Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BoZA - 02/16/2021 AGENDA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS February 16, 2020 6:00pm CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Zoom Meeting ID: 996 2477 4934 One tap mobile +19292056099,,99624774934#,,,,*556843# US (New York) +13017158592,,99624774934#,,,,*556843# US (Washington D.C) 1. Call to order 2. Roll call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Approval/Amendment of Agenda 5. Approval of December meeting minutes 6. Consideration of Primary Variances a. V20-27, 770 Cooper Sandy Cove Deferred from last month Request(s): • To allow the lot coverage for an AG-1 zoned property that fronts a public street to go from 20 percent to 25 percent. (Sec. 64-1141, (d) (1)(b)) The following Items will not be heard before 6:15 PM b. V20-28, 13230 Providence Road Deferred from last month Request(s): • To allow the lot coverage for an AG-1 zoned property that fronts a public street to go from 20 percent to 25 percent. (Sec. 64-1141, (d) (1)(b)) c. V21-01, 210 Pinehurst Walk Withdrawn Request(s): • To encroach into 25-foot City’s undisturbed buffer and 25-foot City impervious setback for the construction of pool and pool deck. (Sec 20-426(1) and (2)) d. V21-02, 13195 Freemanville Road Request(s): • To allow a new barn to be located less than 200 feet from the property lines (Sec. 64-461 (1)(b)) • To allow the new barn to be located in the front yard of the property (Sec 64-462 (i)) The following Items will not be heard before 6:45 PM e. V21-03, 960 Landrum Road Request(s): • To allow the pool to be located within the front yard (Sec 64-1609, (b)(1)) • To allow the cabana to be located in the front yard. (Sec 64-416 (i)) f. V21-04, 910 Nix Road Request(s): • To allow existing barn (not housing animals) to remain in the front yard (sec 64-416 (i)) • To allow the existing barn to encroach into the front yard setback (Sec. 64-416 (b)) The following Items will not be heard before 7:15 PM g. V21-05, 14500 Wood road Request(s): • To allow the existing garage and the barn (not housing animals) to encroach into the side setback as shown on the survey issued 12-16- 2020. (Sec 64-416 (c)(1)) 7. Consideration of Appeals/Secondary Variances 8. Old business 9. New business a. Vote for the 2021 Board of Zoning Appeal Chair and Vice Chair 10. Adjournment ACTION REPORT BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS December 15, 2020 6:00pm CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/97435734789 1. Call to order 2. Roll call Members Present: Kim Keller, Todd Chernik, Brenda Hamstead, Hodge Patel, Jake Ward, 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Approval/Amendment of Agenda Motion to Approve: Todd Chernik 2nd: Brenda Hamstead Vote: 5-0 5. Approval of November meeting minutes Motion to Approve: Todd Chernik 2nd: Hodge Patel Vote: 5-0 6. Consideration of Primary Variances a. V20-24, 795 Colonial Lane Request(s): • To allow an addition on a single-family dwelling to encroach into the rear yard setback. (Sec 64-416(d)) Motion to Approve with two conditions: Jake Ward 2nd: Todd Chernik Vote:5-0 Condition 1: Site plan dated 11/14/ 20 Condition 2: Elevations A1 and A2 dated 9/9/2020 The following Items will not be heard before 6:15 PM b. V20-25, 14102 Seabiscuit Request(s): • To allow a pool, pool deck, and pool equipment to encroach into the fifty-foot undisturbed buffer and seventy-five-foot impervious setback without two conditions set by the BZA in V20-13. (Sec. 20- 426 (1)(2)) Motion to Approve the removal of two prior conditions as per revised site plan dated 12/2/2020: Brenda Hamstead 2nd: Jake Ward Vote: 5-0 c. V20-26, 660 Glendalough Court Request(s): • To allow an accessory structure to encroach into the side yard setback. (Sec 64-416,(i)) Motion to Approve with three conditions: Todd Chernik 2nd: Hodge Patel Vote: 5-0 Condition 1: Site plan dated 7/8/20 Condition 2: Elevation dated 7/8/20 Condition 3: Plant additional trees as approved by the City Arborist The following Items will not be heard before 6:45 PM d. V20-27, 770 Cooper Sandy Cove Request(s): • To allow the lot coverage for an AG-1 zoned property that fronts a public street to go from 20 percent to 25 percent. (Sec. 64-1141, (d) (1)(b)) Motion to Accept the deferral: Todd Chernik 2nd: Hodge Patel Vote: 5-0 e. V20-28, 13230 Providence Road Request(s): • To allow the lot coverage for an AG-1 zoned property that fronts a public street to go from 20 percent to 25 percent. (Sec. 64-1141, (d) (1)(b)) Motion to defer: Todd Chernik 2nd: Hodge Patel Vote: 5-0 5-minute break Motion to reduce the break to 5 minutes: Todd Chernik 2nd: Brenda Hamstead Vote: 5-0 The following Items will not be heard before 7:15 PM f. V20-31, 15590 Birmingham Highway Request(s): • To allow an existing guest house to be located in the front yard. (Sec. 64-1598 (b)(5)) Motion to approve per site plan 10/26/2020: Hodge Patel 2nd: Todd Chernik Vote: 5-0 g. V20-32, 214 Fossil Trace Request(s): • To allow a pool, pool deck, and pool equipment to be located in the front yard. (Sec. 64-1609 (b)(1)) Motion to Approve per site plan 10/30/2020: Jake Ward 2nd: Todd Chernik Vote: 5-0 The following Items will not be heard before 7:30 PM 7. Consideration of Appeals/Secondary Variances a. V20-33, 15255 Birmingham Highway Request(s): • To appeal the rejection of the Community Development Director’s decision denying the acceptance of a building permit. (Sec. 64-2426 (3) a.) Motion to Reverse the Community Development Director’s decision in whole and to allow development: Todd Chernik 2nd: Jake Ward Vote: 5-0 8. Old business 9. New business a. 2021 Board of Zoning Appeal Meeting Schedule Motion to Approve the meeting schedule: Todd Chernik 2nd: Brenda Hamstead Vote: 5-0 10. Adjournment Motion to Adjourn: Todd Chernik 2nd: Jake Ward Vote: 5-0 Page 1 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 PETITION NUMBER: V20-27 PROPERTY INFORMATION 770 Cooper Sandy Cove DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 891, 910 OVERLAY DISTRICT Rural Milton EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 1.02 Acres EXISTING USE Single Family Residence FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Agricultural Equestrian, Estate Residential REQUESTED VARIANCES: • To allow the lot coverage for an AG-1 zoned