[I. Call to Order ]
[00:00:07]
CALLING THE SANDY SPRINGS BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING TO ORDER. CLARK BROWN, WOULD YOU PLEASE
[II.Roll Call and General Announcements]
GIVE US THE ROLL CALL AND GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. EXCUSE ME.GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR. VICE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS. TODAY IS FEBRUARY THE 4TH, 2026. PLEASE CONFIRM YOUR ATTENDANCE AS I CALL YOUR NAME, MADAM CHAIR. SHERRY ALLEN HERE. VICE CHAIR JUSTIN SPORANO HERE. BOARD MEMBER JASON BODWELL HERE. BOARD MEMBER FRED JEWELL HERE. BOARD MEMBER NATHAN GRANTHAM HERE. BOARD MEMBER SUSAN MAYER HERE. BOARD MEMBER KIM GAY HERE. YOUR ATTENDANCE HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED AND WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE OFFICIAL MEETING MINUTES. NOW, I WILL READ THE ANNOUNCEMENTS REGARDING THE DECORUM AND THE PROCEDURES OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS. THE BOARD OF APPEALS DUTY IS TO REVIEW AND DECIDE ON APPEALS OF THE OF THE DIRECTORS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OR INTERPRETATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. APPEALS REGARDING APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF A PRELIMINARY OR FINAL PLAT WITHOUT ANY DEDICATION AND VARIANCES FROM THE STANDARD OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE PETITION WILL BE HEARD IN THE SEQUENCE LISTED ON THE POSTED AGENDA. FOLLOWING ARE SOME OF THE RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR THIS PART OF THE MEETING. THE APPLICANT AND ALL THOSE SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION WILL BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF TEN MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR PETITION. THE APPLICANT MAY CHOOSE TO SAVE SOME OF THE TIME FOR REBUTTAL FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE OPPOSITION, THE OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF TEN MINUTES TO PRESENT ITS POSITION. SOME OF THE BURDEN SINCE THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF SINCE. EXCUSE ME.
SINCE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS UPON THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT WILL BE ALLOWED TO MAKE CLOSING REMARKS PROVIDED TIME REMAIN FROM THE ORIGINAL ALLOTTED TIME. STAFF WILL KEEP TRACK OF THE TIME FOR BOTH SIDES. THOSE CALLED TO SPEAK WILL BE TAKEN IN THE ORDER THAT THE PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS WERE REVIEWED OR RECEIVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING CLERK PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF TONIGHT'S MEETING. ALL SPEAKERS WILL BE WILL IDENTIFY THEMSELVES BY NAME, ADDRESS, AND, IF APPLICABLE, ORGANIZATION BEFORE BEGINNING THEIR PRESENTATION, DEMONSTRATION OF ANY SORT WITHIN THE CHAMBER IS PROHIBITED. SO PLEASE REFRAIN FROM ANY APPLAUSE. CHEERING, BOOING, OUTBURST OR DIALOG. WHEN THE PERSON IS SPEAKING, PLEASE SHOW THE SAME RESPECT TO THE PERSON SPEAKING THAT YOU WILL EXPECT TO RECEIVE. THE APPLICANT SHALL NOT SUBMIT MATERIALS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS DURING THE MEETING. ALL MATERIALS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING, FOR INCLUSION IN THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION OF PACKAGING TO THE BOARD. THANK YOU. CHAIR. THANK YOU. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF TODAY'S MEETING?
[III. Approval of Meeting Agenda]
AGENDA. MOTION SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THE[IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes]
MEETING AGENDA. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 7TH, 2026, BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING. SO MOVED. SECOND. ANYONE? SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A CHAIR VOTES AYE. IT'S UNANIMOUS. CAN WE CALL THE FIRST CASE V 2554 701.[V. Cases ]
BEST WAY. GOOD EVENING. BOARD OF APPEALS. MEMBERS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, WELCOME TO THE FEBRUARY 4TH, 2026 PUBLIC HEARING. TODAY. WE WILL WE WILL BE DISCUSSING VARIANCE CASE V 2554 701. BASED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL. THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 6.1.2. B TO RETAIN A BUILDING EVE THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE 30 FOOT SIDE STREET SETBACK. THE CHARACTER AREA OF THE HIGHLIGHTED PARCEL IS PROTECTED.NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE ZONING IS D 27. HERE ON THE AERIAL IMAGE YOU CAN SEE THE LOT HAS A NORMAL RECTANGULAR SHAPE LOT WITH A CURVE IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE LOT AT BASS WAY IN MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY. HERE IS THE SURVEY WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE PARCEL IS DEVELOPED ON A 0.62 ACRE LOT WITH A TWO STORY HOME, A THREE CAR GARAGE, LANDSCAPED REAR YARD WITH A COVERED PORCH, POOL, POOL DECK, SPA, A COVERED PATIO WITH STEPS, AND A FIREPLACE. THE BUILDING EVE IS THE ROOF TO THE COVERED PATIO ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOME.
THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 2018, AND THE CURRENT HOMEOWNERS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 2019.
[00:05:06]
EVERGREENS SCREENED THE ENTIRE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOME, INCLUDING THE PATIO WITH THE BUILDING ENCROACHMENT, WHILE OTHER TREES AND LANDSCAPING SCREENED THE REAR NEIGHBOR'S VIEW OF THE BUILDING. EVE. THE PARTIALLY ENCLOSED PATIO ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT A PERMIT AND CITED IN FEBRUARY 2025, THE APPLICANT AGREED TO REMOVE THE PORTIONS OF THE PARTIALLY ENCLOSED PATIO AND EVE THAT WERE IN VIOLATION OF THE BUILDING CODE. THE APPLICANT REMOVED ONLY THE WALLS IN THE STEPS THAT WERE PART OF THE ENCROACHMENT, AND NEGLECTED TO REMOVE THE ROOF EAVE PORTION, HOPING TO KEEP A CONSISTENT ROOF LINE. HERE WE HAVE SOUTHERN ANGLES OF THE BUILDING. EVE ENCROACHMENT. NEXT ANGLES OF THE SCREENING FROM THE NORTH YARD IN THE SOUTHERN DIRECTION OF MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE OVERHANG ON ENCROACHING INTO THE 30 FOOT SIDE STREET SETBACK. THIS PROPOSAL IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN EXISTING BUILDING EVE TO ENCROACH INTO THE 30 FOOT SIDE STREET SETBACK BY 5.2FT. STAFF CONSIDERED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY, AND PUBLIC WELFARE STAFF HAVE FOUND THAT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY DO NOT POSE A CHALLENGE TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY. THE BUILDING EVE ADDITION, FAILING TO MEET THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE CURRENT PROPERTY AND NEGATES THE INTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. HOWEVER, STAFF ALSO FINDS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE IT IS FULLY SCREENED BY EVERGREENS AND OTHER LANDSCAPING. IT IS NOT VISIBLE FROM MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR RELIEF FROM SECTION 6.1.2. B TO RETAIN A BUILDING EVE ROOF EVE THAT ENCROACHES 5.2FT INTO THE 30 FOOT SIDE STREET SETBACK. IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. THE HOMEOWNER SHALL PERMANENTLY MAINTAIN VEGETATIVE SCREENING CONSISTENT WITH EXHIBIT A TO PRESERVE THE INTENDED VISUAL BUFFER FROM MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY AND ADJACENT REAR PROPERTIES. THIS OBLIGATION. THIS OBLIGATION REMAINS IN EFFECT REGARDLESS OF THE CONDITION, REMOVAL, OR FAILURE OF ANY SCREENING INSTALLED OR MAINTAINED BY THE HOA. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? IF SO, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. YOU'RE WELCOME. HI THERE. MY NAME IS ANDREA DARWISH AND I'M THE HOMEOWNER. AND SO. AND MY MY ADDRESS I'M SORRY IS 701. BEST WAY. SO WHAT HAPPENED WITH THIS WAS THAT I WAS NOT AWARE THAT MY BUILDER HAD NOT FILED FOR THE PROPER PERMITTING. I WAS SITED BACK IN FEBRUARY OF 2025 AND THE WORK STOPPED ON THE PROPERTY. AND THEN IT PROCEEDED. ONCE THE APPROPRIATE PERMIT WAS, I GUESS, OBTAINED. THE OTHER THING THAT I DIDN'T KNOW WAS THAT HE WAS BUILDING INTO THE SETBACK. SO MY MY KNOWLEDGE OF THIS AND I'VE MET WITH JONATHAN LIVINGSTON AND SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE BUILDING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE A FEW TIMES, IS THAT THEY TOLD HIM THAT HE NEEDED TO MOVE THE STRUCTURE, WHICH HE HAD PUT UP THREE FEET BACK THREE FEET, I GUESS, TOWARD MY HOUSE AWAY FROM MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY. HE DID THAT, BUT HE DID NOT REMOVE THE ROOF AND PUT THE ROOF BACK UP AND REDO THE ROOF. SO, AS IT EXISTS TODAY, THE STRUCTURE ITSELF IS WITHIN THE SETBACK THAT'S REQUIRED. IT IS ONLY THIS PORTION OF THE OVERHANG.IT CAN'T BE SEEN BY ANYBODY. AS YOU GUYS SAW, IT IS COMPLETELY SHIELDED FROM MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY. IF I HAD IT TO DO MYSELF, I WOULD HAVE DONE IT WELL WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE THE SETBACK AND THE GUIDELINES. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, TO FIX IT, I GUESS HE'S GOT TO TAKE THE ENTIRE ROOF OFF AND PUT IT BACK UP AGAIN. AND SO I'M REQUESTING THE VARIANCE FOR THAT PURPOSE. AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE THE MANDATE TO KEEP THAT THE TREES UP AND THE VEGETATION THERE TO HIDE IT SO THAT NOBODY CAN EVER SEE IT. BUT REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU ARE, WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HOUSE FROM MOUNT VERNON HIGHWAY, WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE HOUSE FROM THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE, OR WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, YOU CAN'T SEE IT. AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT MAKES IT OKAY, AND I REALLY
[00:10:02]
WOULD HAVE ASKED HIM TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY HAD I UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE GUIDELINES WERE. BUT HE KIND OF LEFT ME WITH THE BAG HOLDING THE BAG. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS IS THAT. AND YOU STILL HAVE TIME RESERVED IF YOU WANT TO COME BACK FOR REBUTTAL. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO REALLY SAY ANYTHING. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT, I MISSPOKE. IS THERE ANYONE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION? AND YOU'VE STATED YOU DON'T WANT MORE TIME TO TO SPEAK MORE, CORRECT? OKAY. SO THEN WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. PERIOD. AND WE WILL DELIBERATE AS A BOARD. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS? YES. AND DO YOU WANT STAFF TO SPEAK TO THAT OR DO YOU WANT TO MISS THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK TO IT? OKAY.STAFF TO SPEAK TO IT. BACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS PLEASE. YEAH. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MISS OWENS? FOR PLANNER OWENS? WHILE MEMBER LOOKING AT THAT, DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. SO IT SEEMS TO ME THE IT WAS BUILT SOMEWHERE IN THE CONSTRUCTION. IT WAS FLAGGED AS A VIOLATION OF GOING INTO THE SETBACK. AND THEN PORTIONS OF IT WERE RECTIFIED, BUT NOT THE EVE OF THE ROOF. THAT'S WHAT I'M THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING. SO PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT STAIRS AND A RETAINING WALL WERE WERE RECTIFIED, BUT THE ROOF WAS NOT CORRECT. OKAY, OKAY. ANY ANYONE ELSE MEMBER OKAY. SO I'M ASKING IF SHE WOULD BE WILLING TO. DO WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDS BY FOLLOWING THE CONDITIONS. AND YOU'D HAVE TO COME BACK SO WE CAN PICK YOU UP ON THE MIC. SO WE HAVE A COMPLETE HEARING. THAT'S QUITE ALL RIGHT, MA'AM.
DOWN IN HER OTHER ARM. TAKE YOUR TIME. NO. IT'S OKAY. YES, OF COURSE I WOULD. THERE'S NO REASON I WOULD NEVER HAVE A REASON TO TAKE THAT VEGETATION DOWN. AND AGAIN, IF THERE WAS A WAY FOR ME TO LOB OFF THAT PART OF THE ROOF. AND I EVEN ASKED JONATHAN LIVINGSTON THIS WHEN HE WAS OUT, BUT HE SAID THAT THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE. SO I WOULD EVEN DO THAT. BUT YES, I'M ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE THAT VEGETATION IS PERMANENTLY UP AND THOSE TREES.
I'VE OWNED THE HOME SINCE 2019, AND THOSE TREES GROW AT A MIRACULOUS LEVEL. SO, I MEAN, THEY'VE GOTTEN TREMENDOUSLY TALLER SINCE I'VE BEEN THERE. SO THEY'RE JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO GROW. SO YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. TO ADD TO WHAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT WITH YOUR BUILDER. SO OF COURSE SOMEBODY ELSE. NO, GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD. YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, HE DIDN'T FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE ROOF, BUT WHEN YOU WERE TOLD THAT THEY DIDN'T DO THAT, YOU HAD THE CONVERSATION WITH HIM AND HE BASICALLY SAID HE CAN'T HE CAN'T TAKE OFF THAT SECTION OF THE ROOF. OTHERWISE HE'D HAVE TO REMOVE THE WHOLE STRUCTURE. OR WHAT WAS THE IMPLICATION IF HE HAD TO DO THAT? THANK YOU. NO, SIR. SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS JONATHAN LIVINGSTON ACTUALLY CAME OUT HIMSELF TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY. HE WAS OUT WITH ANOTHER GENTLEMAN NAMED STEVE, WHO'S ANOTHER INSPECTOR FOR SANDY SPRINGS. AND SO THEY WERE ON SITE. I WAS ACTUALLY ON SITE AND THE BUILDER WAS ON SITE. AND SO, JONATHAN, MR. LIVINGSTON SAID THAT THE BUILDER HAD NOT FOLLOWED THE INSTRUCTION THAT HE'D BEEN GIVEN TO MOVE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE, THAT HE HAD MOVED THE BUILDING PART, BUT THAT HE HADN'T BROUGHT THE ROOF LINE IN. AND SO I SAID, WELL, CAN'T WE JUST LOB OFF THAT PART OF THE ROOF THEN TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S GOOD? AND JONATHAN SAID, NO, BECAUSE OF THE EAVE OR THE SLOPE OF THE ROOF, THAT THAT COULDN'T BE DONE. AND SO HE WAS THE ONE WHO ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED THAT I APPLY FOR A VARIANCE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WERE YOU EVER GIVEN A COST OF WHAT THAT WOULD HAVE? WHAT COST YOU WOULD HAVE HAD TO INCUR? NO, MA'AM. OKAY. I'M SORRY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT WHILE SHE'S HERE?
[00:15:05]
THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK YOU. I'LL STAY CLOSE THIS TIME. ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? EVERYONE SHAKING THEIR HEAD? NO. SO IS THERE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT CASE NUMBER THIS BE. 25. 24. I GUESS I'M SUPPOSED TO READ IT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION ON V 2554. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE WITH THIS. THESE CONDITIONS THAT ARE ON THE SCREEN, THAT THE HOMEOWNER SHALL PERMANENTLY MAINTAIN A VEGETATIVE SCREENING. CONSISTENT. WHAT'S IN EXHIBIT A ON THE SCREEN? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED. AND CHAIR VOTES. AYE.IT'S UNANIMOUS. THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS APPROVED. CLARK BROWN, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE NEXT CASE? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. 2020 6-0003V-25538 70 EDGEWATER DRIVE. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 6.1.2. B TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIX. THE 60 FOOT PRIMARY STREET SETBACK BY 20FT FOR A NEW HOME PRESENTED BY HELEN OWENS, OUR PLANNER TO, I'M SORRY, OUR PLANNER THREE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND MISS OWENS, BEFORE YOU PRESENT, WE HAVE A BOARD MEMBER WHO'S GOING TO RECUSE HIMSELF. BOARD MEMBER FRED JEWELL IS IS GOING TO RECUSE HIMSELF ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE AND NOT DELIBERATE AND NOT BE IN THE ROOM WHILE WE DELIBERATE ON THIS CASE, AND THEN HE'LL COME BACK IN. THANK YOU. YOU MAY PROCEED, MISS OWENS. TODAY WE'LL BE DISCUSSING VARIANCE. CASE V 2553 AT 870 EDGEWATER DRIVE. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL. THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 6.1.2. B TO ENCROACH INTO THE 60 FOOT PRIMARY STREET SETBACK BY 20FT FOR A NEW HOME.
