Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA April 15, 2015 7:00 PM CITY HALL A. Roll Call B. Approval of Minutes: March 18, 2015 C. Old Business: 1. V2015-001 4324 Ridgegate Variance to Zoning Code Sec. Section 1401, Minimum Yard Requirements, for property located at 4324 Ridgegate Drive, Peachtree Corners, Ga., 6th Dist., LL329, Parcel R63290 028 for a front setback reduction in order to allow a 55 ft. front setback instead of the required 75 ft. (Tabled from 3/18/15) D. New Business: 1. PH2015-002 LEAP Industries Appeal of administrative decision and request for code interpretation pursuant to Zoning Code Sec. 1605.1 in order to determine the zoning classification for an asphalt recycling facility. E. City Business Items: Follow-up on 3800 Meadow Green Ct. F. Comments by Board Members. G. Adjournment.  DRAFT CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS March 18, 2015 The City of Peachtree Corners held a Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. 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 September 17, 2014 Minutes. MOTION TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 17, 2014 MINUTES. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Marcia Brandes Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Brandes, Knox, Blum, Regmi) NEW BUSINESS: 1. V2015-001 4324 Ridgegate Variance to Zoning Code Section 1401, Minimum Yard Requirements, for property located at 4324 Ridgegate Drive, Peachtree Corners, GA., 6th District, LL329, Parcel R63290 028 for a front setback reduction in order to allow a 55 foot front setback instead of the required 75 foot. Diana Wheeler, Community Development Director, presented the case to the Board. Mrs. Wheeler provided background information regarding the applicant’s request. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduction in the front setback from the required 75 ft. setback to 55 ft. There is an existing house on the property and the owners would like to remove it and build a new house. The R-100 zoning classification requires a front setback of 35 ft.; however when the Riverview Estates Subdivision plat was recorded in 1972, it required that residential front setbacks be a minimum of 75 ft. The existing home has a front setback of 92 ft. Plans for the proposed new home show a 55 ft. front setback. The portion of the proposed new home that encroaches into the 75 ft. front setback is the garage adjacent to the semi-circular driveway. Mrs. Wheeler presented three drawings depicting the reasoning for the variance request. The first drawing depicts the existing Page | 1  DRAFT home with current conditions. The second drawing depicts the limited portion of the property that is buildable if all of the required setbacks are maintained. The final drawing depicts the proposed home with the front and rear setback variances in place. At Staff’s request, the applicant contacted adjoining property owners to advise them of this variance application. The applicant provided signed letters from the three closest property owners indicating that they have no objections to the requested front setback variance. After reviewing the applicant’s proposal and the variance criteria, Staff finds that the added MRPA regulations create a hardship when added to the existing setback requirements for the Riverview Estates Subdivision. Therefore, a front setback variance can be justified. The applicant for the request, Mr. Greg Dean of Boundary Zone, and the property owner, Mr. Tony Rogers, gave a brief history of the site and requested that the variance be approved so building can commence. Mr. Dean stated that if the variance was not granted the home would be built out of proportion and would be extremely wide, making it aesthetically unpleasing. Chairman Knox opened the floor to anyone wanting to speak in favor or opposition to the application. Mr. Aaron Kappler of Thompson, O’Brien, Kemp & Nasuti stated that the public notice requirements had been followed, and that there were three letters of support for this variance, all from surrounding property owners. Mr. Sid Johnson of 4328 Riverview Drive, Ms. Laurie Wakefield of 4228 Riverview Drive, Mr. Jim Wueste of 4669 Rivers Court, Mr. Bill Vining of 4185 Gatewood Lane, and Ms. Leslie Johnson of 4328 Riverview Drive all requested that this item be tabled in order to seek Council, and also to see the site plan and elevations for the proposed house. A motion was made after Chairman Knox encouraged the applicant to meet with the Homeowners Association and share his proposed site plan and elevations. I MOVE THAT WE TABLE THIS MATTER TO A FUTURE HEARING, WITH A DATE CERTAIN FOR OUR NEXT MEETING OF APRIL 15, 2015, AND THIS