Board of Zoning Adjustment - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This meeting is being held in compliance with the Georgia Open Meetings Act OCGA 14-1. This meeting is the Board of Zoning Adjustment, five-member board created by the Atlanta City Council and confirmed by Atlanta City Council. It is created to exercise and perform all the functions, powers, and duties of the Board of Zoning Appeals. My name is Michael Williams, Chair of the Board. I have the honor of introducing the other members of the Board. With us today is Mr. Philip Perry, Ms. Aisha J. Thomas, and Vice Chair Mr. Kevin Bacon. Ms. Angela Blatch is Secretary of the Board. Ms. Valerie Lineberger is with the Office of Zoning Development. Also present is the board's attorney, Ms. Charlie Hewitt. Before we get started, we'd like to acquaint you all with some of the rules, procedures of this meeting. Official records of the proceeding are being taped, so when you give testimony, please speak directly to the microphone, address or comments to all board members. Please be advised that the boards may adopt a consent agenda to approve non-controversial or routine applications. Non-controversial? or routine applications may include applications with unanimous recommendations for approval with no conditions attached from both planning staff and MPU. If conditions are attached to an approval recommendation from either staff or MPU, the application will not be included on the consent agenda unless the conditions are the same from the staff and the MPU. If an application is included within the consent agenda, testimony from any party will not be required, including the applicant. After the consent agenda is sounded, the Board will immediately go into deliberations and vote on the consent agenda. However, Before this occurs, the chair will ask whether any board member wishes to remove any items from the proposed consent agenda. The chair will also ask whether any applicant or other interested party wishes to be heard on any proposed consent agenda item. If so, the application will not be included, I'm sorry, the application will be removed from the consent agenda and will be heard and the order was received by the secretary enlisted on the published agenda as amended. Unless the board asks to amend the agenda, cases generally heard in the following order, deferrals, consent agenda cases, appeals, remaining new cases, and previously deferred cases. Our secretary will sound each case on the agenda and will give planning staff and NPU recommendations. All cases will be heard in the order as listed on the agenda or in accordance with the amended agenda as adopted by the board. Everyone who wishes to speak must fill out the sign-in sheet located on the podium. Prior to presenting any testimony, Each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and address for the record. If the applicant wishes to defer his or her case, please make the request to defer immediately after the case is sounded and before making any statements on the merits of the case. The board may defer or postpone on a motion or on any board member at the request of the filing party only for good cause and with the consent of the majority of the board. Cases that are deferred at the request of the applicant will be assessed a deferral fee. Secretary of the Board will notify the applicant of the amount of the required fee, which should be paid within three days of notification in order for the case to be placed on a subsequent agenda. For cases being heard today, the applicant will be allowed a total of 10 minutes to present his or her case. Testimony by members of the public in support of the case shall be included within the 10-minute applicant presentation time. Since the burden of proof is upon the applicant, the applicant may choose to save part of the 10-minute time period for rebuttal following all other testimony and reports. following all of the testimony. The rebuttal time will be limited to addressing comments and questions that have been raised by opposition or for clarification purposes. After the initial presentation by the applicant, parties who oppose the case shall be allowed a total of 10 minutes to present their testimony. It benefits these parties to be as concise and organized as possible regarding each presentation and to be considerate of the number of parties that wish to speak in opposition of the application. All testimony is taken as if under oath and subject to the penalties of perjury. All testimony should be relevant although we do not adhere to formal court rules of evidence. All material that you submit to this board becomes evidence. If it can be easily copied, you may request that it be returned and our secretary will do so. Following all testimony, the board will promptly go into deliberations and have time to consider the presentations by all parties and any relevant material presented as well as ask questions to each party as desired or necessary and then vote immediately following each case. No participation by the public will be permitted during deliberation unless the request by a board member. Written notification from the Office of Zoning Development confirming the results of the hearing will be sent within one week. The only matters this board will address are zoning issues related to applicable rare special exceptions and appeals as advertised and stated in the published agenda for this meeting. Please address and confine all comments to that specific subject. In the interest of time, the chair reserves the right to caution any speaker that has strayed too far off the subject at hand and to request that the party remove herself from the room if disrupted to the proceedings. The board will decline to mediate disputes that are not related to the case. Please note that this board does not have authority over the policies, procedures, operations of the Department of the City of Atlanta. We will be addressing zoning matters pursuant to the City of Atlanta Zoning Ordinance. As it relates to relevant facts, particular applications and comments and evidence from the parties that are before us, speaking in either support or denial. other matters should be mentioned different viewpoints may be presented today and it is possible and even probable that not everyone will agree with or be pleased with the decisions of the board however this board intends to make fair decisions based on relevant facts of the case and in accordance with the relevant ordinance contained in the city of Atlanta zoning ordinance after the hearing Result letters reflecting the board's decision will be available seven business days from the date of this hearing. Finally, no demonstrations will be permitted in the chambers. Please... Please refrain from any applause or dialogue when any person is speaking. And at the conclusion of a particular application hearing, please depart the chamber in a quiet and orderly manner. At this time, we ask that you turn off, vibrate all cell phone paging devices and flashes from cameras so that we can proceed with as little disruption as possible. I will now entertain a motion to adopt today's published agenda.

