e d u c e F r o n t a n
d R )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
4. Finally, the Applicant's Letter of Intent cites "extreme hardship on the Owner of
Subject Property because they will not be able to sell their property unless suchvariances are granted to the Applicant". There is no such hardship to theProperty Owners (Meg and Alan Roberds) as other neighbors have interest in purchasing the property as-is. More specifically, we, the Kidders, haveindicated our desire to purchase the property as-is from the Roberds. Werecently purchased the Roberd's previous home, 3161 Lynwood Drive, and havea contractual agreement (see attached pg 6 Special Stipulations) that we have i l
( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i
Monique and Kevin Kidder 3161 Lynwood Drive NE
D.2.d
s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l , P C
- I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g
e , a n d R e d u c e F r o n t a n d R )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 S t a m p e d a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 2 8 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 7 : P a t s i o s H o m e s C / O R o b e r t s & D a u g h d r i l l ,
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Attachment: ZBA14-07 Stamped site plan-existing (1287 : ZBA14-07: Patsios Homes C/O Roberts & Daughdrill, PC - Increase Lot Coverage, and Reduce Front and R)
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Attachment: ZBA14-07 Stamped site plan-proposed (1287 : ZBA14-07: Patsios Homes C/O Roberts & Daughdrill, PC - Increase Lot Coverage, and Reduce Front and R)
MEMORANDUM
MEETING OF: April 16, 2014
COMMITTEE: Zoning Board of Appeals
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE:ZBA14-08: Michael Patrick - Increase Lot Coverage from 35% to 62% and Waive Lot Merger
Requirement - 1082 Wimberly Road
BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: Please see attached files.
FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted –
over or under)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Please see attached files.
ATTACHMENTS:
ZBA 14-08 revised staff memo (DOCX)
ZBA14-08 application (PDF)
E.1
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Location: 1082 Wimberly Road, Brookhaven, GA 30319
Tax Parcel # 18-275-04-007
Property Owner/
Applicant: Michael and Susan Patrick
Request: To waive the lot merger requirement of Section 27-938 and increase
lot coverage on lot 7 from 35% to 62%
DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting two variances associated with this case as noted:
A. Waive the lot merger requirement of an R-75 lot currently located at 1082 Wimberly
Road. This request is being made to revert the lot to the original Thomas J. Northcutt
plat (dated June 26, 1950) which shows two legal non-conforming lots of record.
B. Increase the lot coverage from 35% to 62% (Lot 7).
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The property is zoned R-75 (Single-Family Residential District) and is immediately surrounded
by R-75 zoned properties. The property has frontage along Windsor Parkway and WimberlyRoad so it is considered a double frontage lot. Per the original plat, the subject lot contains two
separate parcels consisting of lot 6 and lot 7. The subject property contains a residentialstructure and pool. The neighborhood has seen incremental redevelopment of larger homes to
the north, south and east of the property, including the subject residence.
The subject parcel totals 0.514 acres (22,396 square feet) and has 139.65 feet of street frontage
along Wimberly Road wherein the district requires a minimum of 10,000 square feet and 75 feetof street frontage. Based on the applicant’s letter of intent, the request to revert to the original
plat, which shows two lots, meets the minimum lot size requirement of the district. Staff would
E.1.a
3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e
l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
6 2 % a n d W a i v e L o t M e r g e r
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
note that because the original lots are non-conforming, contiguous and held in commonownership, they are treated as an undivided lot per Section 27-938. In an effort to revert to the
original platted lots, the applicant requests a lot merger waiver.
In 2009 a variance was approved by DeKalb County to increase the impervious surface of lot 7from 35% to 41% to build the current residence. Subsequently, the property owner purchased lot
6. Due to this purchase, the property was merged. Later, a pool was permitted by DeKalb
C Th l dd d ddi i l 21% f i i f l 7 A i l v i s e d s t a f f m e m o ( 1 3
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 City Zoning Ordinance: 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 samezoning district;
Staff Comment:Unless a lot merger waiver is granted, lots 6 and 7 are treated as a single lot. As
undivided, the lot size, lot frontage and lot coverage are conforming to the R-75 district.
Through actions of the owner, reverting the lots back to the original plat would create
narrow, non-conforming lots; in addition, it will result in 62% lot coverage on lot 7.Such action would appear to grant the property owner greater impervious surface area
than what is enjoyed by their neighbors.
(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:
As currently existing, the subject property has a combined lot which maintains a lot
coverage of 32%. If a lot merger waiver is granted, then it would result in lot 7becoming non-conforming with 62% lot coverage. It appears that the applicant has
E.1.a
3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e
l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
6 2 % a n d W a i v e L o t M e r g e r
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
received the benefit of lot coverage in the past taken from lot 6. Given the circumstances,it appears both variances requested are not the minimum necessary to afford relief. If granted, a special privilege may be afforded.