property that fronts a public street to go from 20 percent to 25 percent. (Sec. 64-1141 (d) (1)(b)) PETITIONER/OWNER Jon P. and Heather A. Duvall ADDRESS 770 Cooper Sandy Cove Milton GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE Jon P. and Heather A. Duvall ADDRESS 770 Cooper Sandy Cove Milton GA 30004 Page 2 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: Shubha Jangam 678.242.2539 Background: The site is a 1.02-acre lot located on the north side of Cooper Sandy Cove. This property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay District. The final plat for the property was approved in 1997. As per Sec. 64-1141 (d) (1)(b) lot coverage for each individual lot zoned AG-1 shall not exceed 20 percent for lots that front on public streets. The current impervious coverage on the lot is 21 percent (Exhibit A). The applicant is requesting to build a pool and deck in the rear yard that would increase the impervious coverage from 21 percent to 23.47 percent. Therefore, this variance is requested. The applicant worked with the City staff to reduce the proposed footprint as requested by the DRB. Exhibit A shows the former plan that proposed lot coverage of 24.72 percent. Exhibit B shows the closeup of pervious pavers design around the pool after the meeting with staff. Lot coverage is defined in the Zoning Ordinance as the following: Lot coverage means the percentage of impervious surfaces located on a lot in comparison to the total lot area, calculated by dividing impervious surface area by total lot area. For purposes of calculating lot coverage, impervious surfaces shall include the following: (1) The footprint of the main building regardless of size; (2) The total footprints of any accessory buildings larger than 150 square feet; (3) Swimming pools, hot tubs, and associated decks and; (4) Parking pads and driveways. This application was deferred in December to update the property survey. However, no discrepancy was found in the old survey according to the applicant. The new site plan submitted is shown in Exhibit C with a revised fence layout. The applicant has incorporated some pervious pavers around the pool so now the total proposed lot coverage is 23.47 percent. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On November 3, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comment: • Work with the city staff to reduce the impervious lot coverage. Page 4 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Standards for Consideration: The approval of a variance is based on the following consideration(s): • Relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance. • There are such extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship due to size, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions not caused by the variance applicant. • Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties. • That the public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done. The applicant response: • Please see the letter of appeal. The staff response: • Part one: The existing lot coverage is already beyond the limit (21 percent) the owner cannot add a pool without this variance. The proposed addition was 3.72 percent which is reduced to 2.47 percent after meeting with staff. This is the lowest increase in the lot coverage and closer to required 20 percent, therefore would not offend the spirit of the Ordinance. • Part two: The homes built in this subdivision have larger footprints and spacious driveways. The owner purchased the house around the time when the changes in lot coverage were made in Milton. The strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship; therefore, this relief should be provided. • Part three: Relief, if granted would not cause a detriment to the surrounding properties when water quality and runoff is addressed through landscaping. • Part four: The public safety, health and welfare are secured, and substantial justice is done by allowing a minimal increase to the lot coverage. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends Approval of the variance with a condition to incorporate Modified French Drain or flow-well system to control the water runoff as approved by the Community Development Department. Page 5 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Letter of Appeal Page 6 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit A Page 7 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 n Exhibit B Page 8 of 8 V20-27 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit C Shubhan i Jan am From: Nandie Gibbons <nandiegibbons@atlantafinehomes.com> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2021 12:25 PM To: Shubhangi Jangam Subject: The Board of Zoning Appeals CAUTION. This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Good day, I'm writing this letter in support of my neighbors, A & Heather Duvall residing at 770 Cooper Sandy Cove, Alpharetta, 30004. It is my understanding that they are trying to put in a pool on their property but are having issues due to the variance going from 21-23%. Seeing that a large part of their property is at the front of their house, it does not leave an alternative but to ask for the variance. Our subdivision does not have a pool, so installing a pool would not only increase the value of their property but also the value of the subdivision, (majority of the houses in our subdivision have pools). As a realtor myself, I see the increase in demand for houses with pools every day! Please let me Know if you have any questions at all. Nandie Gibbons ATLANTA FINE HOMES SOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL REALTY 1125 Sanctuary Parkway, Suite 400, Alpharetta, Georgia 30009 c. 770.880.1892 n, 770.442.7300 F. 770.821.1486 nand iegibbons@atlantafinehomes.com atlantatineliomes.SL9lg I sothebysreaity.cs m Please Exercise Caution: Wire fraud, email hacking and phishing attacks are on the rise! Email is neither secure nor confidential. If you receive an email from anyone concerning any transaction involving Atlanta Fine Homes Sotheby's International Realty requesting you to wire funds anywhere or asking you to provide nonpublic personal information (such as credit or debit card numbers, or bank account or bank routing numbers) by unsecured return email, NEVER respond to the message even if it appears to be sent