MATTER WOULD COME BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD AT THAT NEXT MEETING. By: Eric Christ Seconded: Marcia Brandes Vote: (5-0) (Christ, Brandes, Knox, Blum, Regmi) The Zoning Board of Appeals meeting concluded at 8:27 PM. Page | 2  DRAFT Approved, Attest: _________________________ _______________________________ Wayne Knox, Chairman Kym Chereck, City Clerk Page | 3  V2015-001 4324 Ridgegate  City of Peachtree Corners Zoning Board of Appeals March 18, 2015 CASE NUMBER: V2015-001 PROPERTY LOCATION: 4324 Ridgegate Drive 6th District, Land Lot 329, Parcel 028 CURRENT ZONING: R-100 PARCEL SIZE: 1.1 acres PROPERTY OWNER: Tony Rogers APPLICANT: Greg Dean – 770-271-5772 REQUEST The applicant requests a variance to allow a reduction in the front setback from the required 75 ft. to 55 ft. LOCATION AND BACKGROUND The property is located in the Riverview Estates Subdivision, within the Chattahoochee River Corridor. There is an existing house on the property and the owners would like to remove it and build a new home. According to tax records, the existing house on the property has 3351 sq. ft. and was built in 1980. The R-100 zoning classification requires a front setback of 35 ft.; however when the Riverview Estates Subdivision plat was recorded in 1972, it required that residential front setbacks be a minimum of 75 ft. The existing home has a front setback of 92 ft. Plans for the proposed new home show a 55 ft. front setback. The portion of the proposed new home that encroaches into the 75 ft. front setback is the garage adjacent to the semi-circular driveway. When the Riverview Estates Subdivision was originally platted, there were no state mandated requirements for construction distances away from the Chattahoochee River. However, the Metropolitan River Protection Act (MRPA) was adopted in 1973 and this regulation has had a significant impact on all development along the Chattahoochee River. One of the provisions of MRPA is that a 150 ft. impervious setback must be maintained between the river and any construction. The current home is located 94.1 ft. from the river. Setting back the new home an additional 56 ft. would severely limit the size of the house. Further, if the 75 ft. front setback were also applied, the lot would be left undevelopable, with only a 20 ft. wide buildable area. In order for the lot to be buildable, variances would be required for either the front, the rear, or both setbacks. Since encroaching too far into the rear setback could have a potentially negative environmental impact and encroaching too far into the front would put the house too close to the street, the property owner is requesting smaller variances to each setback. The Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) has jurisdiction over encroachments into the 150 ft. setback to the rear of the property. They have reviewed and approved the applicant’s request for a reduction from the required 150 ft. rear setback to a 100 ft. rear setback. The ZBA has jurisdiction over the front setback and so this application only involves the front setback reduction request. The applicant has submitted three drawings that are helpful in understanding the reason for the variance request. The first drawing shows the existing conditions and the location on the property of the current home. The second drawing shows the very limited portion of the property that is buildable if all of the required setbacks are maintained. The final drawing shows the proposed home with the front and rear setback variances in place. At Staff’s request, the applicant contacted adjoining property owners to advise them of this variance application. The applicant provided signed letters (attached to the application) from the three closest property owners indicating that they have no objections to the requested front setback variance. 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 would like to remove an older home and replace it with one that will improve property values in the Riverview Estates neighborhood. Staff has reviewed aerial imagery of homes along Ridgegate Drive and finds that the home proposed by the applicant is comparable to most homes along the street. Granting the setback variance would not provide the property owner with an opportunity to build a home that is larger than others or out of character with the neighborhood. Further, the exact placement of the fronts of the existing homes along the street vary somewhat and don’t maintain a strict, uniform appearance. This means that granting the variance would not result in a home that stood out or whose location was unusual within the neighborhood. After reviewing the applicant’s proposal and the variance criteria, Staff finds that the added MRPA regulations create a hardship when added to the existing setback requirements for the Riverview Estates Subdivision. Therefore, a front setback variance can be justified.  