(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;
v i s e d s t a f f m e m o ( 1 3
(4) The literal interpretation and strict application of the applicable provisions or
requirements of this chapter would cause undue and unnecessary hardship, not merelyimpose a casual/discretionary inconvenience upon the applicant or his/her assigns; and
Staff Comment:
It appears that the literal interpretation and strict application of Section 27-938 would
prohibit the applicant from reverting to the original lots of record and prevent theapplicant from developing the lot in a similar manner to lots nearby. However, because
a pool was added by the applicant in 2011 and permitted based upon the combination of
lots 6 and 7 , the variance to lot coverage is a result of the owner’s action s. As such, theliteral and strict application of the requirements of this chapter do not cause undue and
unnecessary hardship upon the applicant as the hardship has been created by the
applicant.
(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 no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Board vote to deny the variances to waive the lot merger requirement of
Section 27-938 and increase lot coverage on lot 7 from 35% to 62%.
E.1.a
3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e
l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
6 2 % a n d W a i v e L o t M
e r g e r
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 8 : M i c h a e l P a t r i c k - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Location: 1628 Wayland Circle, Brookhaven, GA 30319
Tax Parcel # 18-237-05-012
Property Owner/ James and Katherine Barron
Applicant: HSC Intown, LLC
Request: To waive the lot merger requirement of Section 27-938, reduce
the rear yard setback of from 40 feet to 30 feet (lot 1), reduce the
rear yard setback of from 40 feet to 30 feet (lot 26), and reducethe average front yard setback from 33 feet 4 inches to 30 feet 8
inches (lot 26).
DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting four variances associated with this case as noted:
A. Waive the lot merger requirement of an R-75 lot currently located at 1628 WaylandCircle. This request is to correct a formality in the tax parcels of lot 1 and lot 26, which
were merged into one lot by DeKalb County. Such variance will allow the applicant to
revert the lot to the original plat from 1946, which shows two lots of record.B. Reduce the rear yard setback of from 40 feet to 30 feet (lot 1).
C. Reduce the rear yard setback of from 40 feet to 30 feet (lot 26).
D. Reduce the average front yard setback from 33 feet 4 inches to 30 feet 8 inches (Lot 26)
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The subject property consists of 0.61 acres (22,600 square feet) and is located on the northwest
corner of Wayland Circle and Richwood Drive. The property is zoned R-75 (Single-FamilyResidential District) and is immediately surrounded by R-75 zoned properties. Per the original
plat, the subject lot contains two separate parcels consisting of lot 1 (1620 Wayland Circle) and
lot 26 (1628 Wayland Circle). Based on the submitted site plan, both lots conform to minimumdistrict standards of 10,000 square feet and 75 feet of street frontage. The subject property
contains a single home on the combined lot. The applicant is seeking the aforementionedvariances to construct new single-family homes on lot 26 and lot 1.
E.2.a
1 3 1 9
: Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w
n ,
L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 4 0 ' t o 3 0 ' , R e d u c e A v e r a g e
F r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
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 City Zoning Ordinance: No relief may be granted or action taken under the terms of this division unless such relief can be
f f M e m o . d o c (
(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 orapplicant, 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: In regards to the request to the waiver of the lot merger requirement, the existing lot
merger is not the result of the actions of the owner or applicant. The strict application of
the requirement of this chapter will deprive the property owner of the rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district.
The existing physical characteristics of both lots 1 and 26 were not created by the owner
or applicant. There appears to be no impact associated with exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot 1. However, lot 26 appears to be irregularly shaped since
the rear property line slants inward impacting the building envelope. The strict
application of the requirement of this chapter may deprive the property owner of rights
and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district.
(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 uponother properties in the zoning district in which the subject property is located;
Staff Comment: In regards to the request to the waiver of the lot merger requirement, the existing lot
merger is not the result of the actions of the owner or applicant.
The requested reduction of the rear yard setback on lot 1 from 40 feet to 30 feet appearsto go beyond the minimum required to afford relief.
Along the front of lot 26, the applicant has requested a reduction of the average front yard setback. Based on the buildable area, it appears that the setback goes beyond the
minimum necessary as the footprint of the home could be adjusted to meet the setback. Inreviewing the building footprint on lot 26, the requested reduction of the rear yardsetback from 40 feet to 30 feet appears to be the minimum required to build a home and
E.2.a
( 1 3 1 9
: Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w
n ,
L L C - R e d u c e R e a r
Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 4 0 ' t o 3 0 ' , R e d u c e A v e r a g e
F r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
setback from 40 feet to 30 feet appears to be the minimum required to build a home and
therefore, will not appear to constitute granting of a special privilege.
(3) The grant of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare orinjurious to the property or improvements in the zoning district in which the subject
f f M e m o . d o c (
Granting of the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 30 feet as requested for lot 1 may bematerially detrimental, as the applicant has requested more than needed.
The request to reduce the average setback on lot 26 may have a negative impact as the
request would deviate from the requirement of the average setback and also from the
required front yard setback of the R-75 zoning district, which is 30 feet. Due to theirregular shape of lot 26, which constrains the buildable area, the request to reduce the
rear setback to 30 feet will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property.
(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:
It appears that the literal interpretation and strict application of the zoning requirements
concerning the lot merger requirement would cause undue hardship as the applicantwould not have the ability to revert the subject property to the original plat and to the
original two lots of record without granting of a variance.
