CITY OF BERKELEY LAKE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
 MEETING and PUBLIC HEARING
4040 S BERKELEY LAKE ROAD
BERKELEY LAKE, GEORGIA 30096
FULL MINUTES
April 1, 2008

Those in attendance at the meeting were as follows:

Commission members:   Bob Herb, Chair, Sally Rich-Kolb, Rodney Hammond, Dan Huntington

City Administrator:   Tom Rozier

Citizens present:    Laraine Downey, Bill Downey, Steve Seitz, President of BLHA

I. CALL TO ORDER

Herb called the meeting to order at 7:36PM at 4040 S. Berkeley Lake Road. (0:00:08)

II. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA

Herb made a motion to delete New Business item ‘C’.  All were in favor and the motion passed.

III. OLD BUSINESS  (0:00:53)

Kolb motioned to accept the minutes of the March 3, 2008 meeting. Huntington seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed.

IV. NEW BUSINESS and PUBLIC HEARING

a.) Variance – 106 Ridge Road (0:01:12)

Herb introduced Bill and Laraine Downey of 106 Ridge Road.  The Downeys requested a variance to code Chapter 78, Section 197. They presented their case to build a shed with a 62.5% variance to the 40-foot rear setback.

Commissioners noted that the variance request was egregious and made suggestions for more suitable variance requests as well recommendations regarding the height of the proposed structure.

Huntington made a motion to deny the variance. Hammond seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed.

b.) Consideration of Code Amendment to Section 78-65, Street Frontage Requirements (38:16)

Herb introduced the suggested Code Amendment to Chapter 78, Section 65 and provided background information regarding Berkeley Lake Homeowners’ Association’s desire to build structures on the picnic ground property behind Lake Berkeley Chapel. He then provided background as to how the particular suggestion came to be, including the fact that the suggested change had been recommended by the City Attorney.

The suggested amendment to the code is to add “, unless plans for same shall be approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission.” to the end of the existing text such that it would read:

Section 78-65. Street Frontage requirements.

No building or structure shall hereafter be erected on a lot that does not abut for at least 50 feet upon an open street which shall be either a public street, a publicly approved street or a publicly maintained street, unless plans for same shall be approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission.

Huntington made a motion to approve the amendment as presented. Kolb seconded the motion.

Hammond indicated that he had been feeling uncomfortable about making a code change for a single piece of property and that the suggested code change was a better alternative. He further indicated that he had several questions regarding the direction in which the Commission seemed to be heading in that particular approach to considering the plan for the building.

Hammond noted that it is his understanding that other reasons for having access requirements for lots that are set back from the road are liability and fire and rescue access. He further noted that when buildings exist on properties without road access or rights to access, there are technical issues with emergency vehicle access. He mentioned the informal agreement which seems to have existed for many years between Lake Berkeley Chapel and the Berkeley Lake Homeowners’ Association and indicated that he has wondered if the situation could have been avoided if that informal agreement cannot be made formal.

Seitz indicated that BLHA plans to go back to the Chapel, now that they’re aware that this situation exists, and request a formal easement and get it recorded.

Herb pointed out that doing so would not cure the issue because the code requires an actual 50-foot abutment and not an easement.

Huntington indicated that the current topic of discussion was related to the next step in the process suggested by the code change and that the code change would merely provide an opportunity for BLHA to submit those plans and have them approved or rejected at that time.

Herb noted that petitioners and the Commission under the code as suggested for amendment would not be subject to variance ordinances but that it is likely that the process set up under the variance ordinance would be a guide for how the Commission would handle petitions.

Hammond indicated that he has some comfort with the suggested code amendment, however he is bothered by the lack of a legal method for accessing the property for emergency purposes.

Seitz reiterated BLHA’s plan to seek a formal easement from Lake Berkeley Chapel.

There was further plan-specific discussion.

Kolb asked whether the suggested code amendment was opening up possibilities for citizens to subdivide their property without requesting approval from the P&Z Commission.  Herb indicated that it was not.
Hammond indicated that if the code amendment passes and becomes a code change that he would like for City Council to be aware of the related issues.

Herb asked for a vote.

Kolb and Huntington were in favor. Hammond was opposed and the motion passed.

V. CITIZEN COMMENTS

No citizens spoke.

VI. ADJOURNMENT

Hammond moved to adjourn. Kolb seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed.

Herb adjourned the meeting at 8:30pm.

(Respectfully submitted by Tom Rozier, correct as of April 2, 2008)