Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA June 18, 2014 7:00 PM CITY HALL A. Roll Call B. Approval of Minutes: July 17, 2013 C. Old Business: (None) D. New Business: 1. V2014-001 Request Variances to Section 1315.1.1 Overlay District, 5.A Architectural Design, for Marco’s Pizza located at 5270 Peachtree Parkway, Suite 106, Peachtree Corners, GA., as follows: a. Request approval for a permanent tent made of an alternate material. b. Request approval for the semi-annual use (September- March) of an alternate material tent enclosure. c. Request approval for the use of the color red as the primary color for the tent enclosure. 2. V2014-002 Request Variances to Zoning Code Sec. Section 1401Minimum Yard Requirements, for property located at 3800 Meadow Green Court, Peachtree Corners, GA., as follows: a. Request approval for permanent tent encroachment into 25 foot corner front yard. b. Request approval for additional pavement to expand driveway and add parking space. E. City Business Items: (None) F. Comments by Board Members. G. Adjournment.  DRAFT COPY CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS July 17, 2013 The City of Peachtree Corners held a meeting on Tuesday, July 17, 2013 at 7:00pm. The meeting was held at City Hall, 147 Technology Parkway, Suite 200, Peachtree Corners, GA, 30092. The following were in attendance: Zoning Board of Appeals: Wayne Knox, Post B Marcia Brandes, Post A Amreeta Regmi, Post C Eric Christ, Post D James Blum, Post E Staff: Diana Wheeler, Com. Dev. Director Kym Chereck, City Clerk MINUTES: Approval of April 14, 2013 Minutes. MOTION TO APPROVE THE APRIL 14, 2013 MINUTES WITH CORRECTION AS STATED. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Amreeta Regmi Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Regmi, Knox, Brandes, Blum) NEW BUSINESS: 1. Request by QuikTrip Corporation for variances associated with the development of a gas station facility on property located at 3235 Peachtree Corners Circle, District 6, Land Lot 276, Parcel 019, as follows: a. Increase canopy size from 8 sq. ft. to 20 sq. ft. b. Reduce required Tree Density Units from 20 per acre to 13.5 per acre c. Reduce the front landscape strip from 10 ft. to 1 ft. d. Increase the drive isle from 40 ft. to 47 ft. e. Increase the maximum drive isle from 14 ft. per travel lane to 17’ 6” per travel lane f. Vary from the architectural requirements of the overlay district that require a minimum of 1 ft. deep cornices along the entire front and extending at least 10 ft. down the sides of a building g. Vary from the architectural requirements of the overlay district that require a minimum of a 1 ft. high contrasting base along the entire front and extending at least 10 ft. down the sides of the building Page | 1  DRAFT COPY Diana Wheeler presented the case to the Board. Mrs. Wheeler provided background information regarding the applicant’s request. The subject property consists of two parcels that will be combined to total 1.463 acres and is located on the eastern side of Peachtree Corners Circle, northeast of its intersection with Peachtree Industrial Boulevard. The site is currently developed with a coin laundry (converted from a former Waffle House) and a QuikTrip gas station. The applicant intends to initiate demolition of the existing QuikTrip and coin laundry buildings and construct in its place a new “Generation III” QuikTrip design concept that features an updated building and canopy design. The proposed rebuilding would result in a 5,858 square-foot convenience store with 16 fuel pumps and 39 parking spaces. The applicant has requested seven variances. These variances are noted above (a-g). Staff stated that several of the requested variances can be justified due to hardship or because they create an improved condition for the property over the strict application of the code. The variance to increase the size of canopy signs is justified because the overall number and aggregate square footage of canopy signage would be reduced. The applicant’s intent to minimize traffic hazards and to provide for safe flow of traffic internally to the site by increasing interior driveway widths can also be justified. The architectural style of the building, while not strictly compliant with the overlay standards, is generally in keeping with the intent of the regulations. The building design incorporates elements from the overlay standards while attempting to convey a contemporary style. However, a hardship to support the reduction of tree density units from 20 units per acre to 13.5 units per acre and the reduction in the landscape strip from 10 feet to 1-foot has not be demonstrated by the applicant. With the acquisition of the adjacent coin laundry parcel, the subject property increased its overall size and developable area. Through some site modifications, the applicant might be able to construct a larger convenience store as desired while preserving existing vegetation and providing a full landscape strip on the property. Therefore, after review of the application, Staff recommended V2013-004 (a) and (d) through (g) be approved with the conditions noted below. It is also recommended that variances (b) and (c) be denied. 