by our company. Instead, immediately call your real estate agent and report the suspicious activity by email1ng fraud@atlantafinehomes.com or tailing 404-237-5000. ALWAYS confirm wire transfer instructions by phone to a known number before sending any funds. If the disclaimer can't be applied, attach the message to a new disclaimer message. Shubhan i Jan am From: mcgruderlaw@bellsouth.net Sent: Monday, .February 8, 2021 1:02 PM To:: Shubhangi Jan.gam Subject: Milton BZA / Duvall Variance Request CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown. senders. bear Ms. Jangam, 1 am writing this letter in supporL of the va.ria.nce req uest .byJJ and Heather Duvall far property located at 770 Cooper .Sandy Cove;. Alpharetta, GA 30004. My husband and I. are both real estate attorneys and neighbors of the ❑uvaIIs. They have a lovely well-maintained residence in a neighborhood that does not o.ffer.a community pool as an amenity. Accordingly, most houses in Cooper Sandy Lakes have private pools. It.would be a shame for the DuvaIIs to not.be alaie to fully enjoy their property hecause of the relatively new ordinance which wouldprohibit them from going from 21% hardcover to 2330. If the variarice is granted, it would not cause a substantial -detriment to the public good and surrounding properties.. Rather, it would increase the value of the Duvall residence, thus increasing the value of all. house in the neighborhood and serving to increase the City of Milton's tax receipts. Further, the granting of this variance will not. affect the pu blic. safety, health or welfare and justice will not be done by disallowing this minor variance required to allow the Duvall family to fully enjoy their property. Finally; I cannot imagine haw the spirit 0 intent of the ordinance would: be..offend.e.d. b.ythis small.increase. Thank you so much for taking the_ time.to.readthis letter of support. Sincerely, Amy Major McGruder The McGruder Law Firm LLC. (404.) 210-14.22 Shubhangi Jangam From.: Julie Colich <juliecolich@,gmailxom�- Sent: Thursday, February 11,.2021 1:37 PM "To..: Shubhangi.Jangam Subject: Board of. Zoning Appeals - Case# V20-27, 770 Cooper Sandy Cove CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or cricking finks, especially from unknown senders. To Whom It.May Concern, My name is Julie Colich and 1 live at 760 Cooper Sandy Cove, I have. lived here about five years. My neighbors, the Duvall's are requesting to increase their lot coverage from 20% to 23.479'0, f am. writing to the Board. of:zoning Appeals today.to support the requested change. l believe that..the addition► of the pool will increase home values in the neighborhood.. Many of the homes in.our neighborhood and similar.neighborhoods have pools. Much of the lot coverageis due to the home being set back on the lot which requires long driveways. it is.only a. small increase in coverage and is sim€lar to other homes in the neighborhood. 1 don't believe if the req uest. is. granted that. it would offend the spirit or intent of the ordinance as there is still ample green. space in the front, side:and. backyard. I hope the Board will approve the. requested change. Siricerely, Julie Colich 760. Cooper Sandy Cave Milton; GA 30004 1872-C. INDEPENDENCE SQUARE DUNWOODY, GEORGIA 30338 Douglas R. Thompson, Esq. Katie L. Walters, Esq. City of Milton Attn: Sudie Gordon, Clerk 2006 Heritage Walk Milton, Georgia 30004 DOUGLAS R. THOMPSON, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW November 12, 2020 Via: Email: Sudie.gordonln.cityofrniltonga.us PHONE (770) 396-3661 FAX (770) 396-3896 Website: DougThompsonLaw.com Email: Doug@DougThompsonLaw.com Katie@DougThompsonlaw.com Ms. Gordon, Please date stamp a copy of this letter and return it to me via email at the following address: doug@dougthompsonlaw.com Also To: Board of Zoning Appeals Members: Todd Chemik, Chair: Todd.chernickgcitvofmiltonga.us Jake Ward: Jake.ward&cityofmiltonga.us Jason Cole: Jason.cole!kcitvofiniltonea.us Hodge Patel: Hod e.uateIggityofmilton a.us Brenda Hamstead: Brenda.hamsteadgeitvofiniltonga.us Kim Keller: Kim.keller@citvofiniltonga.us Don Curt: Don. curtna cityofrniltonga.us RE: Case #: V20-27, 770 Cooper Sandy Cove Applicants: JP and Heather Duvall Hearing Date: November 17, 2020 Dear Board of Zoning Appeals Members: I am an attorney who has been retained by James J. Robinette to assist him with presenting his objection to the above -noted variance request by JP and Heather Duvall regarding their proposed construction of a pool, spa, and deck at 770 Cooper Sandy Cove. My client, Mr. Robinette, and his wife reside at 780 Cooper Sandy Cove, which is next door to the east side of the Duvall's property. Mr. Robinette received the attached Application For Modification, which was provided to him by The Lake at Cooper Sandy Homeowners Association, Inc. (the "ACC"). The Application information consisted of the following: ■ Two-page Application For Modification Form, as submitted to the ACC; ■ "Hello neighbor" appeal letter from JP and Heather Duvall, requesting signatures from nearby neighbors in support of their variance request; ■ Written proposal from Hilltop Pools for the proposed pool, spa, and deck; ■ A dimensioned plan of the proposed pool, spa, and deck; ■ An aerial photo of the cul-de-sac, showing the location of the Duvall property; ■ A site plan of the Duvall's property prepared by Hilltop Pools, showing the placement of the pool, spa, and deck, along with what appear to be fences and retaining walls; and ■ Notice from the City of Milton of the appeals hearing before the Board Of Zoning Appeals (`BZA") on November 17, 2020. Per the attached notice from the City of Milton, the Duvalls are requesting a variance of the Zoning Code for AG -1 properties (the "Code") "to allow the lot coverage for an AG -1 zoned property that fronts a public street to go from 20% to 25% (Sec.64-1141, d, 1, b)". My client strongly objects to the City of Milton BZA granting the Duvalls' variance request for the following reasons: 1. Proposed Site Coverage violates the letter and intent of the Code — The intent of the Code for AG -1 residential subdivisions is to provide open landscapes, as unobstructed as possible by buildings and hardscape features. The D"'s lot is one of the smaller lots in the Cooper Sandy Cove cul-de-sac. The lot is 