Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, it is 2:30. We'll go ahead and call this meeting to order, please. Wednesday, January 21st, 2026, Board of Zoning Appeals. Go ahead and start with the statement of powers. The Augusta Board of Zoning Appeals hears and makes decisions on applications for variances in accordance with the powers granted under section 1-4-88 of the Augusta Georgia Code. The applicant must provide any scaled drawings or plot plans, including all dimensions, pictures, or any other supporting information at this meeting. Only information presented at this meeting may be used in any future hearings regarding this petition. Any person affected by the board's decision may file an appeal with the Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia within 30 days of the decision of this board. The meeting will be conducted in accordance with the board's bylaws and the rules of procedure as well as the latest addition of Robert's rules of order unless otherwise directed by the majority of the board in session at the time. A minimum of 10 minutes shall be afforded for the presentation of data, evidence, and opinions on each side of a petition. If more than 10 minutes is afforded to one side, then an equal amount of time shall be afforded to the other side. The board encourages participation in this hearing and there is no restriction on whom may address the board within the allotted time. But the board does ask that all public comments be brief on subject and directed to the board, not any individual or group.

I make a motion to approve our minutes from our December 15, 2025 meeting. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. And I believe Mr. Dalton would like to recuse himself having not been at the meeting. Abstain. Excuse me. Abstain. All right, all in favor of approval of the minutes, show of hands. That's unanimous. We have one abstension with Mr. Dalton. All right, we can slide right on into the first item on the agenda, please.

Good afternoon, everyone. We're starting off today with BZA-2526-01, a petition by Harold Goodman requesting a varant for section 8-1B of the comprehensive zoning ordinance to increase the fence height in the front yard from 4 feet to 6 feet on property located at 3075 Walton Way. Staff will present.

Hi, Rachel Martin with planning and development. Um, this variance request involves an existing wooden fence enclosure at the home located at 3075 Walton Way. The applicant request a variance to increase the fence height for an existing 6-foot wooden fence which aims to create a secure residence. The fence continues along all property lines to increase safety and security for the residents. The property is currently listed for sale. The findings are as follows. Section 8-1B of the comprehensive zoning ordinance states that a fence, lattice work, screen or wall is a required in a required front yard shall not exceed 4t in height. The existing fence would be held to the same standard. The existing fence is composed of wood and runs along the entirety of the property on all sides. The applicant states the fence will enhance safety and security along the busy thoroughfare of Walton Way. The property is currently situated in the R1 one family residential zone. Staff observed no instances where fencing exceeded the height requirement within the surrounding area. The fence does not affect the line of sight for the nearby intersection and/or road. Staff did not receive any inquiries um concerning this variance application at the time of completion of this staff report. However, staff did receive an opposition email from the applicant's neighbor yesterday which has been included in your packets. Um criteria for granting variances um are as follows. um extraordinary or exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape or topography. Um yes, the property is extraordinary and or

exceptional because of its sloping topography that we estimate to be um 25%. The application of the comprehensive zoning ordinance of Augusta, Georgia to the particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship. Yes, the ordinance limits the construction of a fence to no more than four feet. The existing six-foot fence will provide enhanced safety and security from Walton Way, which is a busy thoroughare. Um, such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved. Yes, the existing fence is designed to limit access to the property, making it difficult for unwanted elements to enter the residence. Additionally, Walton Way is a very busy thoroughare with a lot of vehicular traffic. A taller fence will increase safety, security, and the overall aesthetics of the property and area. Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purposes and intent of the comprehensive zoning ordinance of Augusta, Georgia. Approval of this variance request will not be a detriment to the public good or impair the purposes or intent of the zoning ordinance. The new fence should not affect the line of sight for the nearby intersection. And that concludes staff's presentation. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is the applicant Harold Goodman present? Yes.

If you'd like, sir, you're more than welcome to uh address the podium over here and add any contacts that you'd like. If not, you're more than welcome to stay. We may have some questions for you. If you would, when you get there, just state your name and address for the record, please. Uh Harold Goodman, 3075 Walton Way. Thank you very much. Did you have anything you wanted to add? No, just thank you. All right. Thank you very much. All right. Is there any opposition present today? Seeing none in the audience, uh we'll just note that there is the email in opposition as well. Mr. Goodman, will you please stay there? We may have a few questions from the board. Miss Williams, can we please have staff's recommendation?