The literal interpretation and strict application of this chapter may cause undue and
unnecessary hardship to lot 1 if a reduction of the rear yard setback is not granted as it is
a corner lot requiring the application of two front yard setbacks impacting the buildingenvelope. However, the reduction of the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 30 feet for lot
1 is more than is needed as it appears that a lesser reduction would provide for the
proposed home.
Strict application of the rear yard setback requirement for lot 26 may place undue and
unnecessary hardship on the applicant as there may not be the necessary lot depth to
construct the proposed home. As noted, the proposed dwelling footprint could bereconfigured to meet the average setback in the front yard, which may be viewed as a
mere discretionary inconvenience.
(5) The requested variance would be consistent with the spirit and purpose of this chapter
E.2.a
( 1 3 1 9
: Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w
n ,
L L C - R e d u c e R e a r
Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 4 0 '
t o 3 0 ' , R e d u c e A v e r a g e
F r o n t
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 1 9 : Z B A 1 4 - 0 9 : H S C I n t o w n , L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE:ZBA14-10: Bright Ventures LLC/Hakim Hilliard - Reduce the Side Yard Setback Along Curtis
Drive from 50’ to 39’, Reduce the Rear Yard Setback from 30’ to 10’, Reduce the TransitionalBuffer Zone Along the West Property Line from 50’ to 21’ and Reduce Parking from 72 to 45
Spaces - 3020 Buford Highway
BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: Please see attached files.
FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Please see attached files.
ATTACHMENTS:
ZBA 14-10 Revised Staff memo (DOCX)
ZBA14-10 application (PDF)
ZBZ14-10_ Letter to Property Owners from Applicant (PDF)
ZBA14-10 site plans (PDF)
E.3
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Location: 3020 Buford Highway, Brookhaven, GA 30319
Tax Parcel # 18-156-05-022
Property Owner/ Imran Sirani
Applicant: Bright Ventures, LLC/ Hakim Hilliard
Request: To reduce the front yard setback facing Curtis Drive of from 50 feet
to 39 feet, reduce rear yard setback from 30 feet to 10 feet, reduce the
transitional buffer zone requirement from 50 feet to 21 feet along theinterior side property line, and reduce the on-site parking
requirement from 72 required spaces to 45 spaces.
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting four variances associated with this case as noted:
A. Reduce the side yard setback facing Curtis Drive from 50 feet to 39 feet
B. Reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 10 feetC. Reduce the transitional buffer zone requirement from 50 feet to 21 feet along the interior
side property line
D. Reduce the on-site parking requirement from 72 required spaces to 45 spaces
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The subject property consists of 0.898 acres (39,153 square feet) and is located on a corner lotalong the northwest side of Buford Highway and Colonial Drive. The property is zoned C-1
(Commercial District) and is immediately bordered by a multi-family apartment complex to thesouthwest of the property. Across Buford Highway, there are a variety of commercial uses that
include a restaurant, bank, convenience store, service station and hotel. Based on the submittedsite plan, the lot conforms to minimum district standards of 20,000 square feet and 100 feet of
street frontage. The subject property currently contains a 2,839 square foot supermarket with 19
parking spaces. The applicant intends to redevelop the site into a two-story building with a 5,000square foot grocery store on the ground level and a 5,500 square foot retail and office space on
the top level. Based on a total of 10,500 square feet of development which includes office/retail
(the office and retail square footages have not been provided by the applicant) and a grocerystore, the parking required ranges from 72 to 80 spaces. The site plan indicates 72 with the
request to reduce to 45 spaces.
E.3.a
f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m
H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e S
i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k A l o n
g C u r t i s
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
CRITERIA TO BE USED BY THE BOARDThe applicant seeks a variance to a development standard. Consideration of this request should
v i s e d S t a f
(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 orapplicant, 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:
In reviewing the lot, there appears to be no exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or
uniqueness to its shape. The topography of the site appears to rise approximately 14 feet from the access point along Buford Highway to the rear of the property. In addition, the
western portion of the site appears to serve as a drainage swale.
The strict application of the zoning ordinance in relation to the setbacks and buffer zones, however, would appear to deprive the property owner of rights and privileges
enjoyed by other property owners along Buford Highway.
(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:
In regards to the requested variances please note that A, B, and C (as noted on page 1)
appear to be the minimum necessary to afford relief and therefore would not grant a special privilege to the applicant. Pursuant to Section 27-913 the proposed parking
reduction (variance D) appears to be the minimum to afford relief as the use of thebuilding is such to make the full parking provision unnecessary.
(3) The granting 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:
It appears that granting the variances will not be materially detrimental to the public.The staff notes that the proposed development preserves and slightly enlarges the existing
buffer.
E.3.a
a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m
H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e S
i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k A l o n
g C u r t i s
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
(4) The literal interpretation and strict application of the applicable provisions orrequirements of this chapter would cause undue and unnecessary hardship, not merely
v i s e d S t a
(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 proposed development appears to be consistent with the terms of the Comprehensive
Plan which identifies the site in the commercial redevelopment corridor.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Board vote in favor of the requested variances with the following
condition:
1. Development of the lot shall occur in accordance with the site plan submitted March 5,
2014 to the Community Development Department.