1. The subject property shall be limited to two canopy signs with each sign not to exceed 20 square feet. 2. Interior driveways immediately surrounding the fuel pump canopy shall be no greater than 47 feet in width. 3. Interior driveways providing primary access to loading or unloading zones shall be no greater than 17.5 feet in width per travel lane. 4. Building elevations shall be substantially similar to QuikTrip elevations drawings dated 5/29/13. 5. Lighting shall be contained in cut-off type luminaries and shall be directed in toward the property so as not to reflect into adjacent properties. Provide photometric plan at time of submittal of land disturbance permit to show compliance with this condition. Page | 2  DRAFT COPY 6. A site plan showing truck turning template to demonstrate the need for additional pavement shall be submitted at time of submittal of land disturbance permit. 7. Plans shall comply with the Buffer, Landscape and Tree Ordinance requirement of 16 units/ acre and Overlay requirement of 1 tree/ 50 feet of frontage. 8. Shrubs and ornamental ground covers shall be provided along front and side landscape strips (3’ island minimum) and in landscape islands (instead of grass). The side shrub planting should extend 80’ minimum from frontage. 9. Except for propane tanks and dispenser machines, there shall be no outdoor storage of retail products. Mr. Lee Tucker, Esquire, represented the applicant. The applicant presented his case for hardship and stated that he was in agreement with all of Staff’s conditions with the exception of condition number seven (7) which he would like modified as follows: Plans shall provide a tree density of 13.5 units/acre and meet overlay requirement of 1 tree/50 feet of frontage. Chairman Knox asked for public comment concerning this application. There was no public comment. Chairman Knox closed the public comment portion of the meeting and asked the Board for a motion. After further discussion, the Board took the following action: MOTION ON V2013-0004a BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS IT RELATES TO V2013-0004A, THERE ARE EXTRAORDINARY OR EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY; THE CONDITIONS OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY CREATE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE OWNER/APPLICANT; STAFF CONDITION 1 THROUGH 9 WILL BE A PART OF THAT, SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST THAT CONDITION NUMBER 7 BE MODIFIED AS IF REQUESTED TO 13.5 UNITS PER ACRE. By: James Blum Seconded: Marcia Brandes Vote: (5-0) (Blum, Brandes, Knox, Regmi, Christ) MOTION V2013-0004b BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT; THERE ARE EXTRAORDINARY AND EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO Page | 3  DRAFT COPY THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY; THE CONDITIONS OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION AS APPLIED TO THIS PROPERTY AFFECT ONLY THIS PROPERTY; THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS NOT THE RESULT OF THE ACTIONS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER; THE APPLICATION IF GRANTED WOULD NOT CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD; AND ADD THE FOLLOWING FINDING THAT THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON INCLUSION OF STAFF CONDITIONS 1-6, 8 AND 9, AND THAT CONDITION 7 BE MODIFIED TO READ THAT PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE OVERLAY REQUIREMENT OF 1 TREE PER 50 FOOT OF FRONTAGE, AND FURTHERMORE THAT THE APPLICANT SHALL (CONDITION 10) SUBMIT A LANDSCAPE PLAN AT THE TIME OF RECEIVING THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT; AND SUCH LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL DOCUMENT THE COST DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE BUFFER LANDSCAPE TREE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT OF 20 UNITS PER ACRE, AND 13.5 UNITS PER ACRE, AND THAT AT THE CITY’S DISCRETION IT SHALL RECEIVE THE COST DIFFERENTIAL FOR THE LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THOSE TWO DENSITIES, AND SPENT BY THE CITY AT ITS DISCRETION LANDSCAPING AT OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Amreeta Regmi MODIFY THE MOTION TO MAKE THE PAYMENT BY APPLICANT OF THE LANDSCAPE DIFFERENTIAL COST TO THE CITY CONTINGENT UPON THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AND CREATING A MECHANISM FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Amreeta Regmi Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Regmi, Knox, Brandes, Blum) MOTION V2013-0004c BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT; THERE ARE EXTRAORDINARY OR EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY; THE CONDITIONS OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION AS APPLIED TO THIS PROPERTY AFFECT ONLY THIS PROPERTY; THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS NOT THE RESULT OF THE ACTIONS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER; APPROVAL CONTINGENT UPON STAFF CONDITIONS 1-9 AS AMENDED WITH THE ADDITION OF CONDITION NUMBER 10. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Marcia Brandes Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Brandes, Knox, Regmi, Blum) Page | 4  DRAFT COPY MOTION V2013-0004d BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT; THERE ARE EXTRAORDINARY OR EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY; A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT; THE APPLICATION SHALL BE APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON STAFF CONDITIONS AS AMENDED 1-9 AND THE ADDITIONAL 10TH CONDITION. By: Eric Christ Seconded: James Blum Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Blum, Knox, Brandes, Regmi) MOTION V2013-0004e BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT; THERE ARE EXTRAORDINARY OR EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY; THE CONDITIONS OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY CREATE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT; FURTHERMORE THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON STAFF CONDITIONS AS AMENDED 1-9 ALONG WITH THE 10TH CONDITION AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Marcia Brandes Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Brandes, Knox, Regmi, Blum) MOTION V2013-0004f BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT; A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT; FURTHERMORE THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON STAFF CONDITIONS AS AMENDED 1-9 ALONG WITH CONDITION 10 AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Amreeta Regmi Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Regmi, Knox, Brandes, Blum) Page | 5  DRAFT COPY MOTION V2013-0004g BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ENTIRE RECORD AND THE HEARING BEFORE THIS BODY, I MOVE THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT; A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT; FURTHERMORE THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON STAFF CONDITIONS AS AMENDED 1-9 ALONG WITH CONDITION 10 AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Marcia Brandes Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Brandes, Knox, Regmi, Blum) CITY BUSINESS: Mrs. Wheeler stated that she will present on behalf of the Board to City Council a request for a Tree Bank. The Zoning Board of Appeals meeting concluded at 8:50 PM. Approved, Attest: _________________________ _______________________________ Wayne Knox, Chairman Kym Chereck, City Clerk Page | 6  V2014-001 Marco’s Pizza  City of Peachtree Corners Zoning Board of Appeals June 18, 2014 CASE NUMBER: V2014-001 PROPERTY LOCATION: 5270 Peachtree Parkway – Suite 106 6th District, Land Lot 301, Parcel 056 CURRENT ZONING: C-2 PARCEL SIZE: 8.9 acres total PROPERTY OWNER: Peachtree Parkway Properties, LLC APPLICANT: Gabriella Billings – Marcos Pizza – 770-840-991 REQUEST The applicant requests a variance to allow a permanent year-round tent including a plastic weather- protection enclosure from September to March for an existing pizza restaurant within a retail shopping center. LOCATION AND BACKGROUND The property is located in the southeast corner of Peachtree Parkway and Peachtree Corners Circle in the Village at Peachtree Corners (formerly the Interlochen Shopping Center). Marcos Pizza occupies suite 106, next to Office Max. The requested tent/enclosure location is adjacent to suite 106 along the facade that faces Peachtree Parkway. The tent/enclosure is visible from both Peachtree Parkway and Peachtree Corners Circle. It was installed without a permit. The shopping center was constructed in 1987 and several of the tenants in the plaza have awnings that were erected prior to the incorporation of the City. The awnings are all supported by the building’s exterior wall and most are either brick red (maroon) or dark green in color, as the overlay standards require. Marcos Pizza received their initial business license on April 15, 2013 and a few months later installed a bright red canvas overhang with support poles over an outdoor patio area next to their entranceway. When the weather became too cold for open, outdoor seating, a red plastic weather screen was attached to the tent structure. A Code Enforcement Officer noticed the bright red color of the tent and during early January 2014 he advised the applicant that approval and a permit were required. When no permit was obtained, the officer issued a citation on January 17, 2014 to Gabriela V. Billings (the applicant) for building without a permit. At the February 6, 2014 court hearing, Ms. Billings was found guilty with the fine to be applied to her variance application fee. The March and April variance application cycles passed with no application being made. The officer then issued a second citation on April 15, 2014 with a court date scheduled for May 8, 2014. Ms. Billings appeared in court on