Mr. Chair, I move that we adopt today's agenda with the exception of moving the following cases to the top of our agenda for consideration of a possible deferral or withdrawal. The cases are V-25-229, V-26-090, V-26-093, V-26-100, V-26-109, V-26-110, V-26-111, and V-26-112. Philip Heary, second.

Motion has been made and properly seconded. All those in favor state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Heary, aye. Ayesha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passes. I will now entertain a motion to move items to the consent agenda.

Mr. Chair, I move that the following cases be moved to the consent agenda. Case V-26-113, V-26-115, and V-26-118. Philip Perry, second.

Before we vote on consent agenda items, any board member wish to remove any items from consent agenda?

No, sir. No.

Anyone present with us today wishes to remove any of the consent agenda items to be heard on the regular hearing schedule? Seeing no one, it's been moved and properly seconded. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Heary, aye. Ayesha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed.

Case number V25-229, appeal of Sean M. Curran of a decision of Administrative Officer of the Office of Buildings for property located at 446 Cherokee Avenue Southeast, from the 45.05 feet on the east side of Cherokee Avenue, and begin at approximately 170.3 feet from the southeast intersection of Glenwood Avenue and Cherokee Avenue. Zone R5 to Family Residential, Grant Park Overlay, Grant Park Historic District. Landlocked 44 of the 14th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner Eric Kaufman, Council District 1, MPUW. Staff recommendation is, I'm sorry, the recommendation is for a denial without prejudice.

Is the applicant present? Seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, on case V-25-229, I move that we deny this case without prejudice. Philip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded. We respect the case V-25-229. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Ayesha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passes.

Case number V26-090, application of Connor Crum for a special exception to increase the height of a retaining wall in the front yard from three feet to five feet for the property located at 1422 Memorial Drive Southeast. Fronting 50 feet on the north side of Memorial Drive and beginning 350 feet from the northeast intersection of Whiteford Avenue and Memorial Drive. Zone R4A, single family residential, Landline 208 of the 15th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner, Connor Crumb, Councilor District 5, NPUO. The recommendation is for deferral.

The applicant present. Seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, on case number V-26-090, I move that we defer the case until our regularly scheduled meeting on October 8th, 2026. Phillip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded. We'll respect case V-26090. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Phillip Perry, aye. Aisha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed.

Case number V26-093, application of Rockland Dunbar for a special exception to increase the height of a wall in the rear yard from 6 feet to 10 feet for a property located at 4431 Davidson Avenue Northeast, front and 100 feet on the south side of Davidson Avenue and beginning approximately 159.92 feet. From the southwest intersection of Lake Haven Drive and Davidson Avenue, Zone R3, single-family residential land, lot 12 of the 17th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner, Jesse Dale Dunbar, Council District 7, MPUB. The recommendation is denial without prejudice.

Acting President, seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, on case V-26-093, I move that we deny the case without prejudice.