THE CHARACTER AREA OF THE HIGHLIGHTED PARCEL IS PROTECTED. NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE ZONING IS D 27. HERE ON THE AERIAL IMAGE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LOT HAS A NORMAL RECTANGULAR SHAPE.
ALTHOUGH THE LOT IS IS NORMALLY IS A NORMAL RECTANGULAR SHAPE. IT HAS A STEEP TOPOGRAPHY THAT SLOPES 20.75% TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. HERE IS A SURVEY WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE PROPERTY IS. EXCUSE ME. THE PARCEL IS DEVELOPED ON A POINT EIGHT ACRE LOT WITH A TWO STORY HOME, A TWO CAR GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY. THE ENTIRE PROPERTY SITS WITHIN THE METROPOLITAN RIVER CORRIDOR. THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1968, AND THE CURRENT HOME OWNERS PURCHASED THE HOME IN 1994. A CULVERT, EASEMENT AND SWALE STORMWATER RUNS ALONG THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, MAKING AROUND 6801FTā S OF THE PROPERTY UNBUILDABLE. ON THE LEFT IS A VIEW OF THE FRONT OF THE HOME, FACING NORTH ON EDGEWATER DRIVE. TO THE RIGHT IS A VIEW OF THE REAR OF THE HOME FACING SOUTH. HERE WE SEE ANGLES OF THE REAR YARD IN THE SLOPE FACING NORTH. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. THE APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING TO DEMOLISH THE CURRENT HOME AND ENCROACH INTO THE 60 FOOT PRIMARY STREET. SETBACK BY 20FT FOR A NEW HOME. THE GREEN SHADED AREA INDICATES THE 20 FOOT SETBACK ENCROACHMENT. THE BLUE. THE YELLOW LINES INDICATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. THE BLUE LINE INDICATES THE SWALE. THE RED SHADED AREA INDICATES THE BUILDABLE AREA. THE APPLICANTS PROVIDED A CODE COMPLIANT ALTERNATIVE DESIGN WHERE ALL THE SITE ELEMENTS ARE WITHIN THE BUILDABLE AREA. THE SITE ELEMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO ENCROACH INCLUDE THE TWO CAR
[00:20:02]
GARAGE, DINING ROOM, MUSIC ROOM, AND A COVERED PORCH. STAFF CONSIDERED THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY, AND PUBLIC WELFARE STAFF HAVE FOUND THAT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY DO NOT POSE A CHALLENGE TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, ALTHOUGH THE 20FT ENCROACHMENT IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC, IT IS A DEVIATION FROM THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. STAFF FINDS THAT THIS PROPERTY CAN BE DEVELOPED WITH ALL OF THE SAME SITE ELEMENTS, WITHOUT THE NEED FOR RELIEF, AS SEEN ON THE PROVIDED ALTERNATIVE SITE PLAN. RATHER, IT WOULD BE A MERE INCONVENIENCE, NOT A HARDSHIP, FOR THE APPLICANT TO REDESIGN OR RECONFIGURE THEIR PROPOSED HOUSE PLAN TO FIT THE PARAMETERS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF VARIANCE V 2553. A REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM SECTION 6.1.2. B TO ENCROACH INTO THE 60 FOOT PRIMARY STREET. SETBACK BY 20FT FOR A NEW HOME. IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. THE CONSTRUCTION BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE PROVIDED SITE PLAN. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT AND IF SO, SIR, THE APPROACH THE PODIUM. YOU BOTH CAN. IF YOU'RE HERE TO BOTH SPEAK OR IF YOU'RE NOT HERE, BOTH SPEAK, BUT YOU CAN BOTH APPROACH THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. HI, I'M BRUCE BOWEN, I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER. I LIVE AT 870 EDGEWATER DRIVE IN SANDY SPRINGS, AND MY NAME IS SYLVIA BOWEN AND I'M HIS WIFE, ALSO LIVING AT 870 EDGEWATER DRIVE. OKAY. IF YOU'D LIKE TO PROCEED, I THINK I'LL LET YOU SPEAK AND I'LL SIT. YEP. SO AS WE INTRODUCE OURSELVES AND AS NOTED, WE'VE LIVED AT THE PROPERTY FOR 30 ODD YEARS. MY WIFE HAS LIVED IN SANDY SPRINGS FOR MORE THAN 45 YEARS. IT'S JUST WE'RE PART OF THE CITY AND WE'RE PART OF THE COMMUNITY, AND THIS IS JUST OUR HOME. BUT WE'VE REACHED A POINT IN OUR LIVES WHERE WE DESIRE A NEW, MODERN, MORE EFFICIENT HOME THAT HAS LESS REPAIRS. WE ALSO WANT TO ACCOMMODATE FOR OUR FOUR CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES WHEN THEY VISIT WITH US. THEREFORE, WE'VE DESIGNED A HOUSE THAT'S VERY FAMILY ORIENTED, BUT IMPORTANTLY HAS A MASTER ON THE MAIN TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR SYLVIA AND I AS WE AGE, THE THE HOUSE. BUT BUT IT IS DESIGNED FOR FAMILY ORIENTED BECAUSE IT IS A VERY, VERY, EXCUSE ME, A VERY FAMILY ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOOD. THE STAFF DID NOTE THAT WE PROPOSED HOUSE MAINTAINS THE OVERALL CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING HOMES IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. IN THE DESIGN PROCESS, WE HAD TO ACCOUNT FOR THE FACT THAT 6800FT OF THE OF THE LOT IS UNBUILDABLE DUE TO THE CULVERT EASEMENT. BUT IF YOU COULD PUT UP PAGE ONE OF MY EXHIBIT, THERE'S OTHER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO WORK WITH. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, THE YELLOW IS THE 68,801 STAFF IS CALLED OUT. ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AREA LABELED B THAT IS INCREDIBLY STEEP. IT'S GOT ACTUALLY A 26 DEGREE SLOPE, WHICH WOULD BE VERY STEEP ACCORDING TO THE STAFF. AND THAT REPRESENTS ANOTHER 99,000 400, 9500FTā S OF THE PARK OF THE THE LOT. NOT TO MENTION IT'S HEAVILY WOODED, WHICH IS IMPORTANT FOR THE RIVER CORRIDOR PEOPLE. SO YOU CAN SEE THE TOPOGRAPHY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH. IN TOTAL, WE'VE GOT ALMOST HALF OF THE LOT, WHICH IS EITHER UNBUILDABLE OR VERY, STEEP AND DIFFICULT TO BUILD ON. WE ALSO HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE OUR MANAGEMENT SYSTEM MADE UP OF 72 AQUA CELLS MODULES. THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE A TRENCH THAT IS 77FT LONG, FIVE FEET WIDE AND SIX FEET DEEP. FOR COMPARISON, THIS IS SIMILAR TO BURYING ABOUT ONE AND A HALF CHEVY SUBURBANS. WE HAVE ENGAGED WITH THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER TO DO THE HYDROLOGY STUDY, AND WE WORKED WITH THE CITY ENGINEER, JOHN AMESBURY, ON THAT. THAT TRENCH IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT BEARS IN MIND HOW WE CONSTRUCT THE HOUSE, HOW WE LAY THE HOUSE OUT, AND WHAT ROOT SYSTEMS WE TEAR UP OR DO NOT TEAR UP. WITH AN ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND THE HYDROLOGIC ENGINEER, WE DESIGNED THE HOUSE THAT DID NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE. THEN WE HAD AN ADVANCED 3D RENDERING BUILT THAT COMBINED THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS, THE DETAILED SURVEY, AND THE AND THE THE ACTUAL SURVEY. COULD YOU PUT UP PAGE TWO, PLEASE? SO THIS IS WHAT THE HOUSE WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM THE BACK. THE BACK VIEW. THE BLUE LINE IS THE LIVING SPACE. EVERYTHING BELOW THE BLUE LINE IS EITHER A VOID FILL DIRT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFICULTY OF CONSTRUCTING THOSE VERY LARGE WALLS. THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WOULD HAVE TO BE PLACED SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTED TERRACES, WHICH MEANS I HAVE WATER PERCOLATING BEHIND A RETAINING WALL[00:25:01]