CITY OF Peachtree CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORNERS Innovative & Remarkable 147 Technology Parkway, Suite 200, Peachtree Corners, GA 30092 Tel: 678.691.1200 I www.cityofpeachtreecornersga.com Case Number: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Received Date:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.Hearing Date:_ _ _ _ __ Variance Application from the Zoning Resolution (Zoning Board of Appeals) Please complete this application & submit it with all attachments as stated in the Variance Application Guidelines. A variance cannot be processed unless all information acccmpanies the application; a variance from a condition of zoning or special use cannot beaccepe t d. Applicant Information Property Owner Information Name Greg Dean Name Ton)l Rogers Address {all correspondence will be malled to this Address 4324 Ridgegate Drive address): 4195 South Lee Street. Suite I. City Peachtree Corners City Buford Ga. 30097 State Zip State Ga Zip 30518 Phone 770-722-4817 Phone 770-271-5772 Contact Person Name: Greg Dean Phone: 770-271-5772 Email Address: gdean@boundaryzone.com Applicant is the (please check or circle one of the following): [ ] Property Owner [>l Owner's Agent [ ] Contract Purchaser Address of Property 4324 Ridgegate Drive, Peachtree Corners, Ga. 30097 Subdivision or Project Name Riverview Estates Lot & Block L32 B 'E' District, Land Lot, & Parcel (MRN) 6th Dist. LL 329. Parcel R6329 028 Proposed Development _ _S_in~g~le_F_a_m~ily~H_o_m_e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Permit Number (if construction has begun) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Variance Requested _ _ _R_e~d~uc~t~io~n~o~f~f~ro~n~t~s~e~tb~a~c~k~t~o_5~5~'~fr~o~m~ri~g_h~t-~of_-w~a~y_ _ _ __ A complete application includes the following: D Application Form (1 original and 9 copies) D Application Fee n Site Plan and/or Boundary Survey o Adjacent owner(s) written support (1 original and 9 copies) (1 original and 9 copies) D Letter of Intent (1 original and 9 copies) D Additional Documentation as needed lJ Signed & notarized Certification page City of Peachtree Corners Attention: Lynn Pierson 147 Technology Parkway Suite 200 Peachtree Corners, GA 3 0092 Re: Approval Letter for Variance request for 4324 Ridgegate Drive, Peachtree Corners GA To the City of Peachtree Corners, I, Dexter R. Floyd, am the legal owner of the property located at 4325 Ridgegate Drive, Peachtree Corners, GA 30097-2318 with the following legal description: Lot: 23 Block 'E', Unit 3 of the Riverview Estates Subdivision Land Lot 329, 61h District of Gwinnett County Georgia which is an adjoining property across the street to the subject property located at 4324 Ridgegate Drive, Peachtree Corners GA 30097-2318. I am aware that a reduction of the required front yard setback is being applied for at the subject propetty and I have reviewed the plans presented to me by the petitioner for the proposed reduction of the front yard setback. I have no objection to granting my consent for the reduction of the front yard setback from 75' to 55' per the request for variance from the owner of the subject property. ~~d! /-------------~ Printed Name: ::D Q_rr-Qc <K, f LGj Q_ Date:~l l___,__.jz__,_2f,__,_/f_ _  CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 147 Technology Parkway, Suite 200, Peachtree Corners, GA 30092 Tel: 678.691.1200 | www.cityofpeachtreecornersga.gov VARIANCE 4324 RIDGEGATE DRIVE CASE NUMBER: V2015-001 BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING DATE: 3-18-15 7 pm PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4324 RIDGEGATE DRIVE  PH2015-002 LEAP Industries  City of Peachtree Corners Zoning Board of Appeals April 15, 2015 CASE NUMBER: PH2015-002 PROPERTY LOCATION: 3095 Kingston Court 6th District, Land Lot 275, Parcel 033 CURRENT ZONING: M-1 PARCEL SIZE: 3.7 acres PROPERTY OWNER: HM Peachtree Corners LLC APPLICANT: Steven Wachter, Chief Operating Officer REQUEST The applicant would like to appeal an administrative decision and request a code interpretation pursuant to Zoning Code Sec. 1605.1 in order to determine the zoning classification for an asphalt recycling facility. ZONING CODE ISSUE The Zoning Code identifies permitted and special uses allowed in each zoning district within the city. When a use is not specifically listed in the Code, the Community Development Director has the authority to determine the most appropriate zoning district for its placement. On rare occasion, (such as this one), the zoning district determination is difficult to make because the use has multiple components that are allowed in more than one district. In this case, LEAP Industries would like to locate their asphalt recycling business in a building located in the M-1 zoning district. LEAP has identified a piece of property near Peachtree Industrial Boulevard and Jones Mill Road that meets all of their needs and they would like to move their business into the existing building on this site. LEAP’s business involves taking used asphalt that is no longer needed and processing the material into new, useable asphalt.  