Phillip Perry, second. Motion's been made and properly seconded. We'll respect the case V-26-093. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Phillip Perry, aye. Ayesha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed.

Case number V-26-100, application of Kai Chu of a decision of administrative... Appeal of Kai Chu of a decision of Administrative Officer in the Office of Buildings and Property located 538 Ethel Street, Northwest. Fronting approximately 50 feet on the south side of Ethel Street and beginning 148.7 feet from the southwest intersection of McMillan Street and Ethel Street. Zone R5 to Family Residential, Home Park Overlay, Landlot 149 of 17th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner Kai Chu and a lease... ELIKA MORCHU, COUNCIL DISTRICT 9, NPUE. THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR DEFERRAL.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL GO INTO DELIBERATIONS AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MR. CHAIR, ON CASE NUMBER V-26-100, I MOVE THAT WE DEFER THE CASE UNTIL OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON NOVEMBER 5, 2026. PHILIP HERRY, SECOND.

Motion's been made and properly seconded with respect to case V26-100. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Ayesha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye.

Motion passed. Case number V26-109, application of tail end for a special exception to increase the height of a retaining wall in the front yard from 6 feet to 17 feet for the construction of a new single-family dwelling for property located at 1064 Peachtree Battle Avenue Northwest, front of 123.68 feet on the south side of Peachtree Battle Avenue and beginning 500 feet from the southwest intersection of Peachtree Battle Circle and Peachtree Battle Avenue. Zone R3, single-family residential, land lot 184 of the 17th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner, Urban Nova LLC, Council District 8, MPUC. The recommendation is for deferral.

Is this the applicant present? Seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, on case number V-26-109, I move that we defer the case into a regularly scheduled meeting in November of 2026. Philip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded with respect to case V-26-109. All those in favor, state your name, say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Aisha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passes.

Case number V26-110, application of Guillermo Galvez for variances to reduce the front yard setback from 40 feet to 0 feet and reduce the rear yard setback from 20 feet to 6 feet for the construction of a new tiny house for a property located at 538 Shelton Avenue Southwest, finding 40 feet on the south side of Shelton Avenue and beginning at the southwest intersection of Humphrey Street and Shelton Avenue. Zone RG3. Residential General, Landlot 86 of the 14th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner, Alpine Dominion LLC, Council District 12, NPUV. The recommendation is for deferral.

Mr. Applicant present. Seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, with respect to case B-26-110, I move that we defer this case until our regularly scheduled meeting on October 8, 2026. Phillip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded. We'll respect the case V26110. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Regisha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed.

Case number V26-111, application of James Cheeks for variances to reduce the north and south side yard setbacks from seven feet to three feet and reduce the front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet for the construction of a new three-story single-family dwelling for property located at 73 Kenyon Street Southeast, finding 18.98 feet on the west side of Kenyon Street and beginning 195... 195.47 feet from the southwest intersection of Wiley Street and Kenya Street. Zone R5, two-family residential, bedline overlay, landlocked, 13 of the 14 districts of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner Austin Starnes, Council District 5, NPUN. The recommendation is for deferral.

Applicant present. Seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation. Entertainer motion.

Mr. Chair, for case number V-26-111, I move that we defer the case until a regularly scheduled meeting on November 5th, 2026. Philip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded in respect to case V-26-111. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Aisha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed.

Case number V26-112, application of Joshua Booth for variances to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 20 feet and reduce the east and west side yard setbacks from 7 feet to 3 feet for the construction of a single family dwelling for property located at 2190 Wilson Avenue Northwest, finding 49 feet on the south side of Wilson Avenue and beginning approximately 96 feet from the southwest intersection of Lamar Avenue and Wilson Avenue. Zone R4, single-family residential land lot 180 of the 14th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner, Concrete Roots Group, Council District 3, MPUJ. The recommendation is for deferral.

Captain present. Seeing no one, we'll go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, with respect to case V-26-112, I move that we defer the case until our regularly scheduled meeting on October 1, 2026. Phillip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded. We respect the case V26112. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry.