CONSTANTLY. SO IT JUST CREATES A LOT OF COMPLEXITY. A LOT OF COMPLEXITY, AND A LOT OF RISK ALONG THE WAY. WE COULD POTENTIALLY MOVE THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BACK FURTHER, BUT THEN WE GET INTO DISRUPTING MANY MORE ROOT ZONES THAT EXIST ALONG THE WAY. AND WE WE TEAR UP MORE, MANY MORE TREES. WE DISCUSSED MAKING THE HOUSE WIDER TO TRY TO PULL THE HOUSE FORWARD. WE LOOKED AT ALTERNATIVES. WE EXPLORED ALTERNATIVES WITH OUR ARCHITECT.BUT IF WE WE, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT MAYBE WE COULD PUSH THE HOUSE FURTHER BACK, BUT THAT JUST AMPLIFIES THE ISSUE. WE TALKED ABOUT TAKING THE BACK PORCH OFF, BUT THEN WE CAN'T ENJOY THE BEAUTIFUL BACKYARD. PLUS, WE HAVE A THIRD CAR GARAGE TUCKED UNDERNEATH THE BACK PORCH. WE CONCLUDED THAT THE BEST WAY TO WORK WAS TO ACTUALLY MOVE THE HOUSE FORWARD BY 20FT. THIS WOULD ACTUALLY, IF WE MOVED IT FORWARD, WE COULD TAKE THAT HIGH WALL AND CUT IT IN HALF. WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE A PLAYABLE, USABLE BACKYARD, AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY OF THE RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THE ENGINEERING REQUIRED TO BUILD ALL THE RETAINING WALLS AND SUCH. SO THAT WAS THE DECISION TO MAKE THE APPLICATION FOR THE VARIANCE. THE STAFF ALSO NOTED THAT OUR REQUEST IS A MINOR DEVIATION FROM THE CODE, AND AGAIN, THAT WE MAINTAIN THE OVERALL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE EXISTING HOMES. I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES OF HOUSES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE SAME MINOR DEVIATION. IF I TRAVEL A QUARTER OF A MILE DOWN THE STREET, I COME ACROSS ON.
ALSO ON EDGEWATER DRIVE, I COME ACROSS FIVE HOUSES THAT ENCROACHED ON THE SETBACK BETWEEN 17FT AND 29FT. THOSE HOUSES ARE NINE, 69, 79, 89, 91,000, 1045 EDGEWATER DRIVE. I CAN GO A LITTLE FURTHER BACK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I CAN GO THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE INTO MY NEIGHBORHOOD ON MOUNTAIN CREEK TRACE, AND THERE ARE FIVE MORE HOUSES THAT HAVE ENCROACHED. THOSE HOUSES ARE 50, 55, 60, 70, AND 80. SO AND IN FACT, THE VARIANCE FOR 50 MOUNTAIN CREEK TRACE WAS GRANTED IN NOVEMBER OF JUST PAST NOVEMBER OF 2025. ALL LIKE OURS. ALL OF THESE HOUSES HAVE VERY DIFFICULT TOPOGRAPHY, I NOTED WITH MY BUILD ABILITY AND THE CULVERT EASEMENT, I'M LOSING APPROXIMATELY HALF OF THE BILL TABILITY AREA OF MY PROPERTY. THE HOUSES THAT I CALLED OUT ALL HAVE DIFFICULT TOPOGRAPHY. THEY'RE EITHER BACKED UP TO A ROCK WALL OR IT FALLS OFF IN THE BACK. THOSE HOUSES HAVE BEEN BUILT WITH AN ACCOMMODATION TOWARD THE TOPOGRAPHY THEY HAVE. IN PREPARATION FOR THE HEARING, WE SENT THE NECESSARY LETTERS TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS AND POSTED THE REQUIRED SIGNAGE.
I ALSO SPOKE WITH ALL OF MY IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, THE ONES ON THE RIGHT, THE ONES ON THE LEFT, AND THE PEOPLE ACROSS THE STREET. THERE'S NOBODY BEHIND US, THANKFULLY, EXCEPT THE SWIM TENNIS CLUB AND POTENTIALLY THE SANDY SPRINGS PARK IN THE FUTURE. EVERYBODY ENDORSED THE PROJECT. THEY WERE HAPPY. THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS. THEY THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO IN SUMMARY, WE'LL REQUESTING A MINOR DEVIATION TO THE BUILDING CODE TO BUILD A NEW MODERN HOME, WHICH WILL IMPROVE AND MAINTAIN THE OVERALL CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING HOME AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND THANK YOU, SIR. AND YOU STILL HAVE TWO MINUTES AND 50S IF YOU. I'LL RESERVE MY TWO MINUTES AND 50S. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT? IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THIS HEARING AND DELIBERATE AS A BOARD. AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
WERE YOU ABLE TO REVIEW THE A LETTER THAT WAS NOT IN SUPPORT? I DID SEE THAT. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THE WOMAN'S CONCERNS. THAT'S SHE HAS A RIGHT TO HER OWN OPINION. BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE NUMEROUS CASES OF HOUSES THAT HAVE ACCOMMODATED THE UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY OF THEIR DIFFERENT LOTS. I'VE CALLED THEM OUT, AND I THINK IT'S TO THE I THINK IT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S BENEFIT AND TO EVERYBODY'S BENEFIT TO UPGRADE THE HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO WHILE I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN, MY NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE WHO HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE EYESORE DON'T SEEM TO
[00:30:05]
BE CONCERNED. OKAY. AND DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT ABOUT WHAT THE SANDY SPRINGS BUILDING OFFICIAL SAID ABOUT THE OTHER HOUSES ALIGNED WITH THE FRONT OF THE CURRENT HOUSE THAT YOU HAVE? I MEAN, IT WILL BE A AND IF IT HELPS, WE'D BE HAPPY TO PUT SHIELDING VEGETATION UP ALONG THE WAY. WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW, 8 OR 9 STEPS. ACTUALLY 20FT IS APPROXIMATELY 8 OR 9 STEPS. IT ALIGNS QUITE NICELY WITH AN EXISTING BASKETBALL GOAL THAT I HAVE IN THE FRONT YARD. AND I WAS ABLE TO WHEN I GO TO MY NEIGHBORS, I SAID, IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT RIGHT HERE. AND THEY'RE LIKE, OKAY, THAT SOUNDS FINE. SO NOBODY SEEMED TO BE OBJECTING THAT I SPOKE WITH ABOUT IT WAS, OKAY, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? YEAH. QUICK QUESTION. SO THE THE IMAGE YOU HAD ON THE SCREEN WITH THE BLUE LINE. SO THAT IS AN IMAGE OF A CONFORMING HOME THAT'S CONFORMING. THAT'S THAT'S A CONFORMING TO THE 60 FOOT SETBACK. YES. IS THAT THE ALT DESIGN THAT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION? I'M ASSUMING. WHAT IS THE ALT DESIGN? THE ALTERNATIVE DESIGN THAT DID NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE. IS THAT WHAT THIS IS THAT THE RENDERING IS THAT. YES. YEAH. WHAT I'M WONDERING IS DO YOU HAVE A SCHEMATIC OF THE NON-CONFORMING DESIGN THAT YOU WANT TO BUILD? I DID NOT SPEND THE ADDITIONAL $3,000 TO DO A 3D RENDERING OF THE NON-CONFORMING. HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL THE ORIGINAL PLANS, IT TALKS ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE WALL. WE'RE REDUCING THAT BACK WALL, IF YOU CAN PUT THAT. I GUESS IT'S PAGE TWO. WE'RE REDUCING THE BACK WALL BY HALF. GOT IT? GOT IT. BECAUSE YOU'RE MOVING UP THE HILL BECAUSE I'M MOVING UP THE HILL. RIGHT. AND THAT AGAIN. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS I, YOU SEE ALL THE TERRACING TO CREATE SOME SEMBLANCE OF BACKYARD. WE'LL BE ABLE TO PUT A SIMPLE FOUR FOOT GABION WALL OR SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT, TO HAVE A PLAYABLE BACKYARD, WHICH WILL BE I HAVE LESS COMPLEXITY WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION. AND SIR, YOU MENTIONED A THREE CAR GARAGE WHERE IN THIS 3D RENDERING IS THAT IT IS TUCKED UNDERNEATH THE BACK DECK. YOU CAN'T SEE IT, BUT THERE'S A DRIVEWAY. SO WE FELT THE THREE CAR GARAGE WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.AND WHY DID YOU FEEL IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? BECAUSE ALL OF THE NEW HOUSES THAT ARE BEING BUILT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR ACROSS IN THE CORRESPONDING NEIGHBORHOOD, ACROSS RIVERSIDE DRIVE, ALL HAVE THREE CAR GARAGE. AND IF IT'S A FAMILY ORIENTED PEOPLE, LIKE THEY WANT TO HAVE THE EXTRA SPACE TO PUT THINGS IN.