7,500 square feet smaller than the average lot size of the adjacent properties on the same side of the street (750, 760, 780 and 790) and is almost 2 %2 acres smaller than the average lot size of the three lots immediately across the street (815, 825 and 835). In addition, the contiguous portion of the Duvall's lot is even smaller, due to the lot area contained within the triangular appendage* in the northwest corner, which comprises almost 6% of the lot. Allowing an additional 5% of site coverage on this particular lot will crowd the site, in violation of the letter and intent of the Code. * Note that in 2007, the area of the triangular shaped appendage, together with a narrow strip of land along one property line, had to be purchased by a previous owner of the Duvalls' lot, in order to increase the lot size. Without this additional area, the lot would not have met the Code's minimum standards of a one -acre of lot size for this zoning designation. The triangular area is low- lying, and unusable for building or a septic drain field. 2. Minimum rear yard is too small for the proposed pool, spa, and deck — The rear yard of the Duvall's lot appears to be close to the 50 -foot minimum required by the Code. Constructing a 19 -foot -wide pool (at its widest), with an additional 20 -foot -wide deck area (10 feet on each side), and locating this approximately 20 feet from the existing house, appears to put the new construction within less than 10 feet from the property line. Crowding this configuration, which contains additional 1,850 square feet of hardscape features into a minimum -sized rear yard is in violation of the letter and intent of the Code. In addition, the location of the proposed pool, spa, deck, piping, and equipment will require coordination with the existing septic tank, piping, and drain field. 3. The proposed Code -required fencing will degrade the view and open space — The attached site plan indicates the installation of a four -foot -height equestrian fence around the pool, spa, deck, walkways, etc. The area enclosed by the fence makes up over 10% of the Duvall's lot area, without even considering that a portion of the lot is not contiguous. This goes against the letter and intent of the Code. 2 4. The proposed pool will provide an attractive nuisance — My client has serious concerns that the Duvalls' installation of the proposed pool, spa and deck will attract even more visitors to the Duvalls' property. According to my client, the Duvalls weekly entertain groups of people, large and small, which result in up to several dozen cars parked in their drive and along the cul-de-sac. The cars parked on the cul-de-sac often block my client's mailbox and partially block his access to his own driveway. In addition, my client is concerned that music and noise from the Duvalls' property will exceed that which is already at what he considers a bothersome level. 5. Lack of clarity of information provided — While the attached information was provided to my client, the small scale, lack of quality and missing information has made it difficult for him to ascertain certain details. The missing and obscured information only increases my client's concern that the proposed installation will have a long-term negative impact. The missing information includes: ■ It is difficult to discern from the three-inch square site plan where the pool equipment (pumps, heaters, if any, back -wash area, etc.) are to be located and whether this equipment will be inside or outside the pool enclosure fence. • It is not clear from the site plan's small scale and generic cross-section drawing how high the retaining walls are to be. These appear to be planned for the west side of the pool, nearest to the spa. ■ The larger, more legible pool, spa, and deck plan does not show equipment, retaining walls, and the relative location of fencing. ■ It does not appear that any of the plans show site lighting. ■ The three-page written proposal from Hilltop Pools is illegible, and therefore difficult to evaluate. Finally, while it is not a zoning issue, my client objects to the Duvalls' including third party information, otherwise known as hearsay, in their Application For Modification to the ACC. It appears that one of the Duvalls wrote that my client's wife did not have a problem with the pool, but that my client did and goes on to mention my client's alleged comments regarding his neighbor on the other side of his property. It is up to my client and his wife to speak for themselves and not for the Duvalls to make public what my client or his wife allegedly said. My client objects to this kind of tactic and will not be intimidated by this level of pressure. My client has the aforementioned specific concerns regarding the Duvalls' proposed installation of a pool, spa, and deck. Mr. Robinette legitimately fears that this project will degrade the value of surrounding properties, including his, and negatively affect his quiet enjoyment of his home. CONCLUSION My client therefore asks the City of Milton BZA to deny the Duvalls' request for a zoning variance. Due to health concerns, my client is unable to attend the November 17, 2020 City of Milton Board Of Zoning Appeals meeting. me. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact Thank you for your attention to this matter. ery s, Douglas R. Thompson DRT:s Attachments Cc: Robert Buscemi, City Architect: Robert.Buscemikcitvofiniltonga.us Robyn MacDonald, City Zoning Manager: Robyn.Macdonaldkcityofiniltonga.us James J. Robinette 0 Page 1 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 PETITION NUMBER: V20-28 PROPERTY INFORMATION 13230 Providence Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 983 OVERLAY DISTRICT Rural Milton EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 1.016 Acres EXISTING USE Residential FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Agricultural, Equestrian, Estate Residential REQUESTED VARIANCE: • To allow the lot coverage for an AG-1 zoned property that fronts a public street to increase from 20 percent to 25 percent. (Sec. 64-1141(d)(1)(b)) PETITIONER/OWNER Mathew and Victoria Titus ADDRESS 13230 Providence Road Milton, GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE Mathew and Victoria Titus ADDRESS 13230 Providence Road Milton, GA 30004 Page 2 