Aye. Isha J. Thomas. Aye. Kevin Bacon. Aye.

Michael Williams. Aye. Motion passed.

The following cases are on consent. Case number V26-113, application of Rachel Cosgrove for a variance to reduce the west side yard setback from 7 feet to 1.5 feet for the construction of a new two-story accessory structure for a property located at 1897 Ardmore Road, Northwest. Front is 69.96 feet on the east side of Ardmore Road and beginning 592.54 feet Point 54 feet from the southeast intersection of Collier Road and Aardmoor Road. Zone R4, single-family residential built line, overlay landlocked 146 of the 17th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owners Rachel Cosgrove and Thomas Clint Scales, Council District 8, MPUE. Case number V26-115, application of Shelton Franklin for... Special exception to allow active recreational pool in a yard adjacent to a street for property located 402 Kelso Drive Southwest. From the 51.52 feet on the east side of Kelso Drive and begin at approximately 113.8 75 feet from the northeast intersection of Patricia Circle and Kelso Drive. Zone R3, single-family residential land lot 204 of the 14th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner Shelton Franklin, Council District 10, NPUI. Case number B26-118, application of Lucinda Bray for a special exception to allow active recreational pool in a yard adjacent to a street for property located at 741- Lourdes Drive Northeast, running 96.32 feet on the south side of Lourdes Drive and beginning at the southwest intersection of Glen Gary Drive and Lourdes Drive. Zone R3, single-family residential, landlocked 4217 District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner Clint Fields, Council District 7, MPUB.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. Reading those consent agenda cases into the record, we'll now go into deliberation and entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that we approve each of the cases listed on the consent agenda as read into the record by Madam Secretary. Philip Perry, second.

Motion's been made improperly. Second. All those in favor, state your name, say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye.

Beesha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed. If your case was read into the record by Secretary Blatch on the consent agenda cases, they have been approved and you are free to go. First case.

Case number V26-106, application of Jamila Brown for a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 60 feet to 49.63 feet for the construction of a second story addition for a property located at 3009 River Mead Drive, Northwest. finding 130 feet on the north side of River Mead Drive and beginning at the northwest intersection of River Mead Lane and River Mead Drive. Zone R2, single-family residential, landlocked 241 of the 17th District of Fullerton County, Georgia. Owner Sabrina Brannon, Council District 8, NPUA. Staff recommendation is denial. NPUA recommendation is approval.

Staff can present. State your name and address for the record. Say again.

Try to touch it. Hello, hello, hello.

That's better, thank you. Name and address again for the record.

Jamila Brown, 570 Piedmont Ave, Northeast, Atlanta, Georgia, 30308. This property is located 100% in the floodplain. The application had been submitted prior to the variance request and site development brought it to our attention that the original design was not allowable because it's in the floodplain. We had several meetings with Rose Connelly and Craig, I'm not gonna try to pronounce his last name, I say it wrong all the time. And it was Craig whose recommendation was that we build on top of the second story of the garage because it was already existing and it was a condition. During the briefing, there was a question about when this property was built. We have pictures from the historic aerial that shows that this design, as is, was built as early as 1972. And I can show those pictures. And 1978 was the latest one we found. This second story was intentional. The design of this house was, this was not an opportunity to get around the zoning, but the only area that we were told we could build. And this was several months of meetings with Mark Mosley, who was the architect, Rose, and Craig. Our last email came in from Craig. Bear with me. where we sent over the last set of designs. And that came in November 24th, 2025, just to give you some context on how long we've been working on this design. And Craig's email states, This was to the group. Kevin, you are correct. You are allowed to rebuild above the garage because it is already living space. We also commented that you will be able to expand the buildable area to meet the exterior walls in the area and not limit the living space. already defined. So the reason we're requesting is so that we're not adding to this encroachment. We're just asking for a reduction so that we're no longer in the encroachment. But the current garage sits in the front yard setback.

Ms. Brown, that concludes your comments?

Unless you have more questions for me, yes.