E.3.a
a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m
H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e S
i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k A l o n
g C u r t i s
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B Z 1 4 - 1 0 _ L e t t e r t o P r o p e r t y O w n e r s f r o m A p p l i c a n t ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B Z 1 4 - 1 0 _ L e t t e r t o P r o p e r t y O w n e r s f r o m A p p l i c a n t ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B Z 1 4 - 1 0 _ L e t t e r t o P r o p e r t y O w n e r s f r o m A p p l i c a n t ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e S i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k A l o n g C u r t i s D r i v e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e S i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k A l o n g C u r t i s D r i v e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 0 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 0 : B r i g h t V e n t u r e s L L C / H a k i m H i l l i a r d - R e d u c e t h e S i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k A l o n g C u r t i s D r i v e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Case: ZBA14-11Location: 2508 Appalachee Drive NE, Brookhaven, GA 30319
Tax Parcel # 18-238-13-016
Property Owner/
Applicant: Wayne Nicholls
Request: Reduce the setback of an accessory structure (swimming pool and
associated patio) from 10 feet to 1 feet and increase the lot coverage
from 35% to 53.8%.
DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting the following variances:A. To reduce the setback of an accessory structure (pool/patio) from 10 feet to 1 feet, and
B. To increase the lot coverage from 35% to 53.8%.
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The subject property is a corner lot located on the southwest of the intersection of CanoocheeDrive and Appalachee Drive. The property is zoned R-75 (Single-Family Residential District)
and is immediately surrounded by R-75 zoned properties to the south, east, and west of the property. To the north, there are three residences zoned R-A8 and to the northwest across the
intersection is RM-100. The property is a legal non-conforming lot of record as it totals 0.212
acres (9,251 square feet) and has 50 feet of street frontage along Appalachee Drive wherein thedistrict requires a minimum of 10,000 square feet and 75 feet of street frontage. It should be
noted that much of the neighborhood contains legal non-conforming lot widths, as many of the
lots, including the subject property, were originally platted with 50 foot frontages. Currently the
property utilizes roof downspouts routed to underground detention and infiltration systems.Additionally, the pool is screened by an 8 foot high fence and landscaping.
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 City Zoning Ordinance:
No relief may be granted or action taken under the terms of this division unless such relief can begranted 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 uponmaking all of the following findings:
E.4.a
v i s e d S t a f f m e m o
( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a
y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e
L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5
% t o 5 3 . 8
% a n d R e d u c e S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
The legal non-conforming lot appears to be exceptionally narrow. Given the character of
the area, the strict application of the requirements of this chapter would appear todeprive the owner the same rights and privileges enjoyed by others in the same district.
(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 uponother properties in the zoning district in which the subject property is located;
Staff Comment:
In regards to the requested variances please note:
A. The pool/spa/patio are currently constructed. Therefore, the relief sought is the
minimum to afford relief based upon the constructed components. It appears that
granting of A. does not go beyond the minimum necessary and does not constitute a
granting of special privilege.
B. The lot coverage is also existing on grade and could be reduced. Based upon
information provided by the applicant, it appears that other properties in the area exceedlot coverage, and granting of this variance does not afford a special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties within the same zoning district.
(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:The pool is enclosed by a privacy fence and detached garage. In addition, stormwatermanagement techniques have been employed. Therefore, the request does not appear to
be detrimental to the public welfare.
(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:
It appears that the literal interpretation and strict application of the requirements of the
chapter may cause hardship. The applicant’s letter of intent reveals not granting therequests may result in financial hardship which does not appear to be a causal
inconvenience.
E.4.a
v i s e d S t a f f m e m o
( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a
y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e
L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5
% t o 5 3 . 8
% a n d R e d u c e S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
pp(yg
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 w a r r a n t y d e e d ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o 5 3 . 8 % a n d R e d u c e S e t b a c k f o r A n )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 w a r r a n t y d e e d ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o 5 3 . 8 % a n d R e d u c e S e t b a c k f o r A n )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 1 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 1 : W a y n e N i c h o l l s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o 5 3 . 8 % a n d R e d u c e S e t b a c k f o r A n )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Location: 1380 Sylvan Circle, Brookhaven, GA 30319Tax Parcel # 18-238-06-046
Property Owner/ Conbar, LLC
Applicant: Alton Moss
Request: To increase lot coverage from 35% to 39%
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting a variance to increase the lot coverage from 35% to 39%.
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS The subject parcel totals 0.145 acres (6,310 square feet) and has 50 feet of street frontage along
Sylvan Circle wherein the district requires a minimum of 10,000 square feet and 75 feet of street
frontage. The property is zoned R-75 (Single-Family Residential District) and is immediatelysurrounded by R-75 zoned properties. The site consists of a residential structure. The site plan
indicates an increase in lot coverage from 35% to 39% to construct a larger driveway.