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: Shubha Jangam 678.242.2539 Background: The site is a 1.016-acre lot located on the west side of Providence Road. This property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay District. The minor plat for the property was approved in 2008. As per Sec. 64-1141(d)(1)(b)) the lot coverage for each individual lot zoned AG-1 shall not exceed 20 percent for the lots that front on public streets. The current impervious coverage on this lot is at 19.26 percent. The applicant wants to build a pool in the rear yard that would increase the impervious coverage well beyond 20 percent. The applicant has worked with City staff to reduce the proposed footprint. It is still above the permissible limit and so the applicant is requesting a variance. Exhibit A shows the plan submitted by the applicant in October 2020. In November the DRB advised the applicant to work with Milton staff to reduce the lot coverage. The BZA heard the applicant in December and deferred the case to provide the owner more time to seek recommendations and further reduce the impervious area. The staff met with the owner in January and gave following recommendations 1. Reduce the decking area around the pool 2. Use pervious pavers with flow well system around the pool 3. Reduce the driveway coverage by partly removing excess or replacing it with pervious surface 4. Consider reducing scope of the project at this stage, for example fireplace and seating around it can be added later 5. Staff also recommended moving the pool to South a little since it is too close to secondary septic field. Exhibit D shows the septic fields. The applicant came back with a revised plan shown in Exhibit B and Exhibit C. It showed only reduced decking. With this revision the lot coverage was 23 percent. The staff provided more feedback to the applicant after that a new plan was submitted with 21.62 percent of lot coverage. It is shown in Exhibit E. The applicant is now proposing all grass around the pool and the fireplace is removed. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On November 3, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comment: • Work with City staff to reduce the impervious lot coverage. Page 4 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Standards for Consideration: The approval of a variance is based on the following consideration(s): • Relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance. • There are such extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship due to size, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions not caused by the variance applicant. • Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties. • That the public safety, health, and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done. The applicant response: • Please see the letter of appeal. The staff response: • Part one: The home and driveway is already covering more than 19 percent of the lot. The proposed design of a pool and deck was elaborate in the beginning. However, the staff has worked with the applicant to reduce the proposed lot coverage significantly. The proposed lot coverage is very close the acceptable limit. Therefore, it would not offend the Ordinance if the relief is granted. • Part two: The applicant bought this property with a concept pool design shown on the house plans. The house was already built at the maximum lot coverage. The location of this property on Providence Road entails a deeper driveway for the safety. The strict application of the ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship. Therefore, this variance can be granted. • Part three: Relief, if granted would not cause detriment to the surrounding properties because of the runoff would be managed by the landscaping improvements. • Part four: The public safety, health and welfare are secured because the increased lot coverage is minimal. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends Approval of the variance. Page 5 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Letter of Appeal Page 6 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 7 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 8 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit A Page 9 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit B Page 10 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit C Page 11 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit D Page 12 of 12 V20-28 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit E Titus Pool Plans: Neighbor's Consent We have seen the pictures presented. for the Titus family's yard at 1..3230. Providence Rd,. Mifton, GA 30049. As their surrounding neighbors, we approve them. building the pool as designed. PAP, ID: 22.462009830411 =;3 BLUESTEIN LISA KIRSHENBAUM 13220 RRDVIDENCE RD Parcel Sales '...,.: , z� Parcel ID: 22 462009830411 - Property Location: :13220 PROVIDENCE RD Unit: City: MILTON Neighborhood:' 220093 i` Trai�rr...ra rr.o..tr Cfrrifn•' 77 7 zoom to lk .:` .. - ,t _ :..fir y,...;,:' -'•:-"`-:,'.. t:: �x.l � �� _ -_� rar-.: -..ti.r ,.v^ e.;ir � .l t✓ is �:i =:_.:� :,;:;r" �,� _. . ?;x r . v f 3230 PraVidsnce'Rd lVlilion G. ?',o'n'_`:. ..-tom^- ,.,; ..-....r.,.I.•.......�...... ,.:..:.. - .... ....... . .. � ......--moi[-....... r..... ..-.-.�..,........ ...::.. .-. ..::. �.-...... ...-. i. ::� iso?: - 5 F 'r II1• - T 22 _�or�9s3as'so _ ALE P T.I .I{. C A K 1800 PRQVIpt~NCE Parcel Sales LA M1 1'y 1,:1'ViV {Neighborhood: 220091 1 Irnproveinent Strata: R1 = - " Property Class: R4 Lana Use Cgdc 10 3-itcsidcntiAl I fanvl e==:.: .... Living U its: Y Acres: 2.28 �. x• ` Zonine; AGI- IM join to ��'��•• <::;<;<:: rn : J : •�f'�: �S •'i-� � �.:�.:. a i. ,' 'k`i-. ? ITIV PARID: 22 452009830403 € MORGAN CURTIS & 13210 PROVIDENCE RD Parcel Sales : City. MILTON Neighborhood- 220093 Improvement Strata: VA. fi Property Class: R4 Land Use Code: 100 -Residential vacant ng Units: 1 Acres: 4.7 Zoom to x I I 6 v 00 M1 l [I A e3 FI m - f 00 M1 00 a� l... ......... _..._.._. _.... .......... i ... _... _., .. _.. _.......". _.".._......_ _.._."._._.. . f w LQ ti 3o C). . ....... . . .. ... ... 