Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BoZA - 09/15/2020 Page 1 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 PETITION NUMBER: V20-15 PROPERTY INFORMATION 810 Guardian Court DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 392 OVERLAY DISTRICT RURAL MILTON OVERLAY EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 1.08 EXISTING USE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED VARIANCES: • To allow an accessory structure to encroach into the rear yard setback (Sec. 64-416, i). • To allow an existing fireplace to be located in the side yard (Sec. 64-77, 2, b, 2). PETITIONER(S) Wayne Massey ADDRESS 810 Guardian Court Milton, GA 30004 Page 2 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 3 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: CODY HENDRIX 678.242.2513 Background: The site is a 1.08 acre lot located along the west side of Guardian Court in The Manor Subdivision. It is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay. The first part of the variance is to allow an accessory structure to be thirty seven feet from the rear property line (Exhibit A). The applicant has indicated the size of the accessory structure is 23’ x 25’ (Exhibit E). The pool on the subject site is existing and was constructed before the incorporation of the City. The second part of the variance is to allow the existing fireplace to be located in the side yard. The applicant plans to construct an accessory structure that will incorporate the existing fireplace (Exhibit D & E) that will encroach into the rear yard setback. Section 64-416, i states that accessory structures may be located in rear or side yards but shall not be located within a minimum yard. The applicant proposes to construct an accessory structure that will be thirty seven feet from the rear yard instead of the required fifty feet. Section 64-77, 2, b, 2 states outdoor fireplaces whether standalone or constructed as part of a patio, retaining wall or other structure, may only be located in the rear yard and may extend no more than ten feet into the minimum rear yard. The applicant proposes to construct an accessory structure that will encroach into the rear yard setback and legalize an existing fireplace that is located in the rear yard, a two part variance is required. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On August 4, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comments: • Subject to neighbor’s letter stating approval. Page 4 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 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 applicant is proposing the location of the accessory structure to be thirty seven feet from the rear property line (Exhibit A). The placement of the accessory structure will be in correlation with the location of the existing fireplace that is located in the side yard. The structure is proposed to be 23’ x 25’ and will be used as an open air pool cabana. • Part two: The applicant wants to incorporate the fireplace into the proposed accessory structure. The proposal will have the least amount of impact on the property as the fireplace is already constructed. • Allowing the encroachment of the proposed accessory structure in the rear yard setback and the existing fireplace to be located in the side yard will not cause detriment to the public good. Public safety, health and welfare will be secured, and substantial justice will be done for the surrounding properties. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends approval of the two part variance request. Page 5 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 6 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit A Page 7 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit B Page 8 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit C Page 9 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit D Page 10 of 10 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit E Page 1 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 PETITION NUMBER: V20-16 PROPERTY INFORMATION 14355 Freemanville Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 743 OVERLAY DISTRICT RURAL MILTON OVERLAY EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 2.595 EXISTING USE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AGRICULTURE, EQUESTRIAN, ESTATE RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED VARIANCES: • To allow an accessory structure to encroach into the rear yard setback (Sec. 64-416, i). PETITIONER(S) Chris Gray ADDRESS 4008 Johnson Ferry Drive Marietta, GA 30062 Page 2 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 3 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: CODY HENDRIX 678.242.2513 Background: The proposed site is a 2.595 acre lot that is associated with the parent parcel located at 1470 Redd Road. The parent parcel is 5.764 acres. The property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay an is located at the intersection of Redd Road and Freemanville Road. The parent parcel is currently under review for a minor plat subdivision and the applicant is proposing to keep the existing accessory structure on lot three on the minor plat (Exhibit A) that is 12.4’ from the rear property line. Section 64-416, i states that accessory structures may be located in rear or side yards but shall not be located within a minimum yard. Since the applicant proposes to keep the existing accessory structure on the site during the minor plat process, a variance is required. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On September 1, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comments: • On board and support the variance. • Adds value to the property and area. Page 4 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 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: • The applicant is proposing the keep the existing accessory structure that will be located in the rear yard setback. Before the subdivision of the parent parcel, the accessory structure was located in the side yard setback. Now that new property lines and lots are being proposed, the setbacks have shifted making the accessory structure be located in the rear yard setback. This accessory structure keeps the character of Rural Milton by preserving older structures and incorporating them into the property. • Allowing the encroachment of the existing accessory structure in the rear yard setback will not cause detriment to the public good. Public safety, health and welfare will be secured, and substantial justice will be done for the surrounding properties. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends approval of the variance request. Page 5 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 6 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 7 of 7 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit A Page 1 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 PETITION NUMBER: V20-17 PROPERTY INFORMATION 0 Thompson Road (22 520005380606) DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 538 OVERLAY DISTRICT RURAL MILTON OVERLAY EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 12.257 EXISTING USE VACANT LAND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AGRICULTURE, EQUESTRIAN, ESTATE RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED VARIANCES: • To allow a new public street to be located twenty five feet from any peripheral property line adjoining AG-1 and residential zoned property (Sec. 64-2397). PETITIONER(S) Hyde Park Homes, Inc. ADDRESS P.O Box 655 Duluth, GA 30096 Page 2 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 3 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: CODY HENDRIX 678.242.2513 Background: The site is a 12.257 acre lot that is located on the south side of Thompson Road. The property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay. The applicant is proposing to locate the entrance road for a new proposed subdivision to be twenty five feet from any peripheral AG-1 and residential zoned property instead of the required fifty feet (Exhibit A). Section 64-2397 states that new public and private streets must be located a minimum of fifty feet from any peripheral property line adjoining AG-1 and residentially zoned property. Since the applicant proposes a new public road to be twenty five feet from any peripheral AG-1 and residential zoned property, a variance is required. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On September 1, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comments: • Support the variance. • Have the adjacent neighbor approve the variance. • Oppose to the variance. • More heart felt safety concern more than development problems. • Huge concerns having a driveway that close to Champions Club Drive. • Creates additional traffic. • Look into larger lots. • This roadway is not the right fit for the community on Thompson Road. • Work with the City to do larger lots. Page 4 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 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: • The applicant is requesting this variance because of the site distance comment made from the Public Works/Transportation review of the preliminary plat submittal. The required site distance for the property on Thompson Road is 500 feet. Exhibit B shows the proposed road without the variance and site distance is not met. Exhibit A shows the proposed road with the variance and site distance is met; however, the road is twenty five feet from the property to the east. If the applicant pursues the Large Lot Incentive, the applicant does not need the variance and the minimum lot requirement shifts to three acres. The proposed road can be constructed into a driveway and does not need a variance. • Allowing the location of the new public road from an AG-1 and residentially zoned property will cause detriment to the public good. Public safety, health and welfare will not be secured, and substantial justice will not be done for the surrounding properties. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends denial of the variance request. Page 5 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 6 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 7 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit A Page 8 of 8 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit B Page 1 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 PETITION NUMBER: V20-18 PROPERTY INFORMATION 3430 Bethany Bend DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 901 OVERLAY DISTRICT STATE ROUTE 9 EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 0.6943 EXISTING USE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED VARIANCES: • To reduce the side yard setback from twenty five feet to twelve feet (Sec. 64-416, c, 1). • To allow a stone masonry material under the three-four board horse fence along a public road (Sec. 64-1092, i). PETITIONER(S) Nowroz Ghadery ADDRESS 3430 Bethany Bend Milton, GA 30004 REPRESENTATIVE(S) Stuart Rees ADDRESS 145 Church Street, Suite 230 Marietta, GA 30060 Page 2 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 3 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: CODY HENDRIX 678.242.2513 Background: The site is a 0.6943 acre lot located on the north side of Bethany Bend. The property is zoned AG-1 and is located in the State Route 9 Overlay. The applicant is proposing to add on to the existing house which will encroach into the side yard setback (Exhibit A). The applicant is also proposing to construct a knee wall that will be under the three-four board horse fence that will be installed along the front of the property (Exhibit A). Section 64-416, c, 1 states that the minimum side yard shall be twenty five feet when it is adjacent to an interior line in AG-1. Section 64-1092, i states fencing in the State Route 9 Overlay along public streets, fencing materials shall be primarily dark stained wood and could include accents of natural or man-made stone, brick, aluminum, ornamental or decorative wrought iron or architectural concrete. Since the applicant proposes to encroach into the side yard setback with a house addition and add a knee wall under the three-four board horse fence along the front of the property, a two part variance is required. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On September 1, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comments: • Work with staff on the site plan. • To make the material real stone for the material under the fence. Page 4 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 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 variance request the applicant is proposing can be erased if the addition can be added to the structure on the west side or shifting the addition towards Bethany Bend. There is no hardship because the proposed addition can be repositioned to be in conformance to the setbacks. • Part two: The proposed knee wall under the fence does not conform to the area and the ordinance does allow stone accents on fences. There is no hardship for allowing a knee wall under the three-four board horse fence along the front of the property. • Allowing the encroachment of the addition of the house into the side yard setback and the proposed knee wall under the three-four board horse fence along the front of the property will cause detriment to the public good. Public safety, health and welfare will not be secured, and substantial justice will not be done for the surrounding properties. Staff recommendation: • Staff recommends denial of the two part variance request. Page 5 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 6 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 7 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit A Page 8 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit B Page 9 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit C Page 10 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit D Page 11 of 11 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit E Page 1 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 PETITION NUMBER: V20-20 PROPERTY INFORMATION 16662 Phillips Road DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2 / 184 & 185 OVERLAY DISTRICT RURAL MILTON EXISTING ZONING AG-1 ACRES 4.60 EXISTING USE VACANT LAND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AGRICULTURE, EQUESTRIAN, ESTATE RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED VARIANCES: • To appeal the rejection of the Community Development Director’s decision denying the acceptance of a building permit. (Sec. 64-2426, 3, a). PETITIONER(S) Dennis, Susan, and Greg Gilreath ADDRESS 408 Lake View Court Oakley, CA 94561 REPRESENTATIVE(S) Scott Reece ADDRESS 13685 Highway 9 Milton, GA 30004 Page 2 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 3 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF ANALYSIS STAFF CONTACT: CODY HENDRIX 678.242.2513 Background: The site is a 4.60 acre lot located on the west side of Phillips Road. The property is zoned AG- 1 and is located in the Rural Milton Overlay. The applicant removed the existing structures on the property without obtaining a demolition permit nor getting reviewed by the Design Review Board. By not obtaining the proper permission, the applicant cannot perform any type of development on the property for five years per 64-2426, 3, a. The applicant submitted a building permit for a fence, but the Community Development Director rejected the building permit application. Section 64-2426, 3, a, states “If a property is demolished or relocated without a certificate of appropriateness from the DRB (Design Review Board), or in the event the plans are changed for the property from which the resource was removed without approval of the changed plans by the DRB, then the following restrictions, in addition to any other penalties or remedies set forth in this article, shall be applicable to the site where the structure or property was formerly located: No building or other permits will be issued for construction on the site, with the exception of a permit to restore such structure or property after obtaining a certificate of appropriateness, for a period of five years after the date of such demolition or removal.” The applicants are requesting to appeal the rejection of the Community Development Director’s decision denying the acceptance of a building permit. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DRB) COURTESY REVIEW: On September 1, 2020, the DRB met and had the following comments: • No issue with variance. • Recommend approval. Page 4 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 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. Page 5 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Page 6 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit A Page 7 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit B Page 8 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit B Page 9 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit B Page 10 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit C Page 11 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit C Page 12 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit C Page 13 of 13 Prepared for the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting on September 15, 2020 Exhibit C