Sure. The planning development staff recommends approval of the variance request as it meets all the criteria established in section 23-5B of the comprehend zone ordinance of Augusta, Georgia as amended. That concludes staff recommendations. Any further questions? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. I think she was trying to get your attention. Opposition. Are [clears throat] you in opposition, ma'am? Oh, I'm sorry. Will you please? Okay. Sorry. When we called for opposition, I didn't see any hands.

All right. If you're in opposition, would you please have one representative address this podium over here, please? [snorts] Thank you. And if you will, same policy here. State your name and address for the record. Uh my name is Bert Harbin. My address is 3012 Park Avenue.

Thank you, sir. And you have up 10 minutes to add anything that you'd like to state. Well, you know, I I understand and I was at the premeating where talked about the topography, etc., and it didn't obscure line of sight at that intersection. But I guess one of our main concerns is the fence going down between the two property lines between 3071 and 30 3075 Walton Way. Now, there is an existing and has been an existing brick wall, lattice brick wall there that was built with the house at 3071 going back to 19 62 or 63. And if you in the photographs that we provided, they're not in the photographs that you currently have in y'all's PowerPoint, but it shows the wooden fence built right up against an existing lattice brick wall. And in some instances, that wooden fence is taller than the brick wall. It's very unsightly. Um, we've had many realtors tell us that it devalues the property coming down Walton Way. Just the appearance of that wood fence that is covering up the existing lattice fence is, you know, it just if you're looking from the property of 3071, you've got a beautiful lattice brick wall and right behind it a brick wall that exceeds the height. Um there were parts that were decrepit and there's not really a brick fence. there's um square openings that um animals or you know a person could theoretically go like you know uh tunnel into. So um that was not an enclosed fence. Number one, um the fence right

near that property had literally nothing to do with it not being sold. So that's I think I may I spoke to my real estate agent about that. All right. Thank you, Miss Williams. Mr. Goodman, I have a question for you. Were you aware of the uh fence the maximum fence height prior to this fence being installed? Uh I was not aware and um I was not aware and when I when I uh spoke to um the zoning board um I explained that.

Mr. Pascal Can we get um planning recommendation? Sure. The the planning development staff recommend approval of the of the variance request as it meets all the criteria established in section 23-5B of the comprehensive zoning ordinance of Augusta Georgia as amended. Yes, sir.

Can I just [clears throat] you know he mentioned openings in the fence that an animal could crawl through. I think he may have said a human being could call through those. The fence was built that way. That's allowed water to flow through in a lower level u area, patio area to allow water to flow through. I don't think I mean I know the house. I live there for seven eight years. I don't think I can crawl through the hole. Um so with that being said, I don't I'm not sure how that pertains to this. But as far as the house being for sale, the fact that, you know, the the house, you know, we've lo we it's currently off the market, I don't know what the fence height and asking for a variance on a fence that was built out of code has anything to do with that.

Correct. Thank you. Yeah, we I'll just remind the board and then I'll go to Mr. Dalton that we're we're focused on the uh the four feet versus the six feet. Mr. Mr. Dalton or Brandon, excuse me. Uh question is the um uh is a permit required to put a fence up of that sort? No, sir. No, thank you. May I May I respond? It must be conforming, however. Yes, sir. Mr. Goodman,

I just want to respond really quickly to that statement. Um the initial reasoning that was stated prior to whether somebody could go through that fence was that it was unseammly and that it affected this the possible sale of the house. That was the initial reason. Now we are hearing a completely different response. So, the fact that the house was up for sale next to mine and that it was widely sold uh you know valued at a higher price than existing homes has absolutely nothing to do with the fence you know. So,

thank you Mr. Goodman and that's a great reminder and we'll go over here to Miss Chivers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This question is to staff. Just want to know um do we have any other wooden privacy fence that have been approved pro uh similar to that in that particular area? While they're thinking about it, I would note that the last meeting that we had, we had a similar request for a wooden fence that was built too tall and we did deny that. Yeah, we did. The difference that Mr. Boyd pointed out earlier was that this is a topographical difference, but that is for this board to make that decision.

And and I'm just hearing the um the individuals who have a complaint. I was just, you know, trying to make sure that uh that we definitely look take that in consideration. And [clears throat] it does show that this is signed by three different people. It might be one document, but did we note that there's three different signatures on there? So that Mr. Chairman. Yes, Miss Williams. Uh in in respect for the ones that are objecting, are you all of the same household? Nope. Okay. Excuse me.