The M-1 zoning district allows ‘Manufacturing or Assembly Plant’.  The M-1 zoning district also identifies a ‘Recovered Materials Processing Facility as a permitted use and limits it as follows: Recovered Materials Processing Facility, Wood Chipping and Shredding, Yard Trimmings composting Facility - Recovered materials processing activities shall be limited to collection, sorting, compaction, and shipping. Composting materials shall be limited to tree stumps, branches, leaves, and grass clippings or similar vegetative materials, not including animal products, inorganic materials such as bottles, cans, plastics, metals or similar materials. LEAP Industries provides recovered materials processing and manufacturing. However, the material it recycles is not included in the code description and the type of recycling that the code contemplates is different. That type of recycling involves sorting different materials and distributing them to other locations for processing. Within the M-2 zoning district, there is a special use identified as ‘Asphalt Plant’. There is no definition provided for this term; however, the traditional asphalt plant is a heavy industry that has air emissions and other issues that require special consideration. The zoning category dilemma in this case comes from the fact that LEAP industries performs the functions of an asphalt plant; however, their patented, non-traditional processes do not produce the air quality and other environmental issues found with a traditional, heavy industry plant. LEAP representatives have submitted documentation that shows they have a very ‘green’ business and would not need the more intense M-2 zoning classification. They have also submitting a map showing that one of their other facilities is located close to several residential areas. CONCLUSION Although LEAP Industries performs the functions of an asphalt plant, their processes and emissions are similar to a manufacturing facility; therefore, the LEAP Industry business warrants consideration of being placed within the M-1 zoning district as a ‘Manufacturing Plant.’ April 1, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals Peach Tree Corners, GA LEAP Manufacturing respectfully requests consideration to allow operation at the proposed location, 3095 Kingston Court, under the existing M-1 zoning for the following reasons: - We believe that categorizing LEAP’s business under the label of traditional asphalt production is misleading. LEAP’s process is far different than traditional asphalt production and more aligned with resource recovery (recycling). - LEAP’s process does not include gas or diesel powered furnaces or dryers as is the case with traditional asphalt production. - Our first plant, now in full operation in Brooklyn Park, MN, is located in a light industrial business park. For the purposes of zoning, our business in MN is considered “recycling”. - Our process does not produce offensive odors or high level of gas emissions. In fact, we have already been awarded an Air Permit Exemption by the State of Georgia for our proposed facility. (Attached) - LEAP’s heating process uses proprietary low energy microwave technology in order to transform reclaimed pavement into new pavement material. It is a clean process. - All processing of recovered pavement is done indoors The initial survey of surrounding businesses at the proposed location suggests that LEAP’s recycling process would easily fit within the general nature of the business community. LEAP will be happy to comply with any path forward that the Zoning Board suggests in order for LEAP to succeed as a new business operator and employer in Peach Tree Corners. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, Steven Wachter Chief Operating Officer LEAP Technologies  LOW ENERGY ASPHALT PAVEMENT Innovation is our core. Improving communities is our passion. Finding revolutionary solutions to everyday problems inspires us. At LEAP we are colorblind… to us, the new black is very green. One road, one parking lot, one driveway at a time, LEAP is leaping ahead. Beyond Asphalt.  