AND ON TOP OF THAT, WE WANTED I MEAN, IT SORT OF IT ALSO WAS A BIT OF A BENEFIT THAT WE COULD TUCK IT UNDERNEATH THE DECK. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANYONE ELSE? ANY COMMENTS FOR STAFF? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION. SOMEONE WE HAVE TO MOVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. OKAY. WELL IF IF YOU'RE STILL LOOKING AT IT OKAY. AND SO QUESTION FOR THE STAFF. THE ONLY VARIANCE IS THE 20FT IN THE FRONT. THERE'S NOT A REQUEST TO HAVE ANY VARIANCE ON THE SIDES. CORRECT OKAY. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU A QUESTION THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT YOU PROBABLY HAVE ALREADY SEEN IN WITH THE ARBORIST BECAUSE YOU HAD MADE A STATEMENT ABOUT CRITICAL ROOT ZONE IMPACT. WAS THERE ANY STUDY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT YOU HAVE? WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO HAVE THE STUDY. WELL, WE'VE PASSED THE METROPOLITAN, THE CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER CORRIDOR ALREADY AND PULLING IT FORWARD WILL STILL PASS THE THE METROPOLITAN RIVER CORRIDOR.
[00:35:02]
THAT'S ALREADY BEEN CONFIRMED. LET ME ASK, MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. ARE YOU SAYING WITH THE ALTERNATIVE DESIGN YOU PASSED OR WITH THE NEW DESIGN? I'M JUST TRYING TO EITHER DESIGN WORKS. OKAY, OKAY. WE HAVE NOT SET THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT KIND OF CAME UP AT THE END. I WAS KIND OF SHOCKED THAT I HAD TO BURY A SUBARU, A SUBURBAN AND A HALF, BUT THE ORIGINAL DESIGN I THINK WAS SIX SUBURBANS. AND SO WORKING WITH JOHN AMESBURY, WE GOT IT DOWN TO A SUBURBAN AND A HALF. IF I DON'T PUT IT BEHIND A RETAINING WALL, WHICH WILL MAKE THE RETAINING WALL ULTIMATELY, I THINK, FAIL IN TEN YEARS, I HAVE TO RUN IT A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, RIGHT INTO THE DEEP PART OF THE BACKYARD, WHICH IS HEAVILY WOODED. AND I, I HAVE NOT DONE THE STUDY, BUT MY SUSPICION IS, IS THAT IT'S GOING TO RIP UP A BUNCH OF ROOT SYSTEMS. OKAY. SO YOU DON'T HAVE A STUDY TO SUPPORT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YOU'RE JUST SAYING THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU YOU BELIEVE REASONABLY BELIEVE. YES. BECAUSE IF I HAVE TO TURN IT, IF I HAVE TO TURN IT A DIFFERENT DIRECTION AND RUN IT STRAIGHT DOWN OR PUSH IT FURTHER DOWN, I'M GOING TO TAKE OUT MORE TREES WITH THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, OKAY.AND THAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE DESIGN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE INVARIANCE DESIGN, THERE'S ADDITIONAL RISK OF TREE DAMAGE BECAUSE OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. WITH THE VARIANCE DESIGN I CAN EASILY ACCOMMODATE THAT WITHIN THE BACKYARD THAT'S THERE. AND WITHIN THE GABION WALL SYSTEM. SO THE VARIANCE DESIGN IS LESS RISKY FROM A TREE STANDPOINT.
BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO TO SUPPORT THAT. I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO TALK WITH THE ARBORIST ABOUT IT. I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK AND CHAT WITH ROGER ABOUT THAT, IF THAT HELPS.
THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. AND BEFORE YOU GO, MAYBE I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE STORMWATER PROJECT. EXPLAIN THAT FURTHER TO ME. YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A STORMWATER PIPE. NO, THAT NEEDS TO BE BURIED. I MEAN, YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT I HAVE OVER 5000FT OF IMPERMEABLE SPACE.
AND BECAUSE WHEN I HAVE TO DO 5000FT OF IMPERMEABLE SPACE, I HAVE TO DO A STORM, I HAVE TO DO A HYDROLOGY STUDY. WE ENGAGED A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER TO DO THAT STUDY. SHE WORKED WITH JOHN AMESBURY ON IT. IT'S AGGRAVATED BY THE FACT THAT THE CULVERT IN THE BACKYARD IS CARRYING WATER FROM THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND SO I HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THAT ALSO.
OKAY, SO IT'S THAT SUBURBAN AND A HALF. IT'S THE 37 FOOT TRENCH. THAT'S FIVE BY FIVE. THAT'S ABOUT 1100 CUBIC FEET. SO IT'S A TRENCH. IT'S NOT BURIED PIPE. IT'S A TRENCH. IT STARTS AS A TRENCH. AND THEN YOU DO A SIX INCH LAYER OF GRAVEL. THEN YOU DO A FOUR FOOT PERFORATED PIPE, AND YOU DO ANOTHER SIX INCH LAYER OF GRAVEL, AND YOU DO A FOOT OF DIRT ON TOP OF THAT, AND YOU ROOT EVERY GUTTER, EVERY DRIVEWAY PIPE. YOU ROOT THAT TO THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. IT'S IT'S SCHEDULED TO HOLD 935 CUBIC FEET OF WATER, 100 YEAR FLOOD.
