|
CITY OF BERKELEY LAKE
4040 Berkeley Lake Road
Berkeley Lake, GA 30096-3016
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Meeting October 4, 2005
Draft Minutes
Call to Order: Chairman Bob Herb called the meeting to order at 7:33pm on October 4th, 2005 at the Chapel- 4043 S. Berkeley Lake Road.
Present: Commissioners Gary Moore, Rodney Hammond Skip Johnson and Craig Belt. Chairman Bob Herb. Jackie Wall (P and Z Clerk)
Guests Present: Roy Campbell, Joe Voyles, Dan Huntington, Barbara Carroll, Dag Sandbakken and Bill Kent.
Old Business:
Minutes: Commissioner Hammond motioned to approve the minutes as amended for the August 30th, 2005 meeting. Commissioner Moore seconded the motion. All were in favor of the motion. The motion passed.
• Hear and vote on a request for annexation and rezoning into the City of Berkeley Lake, by the Nash Corporation, owner of the Capital Commons office complex on Peachtree Industrial Blvd. The rezoning will be from M1 to O and I.
Commissioner Johnson motioned to approve the annexation of property in question with the conditions as prescribed at the August 4th, 05 P and Z meeting. Commissioner Moore seconded the motion.
In discussion Chairman Herb read the conditions that had been decided previously:
• Two rows of 8-10 ft tall Leyland cypress trees would be planted cross set every six feet off center on the North side of the property by the retaining wall
• 2 gallon ivy plants would be planted every 5 ft along the wall,
• Lighting would be reviewed and approved by the city engineer for the purpose of minimizing impact to the surrounding residents
• Waste collection hrs would be restricted to conform to the City noise ordinances and would be no earlier than 7am and not after 7pm.
• The 10 acre complex would comply with the tree ordinance density, not necessarily lot by lot.
• The agreed upon Lot sizes and buffer zone variances as attached.
All in favor of the motion and the motion passed.
Commissioner Hammond motioned to change the zoning from M1 to O and I. Commissioner Belt seconded the motion and all were in favor. The motion passed.
• 4580 Berkeley Walk Point: variance to build a new viewing stand for the Homeowner’s Association tennis courts set back 40 ft from the front property line versus the required 50 ft set back.(39-804.4)
Barbara Carroll described how the current viewing stand had been built by the original builder. She said that they wanted to relocate it in a better place, put it at a better height and make it even less visible from the road, which would also make it more in compliance than it currently is.
Chairman Herb read the following:
39-1401 Variances - Application for, Procedure and Notification
a. There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular property in question because of its size, shape or topography, and
b. The application of the Ordinance to this particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship, and
c. Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved, and
d. Such conditions are not the result of any actions of the property owner, and
e. Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public nor impair the purposes or intent of this Ordinance, and
f. The variance is granted for a use of land or building or structure that is not prohibited by this Ordinance. There was a short discussion about the changes requested. Commissioner Johnson motioned to approve the variance request. Commissioner Belt seconded the motion. All were in favor of the variance request. The variance was approved.
• 3695 North Berkeley Lake Road: variance to alter a non-conforming structure (39-602.1); changing windows and doors, remove and reconstruct rear deck to same size, add a half-roof over the rear deck and add a roof over the front entry door. All of these alterations will be in full conformance and will not increase the existing non-conformance of the house sitting back at the front at 60’ versus required 65 ft and the front building line being at 84 ft versus the required 100 ft.
Chairman Herb said that the house is a non-conforming property already, so that any work done on it would require a variance request.
Dag Sandbakken said that they were not touching the footprint of the house, they were upgrading both the exterior and the interior of the house.
There was a short discussion about the changes.
Commissioner Johnson motioned to approve the variance request. Commissioner Hammond seconded the motion. All were in favor of the variance request. The variance was approved.
• 3695 North Berkeley Lake Road: variance to construct a covered boathouse and dock at a distance of 3 ft from the side property line versus the required 12 ½ ft side set back. (39-401.2)
This Variance request was withdrawn. Sandbakken thanked the Chairman for helping him to find a better solution that did not require the variance.