CRITERIA TO BE USED BY THE BOARDThe 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 City Zoning Ordinance:
No relief may be granted or action taken under the terms of this division unless such relief can begranted 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 uponmaking all of the following findings:
(1) By reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a specific lot, or byreason 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 applicant acquired a building permit and constructed a home in compliance with thechapter and therefore has not been deprived of rights and privileges enjoyed by others in
Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 r e v i s
e d S t a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s
- I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o 3 9 % )
E.5.a
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
The requested variance does not appear to go beyond the minimum necessary to afford
relief but would appear to grant a special privilege inconsistent with lot coverage placedupon other properties in the same district.
(3) The grant of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare orinjurious to the property or improvements in the zoning district in which the subject
property is located;
Staff Comment:
Due to the potential for greater storm water run-off, granting the requested variance maybe detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property and surrounding area.
(4) The literal interpretation and strict application of the applicable provisions or
requirements of this chapter would cause undue and unnecessary hardship, not merelyimpose a casual/discretionary inconvenience upon the applicant or his/her assigns; and
Staff Comment: It appears that the literal interpretation and strict application of requirements wouldmerely impose an inconvenience to the applicant, as they would be required to have a
smaller driveway.
(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 no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Board deny the variance.
Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 r e v i s
e d S t a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s
- I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a
g e f r o m 3 5 % t o 3 9 % )
E . 5 . b
k e t P g .
4 3 4
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 2 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 2 : A l t o n M o s s - I n c r e a s e L o t C o v e r a g e f r o m 3 5 % t o
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Case: ZBA14-13Location: 3028 Mabry Road, Brookhaven, GA 30319
Tax Parcel # 182 274 01 048
Property Owner/
Applicant: Michalene and Gerald Donegan
Request: To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5.2 feet to construct an
enclosed two-car garage
DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting a variance associated with this case as noted:
A. To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5.2 feet to construct an enclosed two-car
garage (Section 27-146 (d)).
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS
The subject property exists as an interior lot along the west side of Mabry Road, approximately300 feet north of its intersection with East Brookhaven Drive. The applicant proposes to renovate
the existing single family structure. Complete renovations will include the construction of an
enclosed two-car garage. The existing structure includes a carport that is setback 5.2 feet from theside property line.
The subject parcel totals 0.31 acres or 14,442 square feet. The current zoning of this property is R-100 (Single Family Residential District). The subject property is surrounded by single familyresidential uses. The applicant desires to expand the original footprint of the carport that will not
encroach further into the side yard setback than the existing carport.
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 City Zoning Ordinance:
No relief may be granted or action taken under the terms of this division unless such relief can begranted 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: 1 3 S t a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i
c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o
n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y
a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 ' t o 5 . 2
' )
E.6.a
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same
zoning district;
Staff Comment:
The shape of the lot and the existing structure appears to restrict the applicant from
constructing a two-car garage according to applicable standards. The strict applicationof the requirement of this chapter would deprive the property owner of rights and privileges
enjoyed by adjoining property owners in the same district.
(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 proposed reduction in the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5.2 feet would meet theminimum necessary to afford relief to the applicant. The proposed enclosed garage would
maintain the existing setback of the carport, and would not encroach further into the side
yard setback. It is also worthy to note that the subject property is significantly smaller
than surrounding parcels within the neighborhood. The variance request does not appearto constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon other
properties.
(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:
Based on the applicant’s request, the granting of the setback reduction would not appearto be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the
zoning district. It shall be noted that the existing carport currently has a side yard setback
of 5.2 feet. The applicant seeks to preserve the original side yard setback to accommodate
the two-car garage.
(4) The literal interpretation and strict application of the applicable provisions or
requirements of this chapter would cause undue and unnecessary hardship, not merelyimpose a casual/discretionary inconvenience upon the applicant or his/her assigns; and 1
3 S t a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o
n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y
a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 ' t o 5 . 2
' )
(5) Th t d i ld b i t t ith th i it d f thi h t
E.6.a
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
(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 no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Board vote in favor of the requested variance and suggests the following
condition(s):
1. Development of the subject property shall occur in accordance with the site plan submittedon March 4, 2014 to the Community Development Department.
1 3 S t a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o
n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y
a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 ' t o 5 . 2
' )
E . 6 . b
P a c k e t P g .
4 4 8
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 ' t o 5 . 2 ' )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 3 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 3 : M i c h a l e n e a n d G e r a l d D o n e g a n - R e d u c e S i d e Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 ' t o 5 . 2 ' )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Request: To reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 15 feet for a deck
addition; to reduce the setback of an accessory structure from 10 feet
to 3 feet.
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting two variances associated with this case as noted:
A. To reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 15 for a deck additionB. To reduce the side yard setback of an accessory structure (fireplace) from 10 feet to 3 feet
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSISThe subject property exists as an interior lot along the east side of Coosawattee Drive,approximately 100 feet north of its intersection with Tugaloo Drive. The subject parcel is 0.138
acres or 6,001 square feet. The current zoning of this property is R-A8 (Single Family Residential)
District.