May 8, 2014 and told the court that the delay in application was caused by the slow response from her landlord in signing the variance application form. The court dismissed the case on the condition that the variance application be submitted the next day. The applicant then submitted the application and no further action has been taken by code enforcement until the Zoning Board of Appeals has completed its consideration of this variance. APPLICABLE CODE REQUIREMENTS City Code; Chapter 1315.1.1 Overlay District – 5.A Architectural Design. (1) Building facades shall be of architectural treatments of glass and/or brick, stone or stucco. Tilt-up or pre-cast concrete or alternate material may be used for industrial, multi-story office (3-stories or greater) or hotel development subject to review and approval of the Director of Planning and Development. (2) Contrasting accent colors of any wall, awning or other feature (other than dark green or brick red) shall be limited to no more than 15% of the total area for any single facade. (3) Metal sided or portable buildings shall be prohibited. (4) Buildings shall incorporate live plant material growing immediately in front of or on the building. (5) Buildings of less than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area shall be designed with pitched roofs, minimum pitch of 4 in 12. (6) Roofing materials for pitched or mansard roofs shall be limited to the following: * Metal standing seam of red, green or silver in color. * Tile, slate or stone. * Wood shake. * Shingles with a slate, tile or metal appearance. (7) All mechanical, HVAC and like systems shall be screened from street level view (within 300 feet) on all sides by an opaque wall or fence of brick, stucco, split-faced block or wood. (8) Any accessories provided such as railings, benches, trash receptacles and/or bicycle racks shall complement the building design and style. VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS Sec. 1605.3 identifies specific findings that must be made in order for a variance to be granted. These findings are as follows: 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 Resolution 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 good nor impair the purposes or intent of this Resolution. CONCLUSION There are approved awning colors identified within the overlay standards and all of the other tenants within the shopping center have used them. Staff could find nothing specific to this tenant’s location or circumstances that would support a variance. If approved, the following is recommended: 1. The approved variance applies to this specific size, site, material and color of tent/enclosure only. 2. No signage is allowed on the tent or enclosure. 3. Fire Marshal approval and compliance with the alcohol ordinance is required. 4. Applicant shall apply for a building permit. If denied, the following is recommended: 1. The tent/enclosure shall be removed within 14 days of the action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. (However, the tenant may apply for a permit to install an awning in an Overlay District compliant color.) Aerial and Vicinity Map Shopping Center Tenant Photos  CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 147 Technology Parkway, Suite 200, Peachtree Corners, GA 30092 Tel: 678.691.1200 | www.cityofpeachtreecornersga.com PUBLIC HEARING MARCOS PIZZA CASE NUMBER: V2014-001 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING DATE: JUNE 18, 2014 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5270 PEACHTREE PARKWAY 6301 056  V2014-002 3800 Meadow Green Ct.  City of Peachtree Corners Zoning Board of Appeals June 18, 2014 CASE NUMBER: V2014-002 PROPERTY LOCATION: 3800 Meadow Green Court 6th District, Land Lot 305D, Parcel 031 CURRENT ZONING: R-ZT PARCEL SIZE: 0.14 acres PROPERTY OWNER: Yury Abramov APPLICANT: Yury Abramov – 404-429-4102 REQUEST The applicant requests a variance to allow an existing permanent 12’ x 17' tent to remain which encroaches 12’ into the front yard set-back. Additionally, the applicant requests a driveway extension of 12’ x 27’. LOCATION AND BACKGROUND The property is located in the Meadow Green townhouse subdivision on the west corner of Meadow Green Court and Meadow Rue Drive. The townhouse faces Meadow Green Court. The 1,152 square foot townhouse was constructed in 1992. 