BUT IT'S ALSO GOING TO PICK UP EVERY RAIN. EVERY DROP OF RAIN THAT COMES OFF THE GUTTER IS GOING TO END UP GETTING ROUTED BACK TO THERE. OKAY. AND THAT'S THAT'S A SANDY SPRINGS REQUIREMENT. AND SIR, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO GO BACK AND TALK TO THE ARBORIST ABOUT IT. ONE OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS I HAVE IS DID YOU CAN YOU MAKE A COMMENT AS TO HOW YOU VIEWED IF THERE WAS NOT? IS THE GOLF CART PARKING? IS THAT THAT THIRD CAR GARAGE? IS THAT WHAT THAT'S BEING REFERRED TO AS IN THIS? YEAH. OKAY. THERE WAS A BIT OF A COMMENT ABOUT THE GOLF CART PARKING AGAIN ABOUT IT BEING YOU COULD IT WOULD THE FRONT SETBACK WOULD BE REDUCED. I COULD DO THAT. THE GOAL OF THE BACK DECK WAS TO CREATE A WELCOMING SPACE THAT CAN BE USED FOR A LARGE FAMILY AND THEIR AND THEIR LOVED ONES TO ENJOY THE BACKYARD AND THE VIEW OF THE BACKYARD. I CAN IF I TAKE OUT THE GOLF CART, AND THEN I REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE BACK DECK BY, I THINK IT'S IT'S 20FT DEEP RIGHT NOW. WE REDUCE IT TO TEN FEET AND IT'S STILL A NICE DECK, BUT IT'S NOT ACCOMPLISHING WHAT IT'S AS MUCH AS WE HAD WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH. AND LET ME ASK YOU THIS, ARE YOU WILLING TO CONSIDER, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE POSSIBILITY, IF AN APPLICANT IS WILLING TO CONSIDER GOING BACK TO SPEAK AND WORKING MORE ON THIS, WE COULD DEFER AND THEN THAT. AND HAVE YOU COME BACK? WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER OR NOT? I WOULD CONSIDER THAT IF WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT, I DO NEED TO GET ON WITH THIS AT SOME POINT. CHAIRPERSON ALLEN, JUST BECAUSE WE WANT TO GET THE GROUND BROKEN AND GET GOING. BUT YES, I WOULD CONSIDER DEFERRING IF WE COULD GET BACK AT THE NEXT BOARD OF APPEALS IF THAT WOULD HELP. I'M JUST ASKING IF THAT'S IF THAT WAS SOMETHING YOU WOULD CONSIDER. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DOES ANYONE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? AND DEFERRAL IS ALSO ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT CAN COME WITH
[00:40:14]
EMOTION AS WELL. I MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER. I SECOND. ALL THOSE IN DISCUSSION OKAY.DISCUSSION DEFERRAL. BUT THERE'S NO POINT IN DEFERRING UNLESS WE'RE ASKING THEM TO BRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO US. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING HIM. AND HE SAID HE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO SO AND THAT HE WOULD GO TALK TO THE ARBORIST. I BELIEVE HE SAID TO OKAY, BECAUSE I WAS ASKING HIM QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. I WAS READING THE ARBORIST STATEMENTS AND I MIGHT I MIGHT HAVE MISSED THAT. SO OKAY. OKAY. WELL, SO ARE WE. ARE YOU READY? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? THERE WAS A SECOND. SUSAN. YES, I APOLOGIZE, MADAM CHAIR. IS THE MOTION TO DEFER TO THE NEXT MEETING OR IS IT. YES. OKAY. SO THAT'S ALL RIGHT. JUST TO CLARIFY. SO THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR IS TO DEFER THIS CASE TO THE NEXT MEETING, GIVE THE APPLICANT A CHANCE TO GO BACK AND TALK TO BOTH ARBORIST, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. MAYBE SOMETHING MORE CAN BE WORKED OUT. AND IT WOULD BE THE NEXT MEETING. THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS.
JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S POSSIBLE. RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE CASES FOR MARCH, SO WE'LL BE PUTTING THIS ONE ON MARCH OR MOVING IT TO THE NEXT ONE. SO AND WE CAN DO APRIL. YEAH. TAKE IT TO BUT BUT THIS CASE BY ITSELF COULD ALSO BE PUT ON MARCH COULDN'T IT. YES. YEAH OKAY. SO SO YOU, YOU COULD, YOU COULD CLARIFY YOUR MOTION IF YOU WANT IT TO COME FORWARD NEXT MONTH OR IF YOU WANT TO DO IT TO A DATE CERTAIN. SEE WHAT I MEAN. YOU COULD I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YEAH. IT COULD COME NEXT MONTH IF YOU WANTED IT TO. YEAH. SHOULD I? YES, MA'AM. SINCE I CAN'T MAKE THE MOTION, I MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER UNTIL MARCH MEETING. MAY I ASK A QUESTION? YES, SIR. DO I HAVE TO KEEP THE SIGN UP? YES. OKAY. YOU'LL CHANGE THE DATE ON THE SIGN TO. NO, NO, NO. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE IT DOWN, YOU CAN TAKE IT DOWN, BUT IT JUST NEEDS TO BE UP 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IT HAS TO BE UP 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. I THINK IT'S MARCH 4TH. RIGHT. BECAUSE MARCH 4TH, FIRST WEDNESDAY OF THE FIRST WEDNESDAY OF MARCH. ANY FURTHER ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I WAS HOPING THAT WE COULD ALSO ASK STAFF TO ADDRESS THE LETTER OF OPPOSITION THAT MADE A DISTINCTION. BETWEEN THE THE HOUSES THAT DO HAVE THE 30 FOOT SETBACK VERSUS THE 60 FOOT SETBACK. I'M SURE WE CAN. YEAH.
IS THAT CORRECT? BUT THAT'S NOT IN THE MOTION. BUT WE CAN ASK STAFF TO ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE. THIS THIS HOMEOWNER SEEMS VERY CONCERNED. AND STAFF PROVIDED THAT WITH US.
SO THAT'S WHY WE WOULD LIKE STAFF TO DO BEFORE THE MARCH MEETING AS WELL. YEAH. AND WE STILL HAVE THE SAME MOTION ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? I'LL SECOND. OKAY.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DEFERRING THIS CASE TO THE NEXT MEETING IN MARCH, ON MARCH 4TH, SAY I, I IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED CHAIR VOTES. AYE. IT'S UNANIMOUS ON MARCH 4TH. AND DURING THAT TIME WE WILL ALSO HAVE STAFF ADDRESS THE ISSUES IN THE OPPOSITION LETTER. THANK THANK YOU. CAN YOU CALL THE NEXT CASE CLARK BROWN? YES, MA'AM. TO WAIT. WAIT. WE CAN'T CALL THE NEXT CASE. CAN SOMEONE ASK BOARD MEMBER JEWELL TO COME BACK? OH. PLEASE CALL THE NEXT CASE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. 2026 0004V2560 4825 FRANKLIN
[00:45:13]
POND ROAD. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 11.7 POINT TWO, POINT B POINT THREE AND SECTION 6.1.2. B TO EXPAND AND ALTER A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES IN THE 35 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND A 50 FOOT PRIMARY SETBACK PRESENTED BY LAQUITA WILLIAMS, OUR PLANNER, TO AGREE.THANK YOU. SAM. HELLO. GOOD EVENING. BOARD OF APPEAL MEMBERS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. THIS IS THE LAST CASE FOR THE NIGHT, SO I'LL TRY TO KEEP IT QUICK. TODAY WE WILL BE DISCUSSING VARIANCE V 2560 AT 4825. FRANKLIN POND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL WITH A CONDITION SO THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 11.7 POINT TWO, POINT B POINT THREE AND SECTION SECTION 6.1.2. B TO EXPAND AND ALTER NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES, AND A 35 FOOT REAR SETBACK IN THE 50 FOOT PRIMARY STREET SETBACK. THE CHARACTER AREA OF THE HIGHLIGHTED PARCEL IS PROTECTED NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ZONING IS R.D. 18. ALL RIGHT, HERE ON THE AERIAL IMAGE, YOU CAN SEE THE TRAPEZOIDAL SHAPED LOT ON FRANKLIN POND ROAD. HERE IS THE SURVEY WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND SEVERAL RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. THE PARCEL IS DEVELOPED ON A 0.67 ACRE LOT WITH A TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOME, A TWO CAR GARAGE, PORCHES, AND A REAR DECK. THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1988, AND THE CURRENT HOMEOWNERS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 2005. THE NORTH PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS ENCUMBERED WITH A STREAM AND ITS ASSOCIATED BUFFERS, MAKING APPROXIMATELY 12,560FTā S OF THE 18,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT UNBUILDABLE WITHOUT A VARIANCE. THE LOT IS WITHIN THE NANCY CREEK DECLARED SENSITIVE AREA AND SITS EAST OF FRANKLIN POND ROAD. THE CURRENT HOME IS CONSIDERED A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE, WHERE THE HOME ENCROACHES INTO THE 50 FOOT PRIMARY STREET SETBACK BY APPROXIMATELY 16FT, AND THE 35 FOOT REAR SETBACK BY APPROXIMATELY SEVEN FEET. THE LOT WOULD NOT BE BUILDABLE WITH A REASONABLE SIZE HOME IF THERE WERE STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. HERE ARE SOME IMAGES OF THE EXISTING FRONT OF THE HOME AND THE TWO CAR GARAGE. HERE ARE SOME IMAGES OF THE REAR SCREENED PORCH IN THE DECK THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE DEMOLISHED. THE IMAGE TO YOUR LEFT SHOWS THE REAR DECK AND THE SLOPING TO THE WEST. THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT IS ANOTHER VIEW OF THE REAR YARD AND STRUCTURES. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN WITH THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES OUTLINED IN BLUE.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO EXPAND AND ALTER THEIR NON-CONFORMING HOME. PER THE DEVELOPMENT CODE 11 .7.2. B POINT THREE. THE NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE IS CONTINUANCE. NO NEW NONCONFORMITY MAY BE CREATED BY AN EXPANSION, ALTERATION, OR REBUILDING PERITONITIS. SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 6.1.2. B SETBACK. ENCROACHMENT. ALL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES MUST BE LOCATED AT OR BEHIND THE REQUIRED SETBACK. IN THE 50 FOOT PRIMARY STREET SETBACK, THE APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING TO ENCLOSE AND EXPAND THE FRONT OF THE HOME BY APPROXIMATELY 100FTS TO CREATE A MUDROOM. 55FTā S OF THE MUDROOM IS PROPOSED TO BE WITHIN THE SETBACK, WITH AN ADDITION OF A SECOND FLOOR. THIS INCREASES THE NONCONFORMITY. THE EXISTING FRONT PORCH WILL BE DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED WITH A NEW FRONT PORCH, AND THE 35 FOOT SETBACK. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES DEMOLISHING A 967 SQUARE FOOT WOOD DECK THAT INCLUDES A SUNROOM, A SCREENED PORCH, WHILE ALSO REPLACING IT WITH A NEW 600 SQUARE FOOT SUNROOM AND DECK. THIS DEVELOPMENT DECREASES THE AMOUNT OF
[00:50:02]
IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. THE APPLICANTS ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO ADD 478FTā !S OF GREEN PERMEAE AREA. WITHIN THE SETBACK, YOU CAN STAY RIGHT HERE. NOW GO BACK. THANK YOU. AS ALWAYS, STAFF, CONSIDER THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE NEXT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY. STAFF HAS FOUND THAT DUE TO THE BUILDING SETBACKS, THE STREAM AND ITS BUFFERS, THE APPLICANTS WILL BE UNABLE TO REASONABLY EXPAND OR IMPROVE THEIR HOME, RESULTING IN AN EXTRAORDINARY HARDSHIP. STAFF FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES A LIMITED EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES, AND IT ALSO REMOVES A LARGE PORTION OF THE EXISTING DECK, MAKING IT A NON A NET REDUCTION OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.NEXT SLIDE. THANK YOU. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF V 20 560 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
THAT THE CONSTRUCTION BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED WITH THIS APPLICATION. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND THE ADDRESS. FOR THE RECORD. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DAN WEBB. 1105 WEST PEACHTREE STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA. 30309 HERE, ON BEHALF OF ROBBIE AND ADISA DURAIRAJ, I HAVE A POWERPOINT, BUT I CAN'T CONTROL IT. AND SO I THINK I CAN MOVE THROUGH THIS PRETTY QUICKLY. SO I ALSO HAVE SOME HANDOUTS ON PAPER. IF YOU GUYS EVERYTHING IN HERE IS IN THE FILE ALREADY. THIS IS JUST AN EXHIBIT. I THINK I COULD GET THROUGH THIS A LOT QUICKER IF WE FLIP THROUGH THE PAGES AND STAFF FOLLOWS ALONG WITH THE POWERPOINT, AND WE JUST HAVE TO DECIDE AS A BOARD, DO DO WE WANT TO JUST SEE THAT THE PAPERS AND HAVE THEM. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANKS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU SIR. SO WE DID A GOOD JOB OF SETTING THIS UP. AND I CAN SKIP THROUGH THESE FIRST COUPLE PAGES. YOU'LL NOTICE PAGE ONE IS A SIMILAR IMAGE TO WHAT SHE SHOWED WITH THE TRAPEZOIDAL SHAPED LOT. YOU KNOW, THIS PROPERTY HAS EVERY IRREGULARITY. IT CAN OBVIOUSLY IT'S IRREGULAR IN SIZE. WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT HAS A SIGNIFICANT DROP SLOPES FROM SOUTH TO NORTH, BUT IT REALLY SLOPES ON THE NORTH SIDE. AS THE LAND TRAVELS DOWN TO A CREEK AND THE POND YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTOS. YOU KNOW, IN SOME OF THE IMAGES THAT YOU SHOWED. AND I'LL GO THROUGH THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE IN A SECOND. YOU COULD SEE ALL THE LINES RUNNING THROUGH THAT HOUSE. THE FACT IS, THIS PROPERTY IS SEVERELY ENCUMBERED BY THE STREAM BUFFERS AND BY OUR COUNT AT LEAST, AND HAD AN ENGINEER IN MY OFFICE CALCULATE THIS. IF YOU FACTOR IN THE STREAM BUFFER, THE SETBACKS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE CODE, 95% OF THIS LOT IS ACTUALLY UNBUILDABLE. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A THIS IS THE EXACT REASON WE HAVE A ZBA TO ADDRESS PROPERTIES LIKE THIS. IF YOU LOOK AT WE CAN SKIP PAGES TWO AND THREE. THOSE ARE JUST SIMILAR IMAGES TO WHAT STAFF SHOWED. PAGE FOUR IS ACTUALLY THE SITE PLAN THAT STAFF USED AS WELL. THE NEXT PAGE IS JUST A BLOW UP SO YOU CAN SEE THE ACTUAL BUFFER LINES.
I FOUND THIS SITE PLAN A LITTLE BIT HARD TO READ, SO I HAD THAT IMAGE CREATED JUST SO YOU CAN REALLY UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF THE STREAM ITSELF. BUT THE FACT IS, THIS IS A PRETTY SIMPLE REQUEST IF YOU REALLY BOIL IT DOWN. I KNOW THE DOCUMENTATION LOOKS COMPLICATED, BUT IT'S NOT.
THIS HOUSE TODAY ENCROACHES INTO THE FRONT SETBACK. THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS BUILT BACK IN 1987. YOU KNOW, GARAGE FAMILY DURAIRAJ FAMILY PLANS RENOVATION IN ADDITION TO THE HOME. AND I'LL SHOW YOU SOME ELEVATIONS IN A SECOND, BUT THEY'RE STAYING WITHIN THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE. THEY'RE NOT GETTING ANY PART OF THIS ADDITIONAL RENOVATION ON THE FRONT, CLOSER TO THE STREET, EXCEPT FOR THE MUDROOM THAT YOU SAW OR YOU HEARD ABOUT. I'LL SHOW YOU AGAIN AN IMAGE OF THAT IN A MINUTE. IT'LL PROJECT ABOUT 1.5FT CLOSER TO THE ROAD, AND IT'S ABOUT 12FT IN WIDTH. THAT'S THE SOLE REASON WE NEED A VARIANCE ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. AND THERE'S SORT OF A SIMILAR STORY ON THE REAR AS YOU HEARD. THE PLAN IS TO REMOVE THE REAR DECK AND EXISTING SCREEN PORCH AND REPLACE IT WITH A SMALLER DECK AND A SUNROOM. AND WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO SHIFT EVERYTHING SOUTH. SO THAT WILL MOVE IT ALL FURTHER FROM THE STREAM AND THE STREAM BUFFER, AND WILL ACTUALLY REMOVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OR SOME IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND REPLACE IT WITH GRASS. SO WE'RE MOVING THE STRUCTURES FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREAM BUFFER AND THE POND. AND WE'RE ADDING SOME LANDSCAPING WHERE THERE IS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE NOW. BUT AS PART OF THAT REAR ADDITION, ABOUT A 25 FOOT PORTION OF A WALL ON THE BACK WILL EXTEND TOWARDS THE REAR YARD ABOUT
[00:55:06]
ANOTHER FOOT AND A HALF TO THREE FEET. SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT THE WHOLE BACK OF THE HOUSE.IT'S A MINIMAL PART. THAT PART ALSO IS ABOVE THE GROUND, SO IT'S SUSPENDED IN THE AIR. BUT THAT'S THE SOLE REASON WE NEED A VARIANCE ON THE REAR AS WELL. SO AGAIN I ONLY REFER TO IT AS SIMPLE BECAUSE WHEN I SAW THOSE DRAWINGS PREPARED BY THE ENGINEER, WHICH WERE FANTASTIC, BY THE WAY, THAT'S SUCH A DETAILED PACKAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION. I STILL FOUND IT HARD TO READ BECAUSE HE HAD EVERY CONCEIVABLE FILTER ON THERE, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ALL UNDERSTOOD THAT WE REALLY NEED ONE SMALL THING ON THE FRONT AND ONE SMALL THING ON THE BACK. OTHERWISE, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE HOUSE, WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD WILL STAY WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT AS IT EXISTS TODAY. I'LL QUICKLY RIP THROUGH THE REMAINDER OF MY EXHIBITS. IF YOU TURN TO PAGE SIX, WHICH IS THIS PAGE RIGHT HERE, IT'S JUST A LITTLE. I ASKED THE ENGINEER TO PULL OUT THE AREAS THAT WERE GOING TO BE AFFECTED. ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING CONDITION. AGAIN, THERE'S A FRONT PORCH THAT WILL COME OFF AND BE REPLACED. THERE IS NO VARIANCE NEEDED FOR THAT. YOU CAN SEE THE MUDROOM THERE.