The rear end of the existing principal structure currently abuts the rear yard setback. The existing
wood deck encroaches into the minimum rear yard setback by 9 feet. The applicant desires to
lower the existing wooden deck and construct an outdoor fireplace. An expansion in the existingfootprint of the wooden deck is requested to allow proper accessibility to the new fireplace. The
applicant seeks to add four (4) additional steps to the lowered deck in order to expand the deck out
further by a maximum of 6 feet towards the rear yard setback. The applicant has requested avariance to reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 15 feet for the purpose of expanding the
wooden deck. A second variance is requested to reduce the accessory structure setback for an
outdoor fireplace (accessory structure) from 10 feet to 3 feet, per the site plan received by Staff onMarch 4, 2014. The correct reduction in the setback for the fireplace would appear to be 4 feet
and not 3 feet. The proposed square footage of the added deck and new fireplace is 142 square
feet.
The expansion of the wooden deck and addition of the fireplace (accessory structure) on the subjecta
f f m e m o ( 1 3
2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a
n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d
u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
f r o m 3 0 ? t o 1 5 ? f o r D e c k A
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
i t t d f thi h t d th h i l t t Th Z i B d f A l
E.7.a
A d d i t i o n
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
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:There does not appear to be a reason relating to the narrowness, shallowness or shape of
the lot, which would preclude the construction of a deck and an accessory structure
(fireplace). The proposal to construct the fireplace in the southwest portion of the propertyis resulting in a variance created by the applicant. There appears to be other area in the
rear yard wherein an accessory structure could be built without a variance.
(2) The requested variance does not go beyond the minimum necessary to afford relief, anddoes 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:
Based upon the applicant’s request to enlarge the existing deck, the variance request is the
minimum to afford relief as the rear yard is constrained by the 15-foot sanitary sewer
easement. There is additional area available in the rear yard to locate a fireplace withouta need for a variance. Therefore the request goes beyond the minimum necessary to afford
relief and may grant a special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon other
properties in the zoning district in which the subject property is located.
(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:
The granting of the reduction in the rear yard setback for the deck expansion would notappear to be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements
a f f m e m o ( 1 3
2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a
n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d
u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
f r o m 3 0 ? t o 1 5 ? f o r D e c k A
(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
E.7.a
A d d i t i o n
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
impose a casual/discretionary inconvenience upon the applicant or his/her assigns; and
Staff Comment:
Application of the minimum rear yard setback may cause an unnecessary hardship by not
allowing the expansion of the deck in the area of the existing deck. However, the literalinterpretation and application of the applicable provisions for the accessory structure
would merely impose an inconvenience as an alternative location is available in the rear
yard for the construction of a fireplace without a variance.
(5) The requested variance would be consistent with the spirit and purpose of this chapterand the DeKalb County Comprehensive Plan text.
Staff Comment:
The requested variances would have no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board vote in favor of the variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 30feet to 15 feet.
Staff recommends the Board vote to deny the reduction of the accessory structure setback from 10
feet to 3 feet.
The following condition is recommended:
1. Development of the lot shall occur in accordance with the site plan submitted March 4,
2014 to the Community Development Department.
a f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a
n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d
u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 3 0 ? t o 1 5 ? f o r D e c k
E . 7 . b
P a c k e t P g .
4 6 7
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : S i t e p l a n 2 ( 1 3 2 4 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 4 : R y a n a n d I r i n a C o n n e l l y - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 3 0 ? t o 1 5 ? f o r D e c k A d d i t i o n a n d R )
E.8
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Request: A variance to reduce the stream buffer requirement from 75 feet to 50
feet for construction of a single family home with a screened porch and
deck.
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting a variance associated with this case as noted:
A. To reduce the stream buffer requirement from 75 feet to 50 feet for construction of ascreened porch and deck.
The stream buffer application was received after the stream buffer moratorium was lifted and priorto the adoption of the amended ordinance on March 25, 2014. Therefore, review of this requestfalls under the previous ordinance. In that regard, the Director opted not to consider the request
administratively which is construed as a denial and therefore defaults to the ZBA for consideration.
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSISThe subject property exists as an interior lot along the north side of East Osborne Road,
approximately 300 feet west of its intersection with Camille Drive and approximately 550 feet east
of the intersection with Green Meadows Lane. The subject property is rectangular in shape andhas approximately 65 feet of street frontage along East Osborne Road. The centerline of a creek
serves as the rear property line for the subject property.
There is an existing single family home on the parcel. The lot size of the subject property is 0.28
acres or 12,220 square feet. The current zoning of this property is R-75 (Single Family Residential)
District.
The applicant proposes to construct a single family dwelling to be situated approximately 34.2 feetfrom the property line. The proposed house will be 3,227 square feet and include a screen porch
and deck with a lot coverage of 30.28%. It is evident from the applicant’s site plan that themajority of the proposed screen porch and a portion of the deck is expected to be located within
a f f m e m o ( 1
3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h
R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m
B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
t o C o n s t r u c t a S i n g l e F
Protection Division (EPD) pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-2-8. This first twenty five (25) feet adjacent
to the stream is the purview of the EPD and has not been requested. (The pertinent Land
Development Regulations which include stream buffers for the City of Brookhaven fall under the provisions of DeKalb County’s Development Code (Chapter 14), as adopted by City of
E.8.a
a m i l y H o m e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
The following criteria shall be considered in evaluating the stream buffer variance request:(A) The request will be protective of natural resources and the environment as would a plan
which met the strict application of these requirements. In making such a judgment, the
Board shall examine whether the request will be at least as protective of the naturalresources and the environment with regard to the following factors:
1. Stream bank or soil stabilization;
2. Trapping of sediment in surface runoff;
3. Removal of nutrients, heavy metals, pesticides and other pollutants from surface runoff;4. Terrestrial habitat, food chain, and migration corridor;