• 882 Lakeshore Drive (Pt, Lot 10A-BL,DC): variance to expand a non-conforming structure (39-602.1); add a rear porch on the back of the house that will be in full compliance and will not increase the non-conformance impact of the side porch and roof overhand being at a ½ ft set back from the side property line versus the required 12 ½ ft set back.
• 882 Lakeshore Drive (Pt, Lot 10A-BL,DC): variance to enlarge a non-conforming structure ( 39-602.1); construct a foyer entrance at the front of the house that would be approx. 1 ½ stories high. This change to the entrance of the house will be in full compliance and will not increase the non-conformance impact of the side porch and roof overhang being at a ½ ft set back from the side property line versus the required 12 ½ ft setback.
Chairman said that it was an older property that was also non conforming. He said that he had already granted an administrative variance for a rear deck. However the request was not to enclose that deck.
Joe Voyles (for Brad Nessler) said that 882 and 888 Lakeshore drive currently shared a driveway, and both neighbors wanted to change that. He said that they were going to take the entrance away from the current position at the side and remove the side deck to allow for more separation between the properties. He said they would then be able to move the driveway.
There was discussion about the current location and how it would affect the setbacks from the property line.
Commissioner motioned to approve the variance request for the front foyer entrance. Commissioner seconded the motion. Commissioners Belt, Moore and Hammond were in favor of the variance request. Commissioner Johnson abstained from the vote. The variance was approved.
Commissioner Belt motioned to approve the variance request to remove the side deck to make it more in conformance and flush with the house and to add the roof to the deck, which will not be enclosed at all with screen or glass. Commissioner Hammond seconded the motion. All were in favor of the variance request. The variance was approved.
Voyles reiterated that the rear roof over the deck would not be visible from the street. He also said that they would be adding a stone wall down the side of the driveway to make the courtyard as described. He said there would be a retaining wall on the side to separate the homes but it would not be attached to the side of the house.
• 350 Lakeshore Drive (Lot 36 & 37, Sec. 3 - BL ): variance to expand structure to occupy 18% of property versus occupying the required maximum 15%. of total property space (39-805)
This variance request was also withdrawn.
• 39-805 Floor Space Requirements R-100 Single Family Residence District
Chairman Herb said that he would like the Commission to consider changing the last sentence of the ordinance:
All single family residences shall contain not less than 2,000 square feet of floor space exclusive of unfinished basements, carports, garages, attic and open porches/decks. The footprint of all structures however shall not occupy more than 15% of the property upon which they are located. He said he was suggesting the last sentence should read further to say:
The footprint of all structures however shall not occupy more than 15% of the property upon which they are located when any structure has a building height that exceeds 25 ft at the highest point when measured at the front or has a building height that exceeds 35 ft at the highest point measured at the rear, if the structure is located on a downward sloping lot. The footprint of all structures however may occupy up to 20% of the property upon which they are located when all the structures on the property have a building height that is 25 ft or less at the highest point when measured at the front AND has a building height that is 35 ft or less at the highest point when measured at the rear, if the structure is located on a downward sloping lot.
He said that the intent of the original code was originally to stop houses becoming too big vertically on small lots. However he felt that one story homes that had a larger lot should be able to have 10 ft at the floor level and 15 ft roof space, and be able to have a larger footprint on the ground and he gave an example.
Commissioner Johnson motioned to adopt the suggested wording into code. Commissioner Hammond seconded the motion and all were in favor.
Chairman Herb asked the Clerk to send the wording to the City attorney in preparation for the next council meeting.
Chairman Herb said that the P and Z suggestions for the Driveway and Parking Area Water Runoff Control ordinance were turned down by Council.
Chairman Herb noted that the property at 326 Lakeshore Drive had been re-measured on the plans and had been shown to be 0.1% over the 15% allowed. He said that they would be applying for a variance request, (which would be an administrative variance), if they did not remove a side deck, which they were currently considering.
New Business
There was discussion about whether the P and Z could limit the number of pontoon boats allowed at each lot on the lake, and whether it was a P and Z issue. It was also questioned whether the use of retaining walls could be restricted.
The Commissioners agreed to meet again on Tuesday November 1st, 2005.
There was a motion to adjourn at 9.05pm by Commissioner Moore. Commissioner Belt seconded the motion and all were in favor.
|