THERE'S A NOTCH IN THE HOUSE. NOW, IF YOU THINK BACK TO THE IMAGE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THERE'S A HOUSE, THERE IS AN ATTACHED GARAGE, AND THERE'S SORT OF AN INDENTION THERE BASICALLY THAT WILL BE ENCLOSED AND THERE WILL BE ANOTHER FOUR BUILT ON TOP OF IT. BUT THAT'S WHERE THE MUDROOM IS GOING TO BE. AND THAT ROUGHLY 12FT OR SO WILL BE ABOUT A FOOT AND A HALF IN FRONT OF THE EXISTING LINE OF OF THE FRONT WALL OF THE HOUSE. AND AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE IN THE BACK, IF YOU LOOK ON THE LEFT SIDE, THERE'S A GREAT BIG RED AREA THAT IS THE DECK AND EXISTING SCREEN PORCH. ON THE RIGHT YOU CAN SEE WHAT IT'S BEING REPLACED WITH, AND YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH SMALLER IT IS AND HOW, AGAIN, THE ACTIVITY IS MOVED TO THE SOUTH AND AWAY FROM THE STREAM AND THE AREA THAT YOU SEE THAT IS NO LONGER THERE WILL BE REPLACED WITH GRASS AND LANDSCAPING. I'M GOING TO SKIP AHEAD TWO PAGES TO THIS PAGE RIGHT HERE. THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS THAT SHOW YOU WHAT THE FAMILY PLANS TO DO WITH THE HOUSE. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE TWO STORY GLASS AREA BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE MAIN HOUSE. THAT'S WHERE THE MUDROOM IS. SO AGAIN, THAT ROUGHLY 12FT WILL BE A FOOT AND A HALF PROJECTION FROM THE EXISTING FACADE WALL OF THE FRONT. AND IF YOU TURN TO THE SECOND PAGE, YOU WILL SEE THE REAR AND THE AREA OF PROJECTION. THERE IS THAT SPOT ON THE LEFT. IT LOOKS SORT OF LIKE IT'S BRICKED AGAIN.
THAT EXTENDS ABOUT. IT VARIES, BUT 1.5 TO ROUGHLY THREE FEET CLOSER TO THE BACK OF THE LOT.
SO AGAIN, THAT'S THE REASON WE'RE HERE. THE DURAIRAJ FAMILY HAS TALKED TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AT THE LAST THREE ITEMS. WITHIN THIS PACKET. ARE THOSE LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORS. THEY'VE GOT A LETTER FROM THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH. THEY GOT A LETTER FROM THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR TO THE REAR. THERE'S SOMEONE ON THE OTHER SIDE TOO, AND I KNOW MR. DURAIRAJ WENT AND SPOKE TO HIM. HE'S ACTUALLY PRETTY FAR AWAY, ACTUALLY, ON THE STREAM. THE GUY SAID HE HAD NO OBJECTION, BUT HE DIDN'T ASK HIM FOR A LETTER JUST BECAUSE HE'S REALLY FAR ENOUGH AWAY TO NOT BE MATERIALLY IMPACTED BY WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE AT ALL. SO STAFF MENTIONED THEY HAVE ONE CONDITION WHICH WE AGREE TO. SO OUR REQUEST WOULD BE THAT YOU APPROVE THIS WITH THE STAFF CONDITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT? ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION NOW AND DELIBERATE AS A BOARD. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? NO. NO ONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS? NO COMMENTS. OKAY. WELL, DOES ANYONE HAVE A MOTION? MEMBER SERRANO YEAH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE VARIANCE V 2560. REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM SECTION 11 .7.2.5.3 AND SECTION 6.1.2. B TO EXPAND AND AND ALTER NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES IN THE 35 FOOT REAR SETBACK, 50 FOOT SETBACK WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE CONSTRUCTION IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED WITHIN THE APPLICATION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. ANY OPPOSED? CHAIR VOTES. AYE. IT'S UNANIMOUS. THE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE IS APPROVED. NOW TURNING TO. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. ONGOING BUSINESS
[VI. Ongoing Business]
ELECTION FOR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. AND NOMINATIONS ARE OPEN FOR THAT. AT THIS TIME, I'D[01:00:04]
LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO NOMINATE SHERRI ALLEN FOR CHAIR. SECOND, THAT. AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO NOMINATE SHERRI ALLEN, ME TO BE CHAIR OF THE SANDY SPRINGS BOARD OF APPEALS, SAY I, I ANY OPPOSED I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR MYSELF SO BUT THANK YOU, THANK YOU. CAN I GET A MOTION TO NOMINATE I CAN NOMINATE I JUST CAN'T MAKE A MOTION. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE OUR CURRENT VICE CHAIR, JUSTIN SPARANO. AND ANYONE ELSE OF COURSE CAN BE MAKE THEIR NOMINATION TO. BUT I CAN'T MAKE A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. OKAY TO ELECT JUSTIN SPARANO AS VICE CHAIR. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. CHAIR VOTES AYE. AND I BELIEVE IT'S UNANIMOUS TO ELECT VICE CHAIR JUSTIN SPIRO. THANK YOU. ANY NEW BUSINESS? CONGRATULATIONS. NEW AND RETURNING CHAIR AND[VII. New Business ]
VICE CHAIR. THANK YOU. YES, WE DO HAVE NEW BUSINESS. WE HAVE A DATE FOR OUR RETREAT. WE GOT THE ROOM AND A DATE. MARCH 20TH, 2026. THAT'S A FRIDAY. AND IT'S DURING THE DAY. OF COURSE. WE USUALLY HAVE BREAKFAST AND LUNCH PROVIDED BY CITY SPRINGS BAR AND SAID MARCH 20TH, MARCH 20TH. YES. AND I KNOW IF YOU GUYS WANT TO SUGGEST ANY SPEAKERS TOPICS, WE'RE HERE TO TO TAKE THOSE SUGGESTIONS AND COMPILE OUR AGENDA IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S PARTICULAR AREAS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE THEM TO GO INTO MORE THAT WILL HELP US WITH OUR WORK. THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU WOULD LET. I WAS GOING TO SAY MICHELLE, BUT MISS MCINTOSH. ROSS. NO. AND ALSO TOMORROW AND FRIDAY IS THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL'S RETREAT, AND THAT'S GOING TO STREAM ONLINE IF YOU GO TO OUR PUBLIC MEETINGS PORTAL. SO SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, WE USUALLY GET SOME SPEAKERS FROM THERE, IDEAS FROM THERE.THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ALWAYS AT LEAST A MONTH FROM THAT MEETING. SO WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THAT MEETING AND THEN PLANNING OUR AGENDA FOR MARCH 20TH. WE'LL MEET WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL. YES, IT'LL BE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF APPEALS. YES. I THOUGHT LAST YEAR MIKE ALEXANDER FROM ARC WAS GREAT. OKAY. THE STATISTICIAN. SO IF HE'S AVAILABLE, IF THERE'S UPDATED INFORMATION THAT HE HAS TO PROVIDE OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS, I REALLY ENJOYED THAT. I THOUGHT THAT WAS GREAT. GREAT. AND WE'LL ALLOW HIM MORE TIME THIS TIME BECAUSE YEAH, I AGREE WITH I AGREE THAT IT WAS GREAT. YEAH. OKAY. GREAT. ANYBODY ELSE IF NOT HEARING ANYTHING MORE CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.