5. Buffering of flood flows; and
6. Infiltration of surface runoff.
Staff Comment:
According to the stream buffer variance requested, the applicant agrees to the following:
1. No disturbance within the stream bank. Additionally, soil stabilization will be conducted
on the property, as per the manual for Erosion and Sedimentation Control in Georgia;
2. Double silt fence will be utilized on the site;3. Proper erosion control for trapping of nutrients, heavy metals, pesticides and other
pollutants from the surface runoff;
4. N/A – No terrestrial habitat, food chain or migration corridor exists on the site;
5. No flood zone area, per FEMA Map # 13089C00525 dated 5/16/2013; and6. Proper erosion control for infiltration and surface runoff.
(B) By reason of exceptional topographic or other relevant physical conditions of the subject property that were not created by the owner or applicant, there is no opportunity for any
development under any design configuration unless a variance is granted.
Staff Comment:
Approximately 51% of the site is covered by the undisturbed buffer on the rear of the subject property, which is a relevant physical condition. However, a different design may be possible with
less encroachment.
a f f m e m o ( 1
3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h
R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m
B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
t o C o n s t r u c t a S i n g l e F
ability to construct a home with an alternative footprint on the site to be compliant with the stream
buffer that may not deprive the property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property
owners in the area. However, this would require the applicant to construct a home that is less
than 3,200 square feet. According to the applicant’s letter of intent, to build a new home
bl di i ld i h d
E.8.a
F a m i l y H o m e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
comparable to surrounding new properties would require a home as proposed.
(D) The grant of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare orinjurious to the property or improvements in the area in which the property is located.
Staff Comment:Staff would recognize that the subject property presents environmental challenges associated with
the stream buffer. Given appropriate mitigation and recommended conditions, granting a variance
to the stream buffer would not appear to be detrimental to the public welfare of the area.
According to the site plan, vegetation is evident within the proposed footprint of the house and
screen porch. The existing site analysis shows 22” and 13” hardwood s that could possibly be
impacted within the 75-foot stream buffer.
(E) The literal interpretation and strict application of the applicable provisions or requirements
of Chapter 14 would cause an extreme hardship, provided the hardship was not created bythe owner.
Staff Comment:
Staff would recognize that the subject property presents environmental challenges associated withthe stream buffer not created by the owner. There may be potential for a home with an alternative
footprint to be built outside of the stream buffer.
RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Board vote in favor of the requested variance with the following
condition(s):
1. Development of the subject property shall occur in accordance with the site plan
submitted on March 4, 2014 to the Community Development Department.
a f f m e m o ( 1
3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h
R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m
B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
t o C o n s t r u c t a S i n g l e
E . 8 . b
P a c k e t P g .
4 8 4
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 '
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S i n g l e F a m i l y H o m e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S i n g l e F a m i l y H o m e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 5 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 5 : R a l p h R e i l l y - R e d u c e S t r e a m B u f f e r f r o m 7 5 ' t o 5 0 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S i n g l e F a m i l y H o m e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
ISSUE/AGENDA ITEM TITLE:ZBA14-16: Rockhaven Homes LLC - Reduce Rear Yard Setback from 40' to 20' to Construct a
Single Family Home - 1290 Oaklawn Avenue
BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: Please see attached files.
FISCAL IMPACT: (Budgeted – over or under)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Please see attached files.
ATTACHMENTS:
ZBA 14-16 Staff memo (DOCX)
ZBA14-16 application (PDF)
ZBA14-16 site plan (PDF)
E . 9 . a
P a c k e t P g .
4 9
7
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 s i t e p l a n ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Request: To reduce the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 20 feet for the
construction of a single family residential home.
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting a variance associated with this case as noted:
A. To reduce the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 20 feet for the construction of a singlefamily residential home (Section 27-196 (e).
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSISThe subject property is located at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Oaklawn Avenue
and Apple Valley Road. The property is zoned R-75 (Single Family Residential District) and is
located in the Brookhaven-Peachtree Overlay District. The subject parcel totals 0.23 acres (9,904
square feet). The existing parcel has approximately 105 feet of street frontage along Apple ValleyRoad and 68 feet of street frontage along Oaklawn Avenue. The applicant seeks to construct a
two-story “Glenwood” style home with a width of 31 feet and depth of 66 feet. The proposed area
for the primary structure is identified as 4,092 square feet.
The applicant is seeking to demolish an existing home and re-construct a larger home on the subject
property. The new single family structure proposes a 20-foot encroachment to the rear yard
setback. The applicant seeks to reduce the minimum rear yard setback from 40 feet to 20 feet.