Yeah, we may. in deliberations. You have 7.35, should you need it?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Is there anyone in opposition in this case? 3-2-6-1-0-6. Seeing no one. Ms. Brown, before we enter deliberations, do you have any other additional comments?

No, sir.

Okay. With that, we'll enter deliberations and maybe have a question or two and arrive at a motion. No question, sir.

No question. She answered any questions I might have had about the dates of the property.

Yes, mine as well. Thank you for providing that context about the date the garage was built. So that was my question, too. So with that, we'll entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, based on the facts presented today, I appreciate staff's recommendation, but disagree with some of the findings here, particularly on the hardship. My interpretation is this was a structure built before the zoning was changed, and I appreciate the sensitivity of trying not to build in sensitive areas, and we're just reusing the footprint here. So based on that... For case V-26-106, based on the findings of the fact of the staff report, but not with the conclusion of the recommendation provided by staff, I move to approve this case.

Philip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded. We'll respect the case V-26-106. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Laisha J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passes. Good luck, Ms. Brown. Thank you. Next case.

Case number V26-116, application of Jessica Flade and Matthew Foley for a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 15 feet 2 inches for the construction of an addition to an existing dwelling for property located at 851 Courtney Drive Northeast, from a 56.9 feet on the south side of Courtney Drive and beginning 1,013.6 feet from the southeast intersection of Highland Avenue and Courtney Drive. Zone R4, single-family residential, landlocked 52 of the 17th District of Fulton County, Georgia. Owner Robert Pilkington. Council District 6, NPUF. Staff recommendation is denial. NPUF recommendation is approval.

Please state your name and address for the record.

Jessica Flake, which address would you like, personal or business?

Whichever you like to give, Ms. Flake.

Okay. 1155 Zonalite Road, Northeast, Suite A2, Atlanta, Georgia, 30306. Okay.

Thank you, Ms. Flake. I'd like to get into the merits of your case.

Okay, so we are looking to add a roof over an existing front porch structure. The existing house predates current zoning and sits already, that front facade sits over six feet nine into that setback. The property has a stream buffer that's at the rear of the property and a pretty extensive topography grade that has really dictated the majority of the houses on this street be developed closer to the street than zoning would allow. The proposed structure that we are trying to add over the front porch is just a roof structure. We're planning to reuse some of the existing column bases that exist on that structure to put the roof onto it. but the clients really want to add this to be able to use the porch structure as well as add some of the original character back to the home you can see in this photo here that the original roof structure that may have existed there was likely taken off to modernize the home and it's essentially made that existing front porch unusable for our clients so We believe that considering the existing home already sits within the setback, that there's a hardship here.

Thank you, Ms. Flick. That concludes your comments?

I believe so. Okay. Unless there are additional questions.

All right. We may have some. We got 821 remaining should you need it.

Okay.

All right. Is there anyone in opposition of V26116? Seeing no one, what we'll do now, Ms. Flake, do you have any additional comments before we enter deliberations?

I don't think so.

OK. With that, we'll enter deliberations and may have some follow-up questions and arrive at a motion. No questions, sir.

No questions. No questions for me.

I just have one question. The awning on the front of the structure?

The existing awning? I'm just getting an idea it's that kind of the length of where the porch will be would it be extended even further into the it will not so the existing porch is nine feet deep we're keeping that nine foot depth we are extending it width wise to match the width of the house okay but other than that there's no additional depth being added to the existing porch okay that's the question I had all right with that we'll arrive at a motion

For the board, I tend to side with the applicant here in terms of the hardship imposed by a zoning ordinance change after the fact, very similar to the first case. We're also not adding any additional condition space here, just improving a front porch. So on those grounds, Mr. Chair, based on the findings of fact of the staff report, but not with the conclusion and recommendation provided by staff, I move to approve case B-26-116. Phillip Perry, second.

Motion's been made and properly seconded. We'll respect the case V26116. All those in favor, state your name and say aye or nay.

Philip Perry, aye. Alicia J. Thomas, aye. Kevin Bacon, aye.

Michael Williams, aye. Motion passed. Good luck, Ms. Flake.

Thank you so much.

And with that, we are adjourned.

Thank you.