900 sq. ft. (26.8%) of the total lot surface is impervious. The tent encroaches 12’ into the required 25’ setback of Meadow Rue Drive. There is an additional 10’ x 27’ pad that has been constructed next to the original driveway. An extension of 12’ x 27’ which is proposed to be adjacent to the townhouse and lying substantially underneath the tent is also requested. On May 2, 2014 Code Enforcement received a complaint about a tent existing at this location. On the same day a code enforcement officer visited the site and documented the tent and driveway with photographs. The officer advised the homeowner that he would need to apply for a variance for the tent encroachment and permission to install the driveway extension. No citation was issued. As stated in the applicant’s letter of May 14, 2014, the tent was constructed prior to receiving approval from the City. The applicant has further stated that “both the awning and the concrete lying underneath the awning will serve to protect the crawl space against rain pooling near the residence and prevent the water from entering the crawl space area.” Driveways are not shown on the approved final plat however the current zoning code states that the maximum lot coverage is 45%. Most of the lots in this subdivision far exceed this 45% limit. The front yard along Meadow Rue Drive is under 45% and should remain under 45% even if the requested extension is approved and constructed. It should also be noted that a maximum of 6 parking spaces are allowed on each residential lot; however, even with the paving extension, fewer than 6 spaces would be accommodated on this property. APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS ARTICLE III. DEFINITIONS Yard, Front. An open, unoccupied space on the same lot with a principal building or use, extending the full width of the lot and located between the street line and the front line of the building projected parallel to the street to the side lines of the lot. Corner lots shall be considered to have two front yards. Section 1001. Plan and Design Standards for Off-Street Parking. The following are required plan and design standards for off-street parking. 1. Required area for each parking space. a. Each automobile space shall be 9 feet wide and 18 feet deep as measured from face-of-curb, or 9.5 feet wide and 18.5 feet deep as measured from back-of-curb. 5. Location and Surface of Parking Areas Maximum allowable paved parking or hard surface area in front yards. (Excluding walkways and required sidewalks): A. R-ZT District – Not more than 45% Section 1002. Number of off-street parking spaces required. Residences (townhomes): 3 per dwelling minimum - 6 per dwelling maximum Section 1902.1. All R-ZT Amendments to be Conditional Zoning Amendments. All R-ZT Single Family Residence Zero Lot Line/Townhouse amendments to the Official Zoning Map shall be conditional amendments. In addition to any other conditions that may be imposed by the City Council pursuant to the provisions for conditional zoning in this 2012 Zoning Resolution, a Concept Plan showing the approximate location of all buildings, walls, fences, property lines, landscaping, parking areas and uses and any other features deemed appropriate by the City Council as a result of the above concept plan review and public hearing, shall be included as part of the amendment, and the use of the property for its zoned purposes shall be conditioned on said concept plan. (*See attached copy of the subdivision plat for the 25 ft. setback requirement.) VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS Sec. 1605.3 identifies specific findings that must be made in order for a variance to be granted. These findings are as follows: 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 Resolution 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 good nor impair the purposes or intent of this Resolution. CONCLUSION The property owner has attempted to solve a water infiltration issue at his home through the use of mechanisms that will divert and obstruct the water. Although the tent was installed without a permit, its location over air conditioning units shows its functional purpose. The tent was clearly not intended as an amenity, but was installed out of necessity. The water infiltration problem creates a hardship for the property owner which, if left unaddressed, could diminish the value of the home. While water infiltration may not be an issue for surrounding property owners, any impact to property values would definitely affect their homes. Further, the construction of the driveway would result in additional impervious area on the property; however, this would not set a precedent since many other neighborhood properties exceed the code prescribed maximum. If approved, the following is recommended: 1. The approved variance applies to this specific size, site, material and color of tent/enclosure only. 2. No additional accessory uses are permitted in this yard. 3. Maintenance of the tent by the owner shall comply with the Property Maintenance Ordinance. 4. The property owner shall apply for a permit for the tent and submit all necessary information. If denied, the following is recommended: 1. The tent/enclosure shall be removed within 14 days of the action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Aerial View 3800 MEADOW GREEN COURT  CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 147 Technology Parkway, Suite 200, Peachtree Corners, GA 30092 Tel: 678.691.1200 | www.cityofpeachtreecornersga.com PUBLIC HEARING 3800 Meadow Green Court CASE NUMBER: V2014-002 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING DATE: JUNE 18, 2014 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 3800 MEADOW GREEN COURT 6305D031