WHY CHOOSE LEAP? • Our production process is completely sustainable • LEAP plants produce next to zero greenhouse gasses / pollution onsite • We utilize 100% recycled asphalt as our base material • Our final product is 95% recycled • LEAP plants do not quarry any virgin aggregate • Plants can be located closer to major metropolitan areas, decreasing trucking emissions and cost • Our Hot Mix Asphalt is stronger and longer lasting than traditional asphalt • The price of our product is less than traditional HMA • LEAP Plants do not burn any raw fuels or natural gasses • We do not charge customers to dump millings or chunks of asphalt • The LEAP city desk is a “one-stop-shop” for HMA, tools and sealcoating products • Our proprietary heating process allows us to produce product year-round  THE LEAP PROCESS The LEAP technology breakthrough occurred in the Spring of 2012 while testing different heating systems and engineered emulsions for use in CIR and FDR. The LEAP patent pending process converts 100% recycled asphalt pavement into HMA (Hot Mix Asphalt) LEAP Technologies Inc.: Low Energy Asphalt Pavement that LEAP is two to technology threeoccurred breakthrough timesin spring moreof 2012 durable thandifferent while testing existing HMA heating products. systems and engineeredThe LEAP emulsions for use in CIR and production process uses very little energy, is environmentally friendly and creates next to FDR. LEAP patent pending process and chemistry converts 100% recycled asphalt pavement into HMA pavement two to three times the performance of existing HMA asphalt. The production process uses very little energy and is environmentally friendly. zero pollution. The process is SO green in fact, that production can take place indoors and can be placed closer to major metropolitan areas than traditional asphalt plants. The process: 100% RAP Material Sized & Injected (5%) Fused to produce a High Performance HMA 100% RAP Material Sized & Injected (5%) Fused to produce high performance HMA  PERFORMANCE RESULTS All testing was conducted by outside 3rd party labs Super Pave LEAP SPWEB340B HMA Oil or Emulsion 5.5 5.0 (emulsion) Content Bulk Specific Gravity 2.438 2.356 (Gmb) Density, lb/ft3 152.1 147.0 Maximum Specific 2.540 2.396 Gravity (Gmm) Dry Tensile Strength (psi) 68.1 120 Soaked Tensile Strength (psi) 55.1 96 TSR 80.9% 80% % Voids 4.0 3.8 * Tests results above are from product produced out of LEAP temporary lab. New test results will be produced out of Brooklyn Park facility  ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY LEAP Technologies Production Process is VERY clean and GREEN. Our LOW ENERGY HEATING SYSTEMS use NO open flame or burning of raw fuel sources. The result is a plant that produces next to ZERO VOC’s or PARTULATE MATTER making our plants the CLEANEST ON THE The LEAP production process is CLEAN and GREEN! Our LOW ENERGY HEATING SYSTEMS use NO open flame or burning of raw fuel sources. The result PLANET! is a plant that produces next to ZERO VOC’s or PARTICULATTE MATTER making our plants the CLEANEST ON THE PLANET! POLLUTION TESTING RESULTS GREENHOUSE GAS ANALYSIS  PLANT FOOTPRINT ZERO GREENHOUSE GAS PLANT PLACEMENT JUST ABOUT ANYWHERE LEAP Plants can be placed in almost any industrial zoning that supports truck traffic, significantly increasing our competitive advantage over conventional asphalt plants by going where they can’t! Our strategic locations will reduce hauling rates and truck emissions! LEAP plants have a much smaller footprint than conventional asphalt plants PLANT FOOTPRINT  WHAT DOES THIS MEAN IN REAL WORLD TERMS? • Target 1916 locations in the US & Canada • The average lot size is 30,000 square yards = 270,000 square feet • The average thickness of a lot is 4” • The average amount of asphalt (in tons) per lot = 6,750 • Target’s asphalt portfolio = 12,933,000 tons • If Target had paved all of their lots with the LEAP product, the reduction in the greenhouse gasses emitted in order to produce their asphalt would be 426,944,196 pounds • *If all of Target’s lots had been paved with the LEAP product, the cost savings to Target would have been roughly $116,400,000 *Based on an average cost from the Maple Grove location of Commercial Asphalt’s 32/42b price - $43.50/ton and the LV4 price - $55.10/ton for an average of $49.3/ton (this is current 2014 pricing). LEAP AHEAD. BEYOND ASPHALT.  LEAP BROCHURE One road. One parking lot. One driveway at a time. LEAP is leaping ahead. Beyond Asphalt. Not just new. LEAP is renewable asphalt that redefines performance. LOW ENERGY ASPHALT PAVEMENT Adrienne Daney LEAP Sales Director 661-706-6091 adrienne@chooseLEAP.com