CRITERIA TO BE USED BY THE BOARD
The applicant seeks a variance to a development standard. Consideration of this request should bemade under the terms of the following criteria, found in the City Zoning Ordinance:
No relief may be granted or action taken under the terms of this division unless such relief can begranted 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 Appealsshall 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:f f
m e m o ( 1
3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c
k f r o m 4 0 ' t o 2 0 '
Staff Comment:
The building envelope as the result of required setbacks does not create exceptional shape for
the lot. The requested building footprint that has been created by the owner or applicant results
in an encroachment into the rear yard setback which may not be necessary. The strict
application of the requirements of this chapter may not deprive the property owner of rightsand privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district.
E.9.c
0 ' t o C o n
s t r u c t a S i n g l e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
(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 to reduce the rear yard setback appears to go beyond the minimumnecessary to afford relief and may grant a special privilege inconsistent with other propertieswithin the zoning district.
(3) The grant of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare orinjurious to the property or improvements in the zoning district in which the subject
property is located;
Staff Comment:The granting of this variance request maybe materially detrimental to the public welfare in
that there appears a sizable home could be built within the established building envelope.
(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 applicable provisions of this chapter
may not cause undue or unnecessary hardship to the applicant but may merely impose aninconvenience as an alternative building footprint could be reconfigured to comply with the
requirements of the setbacks.
(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 no impact on the terms of the Comprehensive Plan.
f f m e m o ( 1 3 2 6 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 6 : R o c k h a v e n H o m e s L L C - R e d u c e R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c
k f r o m 4 0 ' t o 2 0
MEMORANDUM
MEETING OF: April 16, 2014
COMMITTEE: Zoning Board of Appeals
E.10
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
Request: To reduce the front yard setback from 109.4 feet to 76.6 feet for the
addition of a front entry staircase to a new single family structure.
DESCRIPTIONThe applicant is requesting a variance associated with this case as noted:
To reduce the front yard setback from 109.4 feet to 76.6 feet for the addition of a frontentry staircase to a new single family structure (Section 27-788).
SITE PLAN AND SITE ANALYSIS
The property is zoned R-100 (Single family residential district). The lot on which the proposedhome to be built totals 0.457 acres (19,940 square feet) and has 100 feet of street frontage along
Oak Forest Drive. The lot is rectangular in shape and exists as a legal conforming lot of record.
The parcel appears to be steep and heavily wooded with an existing residential structure locatedon site.
The applicant seeks a variance for a front entry staircase to be located 76.6 feet from the front property line, in lieu of the required 109.4 feet. The applicant was originally granted a variance to
reduce the front yard setback form 109.4 feet to 89 feet.
The proposed single family structure is approximately 50 feet deep, excluding the front and rear porches. The proposed front porch is 8 feet deep with an uncovered attached staircase that is 12.5
feet deep. The rear porch adds an additional 12 feet in overall building depth. The total building
depth of the single family structure is 82.5 feet.
The new single family structure with the staircase proposes a 32.8-foot encroachment to the
average front yard setback. The applicant seeks to encroach into the front yard setback an
additional 12.4 feet from the approved variance.
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 City Zoning Ordinance:7
S t a f f m e m
o ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N
e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u
c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k
f r o m 1 0 9 . 4
' t o 7
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 ownerof rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district;
Staff Comment:
The topography of the site slopes upward approximately 22 feet from the front of thet t th t f th d f t t t i Gi thi diti t ti
E.10.a
7 6 . 6
' t o C o n s t r u c t a
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
property to the top of the proposed front entry staircase. Given this condition, not granting
the variance request may create conditions that would preclude construction of a front
entry staircase depriving the property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district.
2. The requested variance does not go beyond the minimum necessary to afford relief, anddoes 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: Based on the design of the home, it appears that the requested variance is the minimum
required to complete the project. According to the site plan, the proposed location of the
front entry staircase to the new structure will be setback 76.6 feet from the front property
line. Staff would note that more shallow setbacks exist along the block. This is evident at4165 and 4211 Oak Forest Drive where setbacks are approximately 70 feet; thus, the
granting of the variance will not constitute a special privilege.
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 Comments:
The granting of this variance may not be materially detrimental to the public welfare as
the front entry staircase provides an aesthetic entryway for the home.
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 acasual/discretionary inconvenience upon the applicant or his/her assigns; and
Staff Comment: The strict application of this provision of the code may cause an undue hardship due to theexisting topography of the site.
7 S t a f f m e m
o ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N
e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u
c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k
f r o m 1 0 9 . 4
' t o
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board vote in favor of the request for reduction of the front yard setbackwith the following condition(s):
1. Development of the subject property shall occur in accordance with the site plan
submitted on March 4, 2014 to the Community Development Department.
E.10.a
7 6 . 6
' t o C o n s t r u c t a
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 a p p l i c a t i o n ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)
A t t a c h m e n t : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 s i t e p l a n s ( 1 3 2 7 : Z B A 1 4 - 1 7 : N e l s o n C o n s u n j i - R e d u c e F r o n t Y a r d S e t b a c k f r o m 1 0 9 . 4 ' t o 7 6 . 6 ' t o C o n s t r u c t a S t a i r c a s e )
8/15/2019 2014-04-16 Zoning Board of Appeals - Full Agenda-1181 (1)