3o C). ' a L w N Q x£ Dx-- i z r 0 0 cn LO0 0 0 3 G) 0 0 0- 0 � wwwr From:deepti sayal To:Christian Wilson; Robert Buscemi; Robyn Macdonald; Shubhangi Jangam; Vikram Sayal Subject:210 Pinehurst walk pool design Date:Thursday, February 4, 2021 1:03:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Robyn, Robert , Shubhangi, Thanks for meeting with us last week and helping us come up with a solution for the pool. We have decided to go with your recommendation for the pool and make it at the place you suggested us . I would like to know what are the next steps involved and if I remember correctly it was mentioned that no variance would be needed if we move the location of pool . Also how soon can I get an approval as my project has already been delayed so much. We greatly appreciate all of your time and input regarding this matter and assisting us in the process. Looking forward to hearing from you and working together. Deepti Sayal 404 838 8884 Page 1 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 PETITION NUMBER: V21-02 PROPERTY INFORMATION 13195 Freemanville Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 988, 1029 OVERLAY DISTRICT Rural Milton EXISTING ZONING R-2 (Residential) ACRES 6.96 EXISTING USE Residential FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Residential REQUESTED VARIANCE: • To allow a new barn to be located less than 200 feet from the property lines (Sec. 64-461 (1)(b)) • To allow the new barn to be located in the front yard of the property (Sec. 64- 462 (i)) PETITIONER/OWNER Walter Behrman ADDRESS 13195 Freemanville Road Milton, GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE Walter Behrman ADDRESS 13195 Freemanville Road Milton, GA 30004 Page 2 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: Shubha Jangam 678.242.2539 Background: The site is a 6.96 acre lot located on the east side of Freemanville Road. This property is zoned R-2 (Residential) and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay District. This property is a flag lot with minimum required 35 feet of road frontage. Exhibit A shows the existing conditions on the subject property. Currently, there is a house with a driveway and a pool. Also, there is an existing patch of plane and cleared ground sprouting from the driveway in the middle of the property. This is the proposed location of a barn that will be housing animals. Per Sec. 64-461 (1)(b) the barn in the R-2 zoning district is required to be located 200 feet from the property line. The proposed barn is located less than 200 feet from the property line on the side and the front. Per Sec. 64-462 (i) the barn can be in the rear or side yard. And this barn is proposed in the front yard. Therefore, these two variances are requested. All the existing structures on this property are in compliance with the Zoning Code. Exhibit B shows the soil and drainage area on the property. It also shows two tennis courts and an addition to the house that the applicant is pursuing separately. The concept look of the barn is presented in Exhibit C. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On January 5, 2021, the DRB met and had the following comment: • DRB recommends approval Page 4 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Standards for Consideration: The approval of a variance is based on the following consideration(s): • Relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance. • There are such extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship due to size, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions not caused by the variance applicant. • Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties. • That the public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done. The applicant response: • Please see the letter of appeal. The staff response: • Part one: For R-2 zoning district the distance of an accessory structure housing animals is required to be a minimum of 200 feet from the property lines. The intent of the 200 feet distance is to allow a sufficient setback from all property lines. Since the neighboring properties are of large sizes, this barn will be more than 200 feet from all surrounding houses at the proposed location. Therefore, the relief if granted would not offend the spirit of the ordinance. • Part two: Although the property is 6.97 acres, there is a waterbody on the east part of the property with the minimum undisturbed buffer requirements. The property is mostly wooded with a few exceptions including the proposed location for the barn. The property itself is less than 400 feet wide. To maintain 200 feet from all property lines is not possible. These conditions not caused by the applicant, creates a hardship therefore this variance can be granted. • Part three: This setback requirement for a barn housing animals in R-2 zone is greater than many surrounding properties that are zoned AG-1, where setback requirement is 100 feet. Relief, if granted would not cause a detriment to the surrounding properties because the proposed site maintains sufficient vegetative buffer. • Part four: The applicant is selecting a spot that was previously cleared, padded and meant for building a structure. The public safety, health and welfare are secured and substantial justice is done by selecting a location that minimizes the further environmental damage. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends approval of the variance with a condition that the barn’s opening to face interior part of the property and not the nearest property line. Page 5 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Letter of Appeal n Page 6 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit A Exhibit B Page 7 of 7 V21-02 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit C Page 1 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 PETITION NUMBER: V21-03 PROPERTY INFORMATION 960 Landrum Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 917, 956 OVERLAY DISTRICT Rural Milton EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 5.5 EXISTING USE Residential FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Agricultural, Equestrian, Estate Residential REQUESTED VARIANCE: • To allow the pool to be located within the front yard (Sec 64-1609, (b)(1)) • To allow the cabana to be located in the front yard. (Sec 64-416 (i)) PETITIONER/OWNER J. Scott McMichael ADDRESS 960 Landrum Road Milton, GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE J. Scott McMichael ADDRESS 960 Landrum Road Milton, GA 30004 Page 2 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: Shubha Jangam 678.242.2539 Background: The site is a 5.5-acre lot located on the north side of Landrum Road. This property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay District. The property is heavily wooded with Cooper Sandy creek as its northern property line. Exhibit A shows the locations of proposed pool and cabana on the property. Exhibit B shows a closeup of the proposed pool and cabana with respect to the house. Exhibit C shows the state water body (Cooper Sandy creek) and the required undisturbed impervious buffer on the property. Per Sec 64-1609, (b)(1) a pool can be located in the rear or side yard. Since the location and the access to the pool is in the front yard this variance is required. Similarly, per Sec 64-416 (i) an accessory structure can be located in the rear or side yard. The proposed cabana is located in the front yard, therefore this variance is required. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On January 5, 2021, the DRB met and had the following comment: • DRB recommends including an areal view showing the wooded site Exhibit D • DRB recommends approval Page 4 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Standards for Consideration: The approval of a variance is based on the following consideration(s): • Relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance. • There are such extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship due to size, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions not caused by the variance applicant. • Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties. • That the public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done. The applicant response: • Please see the letter of appeal. The staff response: • Part one: The intent of the ordinance for allowing pools in the rear or side only is to make the front of the house prominent. The house on this property is shaped in such a way that the main entrance is further away from the front, whereas the garage is projecting towards the front significantly. This has created an additional space that is in front of the main door and side of the garage. The pool and cabana is proposed in this location. The proposed pool and cabana, although in the front, can be hidden from Landrum Road with the existing trees and tactful landscaping. Therefore, relief if granted would not offend the spirit of the Ordinance. • Part two: Although the property contains 5.5 acres Cooper Sandy creek’s required 50- foot undisturbed buffer and 25-foot impervious setback that covers most of the backyard. Part of the backyard close to the house is reserved for the septic systems. The applicant has made an attempt to avoid these areas and so there is very limited area left for building a pool. These exceptional situations or conditions commend that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship. Therefore, the variance can be granted. • Part three: Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties with the proper screening and lighting. • Part four: The public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done by avoiding the undisturbed buffers in the backyard. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends approval of the variance with the following conditions o Landscaping for screening to be approved by the City Arborist. o Pool barrier to be installed with 4-board equestrian-fence. o Lighting at the pool and cabana to comply with the Night Sky Ordinance. Page 5 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Letter of Appeal Page 6 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 7 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 8 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 9 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit A Page 10 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit B Page 11 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 n Exhibit C Page 12 of 12 V21-03 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit D City of Milton Design Review Board Board of Zoning Appeals Milton, GA 30004 This letter is intended to support the McMichael’s Variance requests for the installation of their pool project at 960 Landrum Road. As a neighbor, we appreciate the thoughtful pool design – both from an aesthetic and environmental view point. The plan, as presented, is low key and unobtrusive while complimenting the natural landscape. In harmony, Paul and Michele Gallagher 790 Landrum Rd Milton Ga 30004 Page 1 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 PETITION NUMBER: V21-04 PROPERTY INFORMATION 910 Nix Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 452, 485 OVERLAY DISTRICT Rural Milton EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 3.04 EXISTING USE Residential FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Agricultural, Equestrian, Estate Residential REQUESTED VARIANCE: • To allow existing barn (not housing animals) to remain in the front yard (sec 64-416 (i)) • To allow the existing barn to encroach into the front yard setback (Sec. 64-416 (b)) PETITIONER/OWNER Andrew & Vado Enterprise LLC (Antonio Vado) ADDRESS 15965 Freemanville Road Milton, GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE Andrew & Vado Enterprise LLC (Antonio Vado) ADDRESS 15965 Freemanville Road Milton, GA 30004 Page 2 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: Shubha Jangam 678.242.2539 Background: The site is a 3.04-acre lot located on the west side of Birmingham Highway and north side of Nix Road. This property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay District. The property was part of subdivision that created three lots in 2019. The property is currently being accessed from Nix Road. Per Sec. 64-416 (i), a barn not housing animals can be in the rear or side yard. And per Sec. 64-416 (b) an accessory structure can not be in the setback. This barn existed on the property before subdividing in 2019. The property is being considered for further development and requires bringing all existing structures in compliance before obtaining any new permit. The applicant wish to keep the barn instead of removing it. As per the plat this barn is not only in the front yard but also within the 60-foot front yard setback. Therefore, these two variances are requested. Exhibit A shows the subject property with adjacent two lots created with the platting process. It also shows the location of this barn (marked, to be demolished) as well as an old house that has been demolished last year with the DRB approval. The applicant wants to continue using the accessory structure as storage. Exhibit B shows the picture of this barn. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On February 2, 2021, the DRB met and had the following comment: • DRB recommends getting letters of support from the neighbors. • DRB recommends showing pictures of the barn as seen from Birmingham Highway and Nix Road. • DRB recommends approval. Page 4 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Standards for Consideration: The approval of a variance is based on the following consideration(s): • Relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance. • There are such extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship due to size, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions not caused by the variance applicant. • Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties. • That the public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done. The applicant response: • Please see the letter of appeal. The staff response: • Part one: The relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance since the barn is not close to Nix road or Birmingham Highway. Both the codes intent to keep the accessory structures away from the road front. • Part two: Prior to subdividing, this property was a horse farm and the barn was compliant with the Zoning code. This structure is consistent with Milton’s viewshed and the City is actively encouraging keeping such barns. It would create an unnecessary hardship if the barn is not allowed to stay. For these reasons this variance can be granted. • Part three: Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties because with the setback requirements on the adjacent properties there would be sufficient buffer between the structures. • Part four: The public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done with continued use of a barn that is consistent with Milton’s rural character. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends approval of the variance. Page 5 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Letter of Appeal Page 6 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit A Page 7 of 7 V21-04 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit B Page 1 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 PETITION NUMBER: V21-05 PROPERTY INFORMATION 14500 Wood Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 700, 741 OVERLAY DISTRICT Rural Milton EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 6.75 EXISTING USE Residential FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Agricultural, Equestrian, Estate Residential REQUESTED VARIANCE: • To allow the existing garage and the barn (not housing animals) to encroach into the side setback as shown on the survey issued 12-16-2020. (Sec 64-416 (c)(1)) PETITIONER/OWNER Kim Naddler ADDRESS 14500 Wood Road Milton, GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE New River Building Co., LLC (Heather Duffie) ADDRESS 375 Maxwell Road Alpharetta, GA 30009 Page 2 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: Shubha Jangam 678.242.2539 Background: The site is a 6.75-acre lot located on the south side of Wood Road. This property is zoned AG- 1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay District. Exhibit A shows the two accessory structures on this property, a garage and a barn. It shows both the structures encroaching into the side setbacks. The house and the pool on the property are in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Exhibit B is showing the areal view of the structures on this property. Exhibit C shows the pictures of the garage and the barn. Per Sec. 64-416 (c)(1), an accessory structure cannot be in the side setback. As mentioned earlier the applicant plans to build a new home at this property and the City requires bringing all non-compliant issues in compliance before obtaining a new building permit. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On February 2, 2021, the DRB met and had the following comment: • DRB recommends getting letters of support from the neighbors. • DRB recommends approval. Page 4 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Standards for Consideration: The approval of a variance is based on the following consideration(s): • Relief, if granted would not offend the spirit or intent of the Ordinance. • There are such extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property that the literal or strict application of the Ordinance would create an unnecessary hardship due to size, shape or topography or other extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions not caused by the variance applicant. • Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties. • That the public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done. The applicant response: • Please see the letter of appeal. The staff response: • Part one: The garage and the barn are physically away from the neighboring houses and Wood road. Therefore, the relief if granted would not offend the spirit of the Ordinance. • Part two: Both the structures were built prior to the formation of the City and both structures are in fair shape and can continue being used. It would create an unnecessary hardship to require removal of them. Therefore, this variance can be granted. • Part three: Relief, if granted would not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and surrounding properties because the sizes of surrounding properties are larger than three acres. • Part four: The public safety, health and welfare are secured, and that substantial justice is done with continued use of the garage and barn (not housing animals). Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends approval of the variance. Letter of Appeal Page 5 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Page 6 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit A Page 7 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit B Page 8 of 8 V21-05 - Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on February 16, 2021 Exhibit C