Jason in the same neighbor. Yeah. Yeah. [clears throat] You want me to clarify all that? Yes. Hold one moment. The attorney was Let her Let the attorney go ahead. I'm sorry. Street. The H the house at 3071 that is currently for sale is in the estate. All right. That's my wife, Mary Lee Harbon, her sister Jennifer Reynolds, and the realtor uh listing 3071. Okay.

Walton Way. So, it's in an estate. It's for sale, [clears throat] you know, and I've just, you know, I don't know whether everybody knows. It seems to be very common that 3071's for sale, but this 3075 is for sale also. It's unoccupied. Um, I don't know whether that has any bearing on it, but you know, if we want to talk about security and safety of a wooden fence, ain't much security or safety with a wood fence. All right, Miss Williams.

In our pre meetings, staff uh kind of gave us some intel concerning the 25% concerning the topography. Could we please have staff to go on record to give uh some intel concerning the topography in in our right now at this time?

Yeah. So, we uh what we failed to do is use the topography tool on our website on our mapping to actually pinpoint the specific um you know gradient you know difference from the area. But just from visual observation and being out at the site and traveling along the uh Walton Way, we were able to discern that the house was the property was notably lower than um the street and it basically sort of took away from the overall visual of a 6ft fence. And so based on visual observations and we did do um we did do the 60 60 triangle from the apex of the intersection um to address the sight distance uh or the sight obstruction issue. And so based on both observations, we determined that it wasn't a visual um you know visual uh conflict nor was it from a safety perspective or from from a uh aesthetic perspective.

Just another point to reference here as well. This is a double frontage lot as it is a corner lot. And so granting this variance is granting it not only on the Walton way side but also on the Malver side. Um, so it's a significant request and the Melvin site the topography isn't as uh extreme or significant but as you can see here on the photograph there is there is a elevation a a visual elevation change um that um minimizes the overall impact of the sixoot fence along the property line both uh for both streets. M

I I was just going to say aesthetically, um I don't know, two more feet. I mean, is that really going to deter anybody from [clears throat] getting across the fence as opposed to the 4 foot? Have her to come up. We can't hear. Sorry, ma'am. You're going to have to come on up while she's coming. Does everybody have the packet that shows the picture looking from the 3071 looking at the brick lattice wallage page five?

All right. I mean, that's what we're looking at. That's what any potential buyer is looking at now. All right. Ma'am, for you as well, please state your name and address for the record. Mary Lee Harbon. Um, same address. the same address. Thank you. Go ahead. Um, what I was pointing out was it's not just that it's six feet, it's over seven feet in many areas. It's a varying fence. It's the same when you're looking at it on the top, but if you measure to the ground, it's well over seven feet in many areas. All right. Thank you. Okay, that's all I wanted to say.

Uh, I have a question. Can staff speak to that because we're the variance is for 6 feet as opposed to 7 ft. May we have some clarity on that, please? And and I don't know um if the applicant could confirm this, but these appear to be six foot panels and that appears to be consistent. Um, and so there may be some undulation or some variation in the overall topography of the property that results in a slightly higher pitches throughout, but the paneling itself appears to be a 6 foot uh length. Um, and and that's sort of what we're measuring from the grade level, you know, to the highest level. So, if it's a six foot paneling, you can't make seven feet out of six feet if it's six foot paneling. Um, that would be our response to that,

Mr. Goodman. Yes. Um, if you go on Zillow right now, it's off the market. Okay. Uh, it was listed for 1.4 million at one point. Okay. I'm going to pause you there for a second. I'll just let both of y'all know that we're going to focus only on the height of the fence and we're going to leave the sales of these homes separate. Please. Yes, Miss Williams. Uh, Mr. Goodman, you heard the mention concerning that they allegedly is above six feet. There's no there's no way it's 7 ft. Okay. So, you have you ridiculous. You confirm that there are six feet panels.

Yes. Um, the the house itself is below well below the the road. So, um Yes. Yes, sir. I'm sorry, Dick. But when you in fencing, uh, when you refer to a six-foot panel, I just want to make sure everybody knows that this is not a a 8 foot long panel that's 6t tall that you go by at Home Depot and install. This is a stick built fence, shadow box fence. So, each each piece is is, you know, individual. It's not It does not come in a panel. It's not accurate. All right. Not accurate.

I'm going to ask this board to consider a motion here so we can move on. You know, I would like to make a motion to approve it. It meets the criteria. There's a motion to approve. Do we have a second? No second. Any other motions? I'll make a motion to deny. There's a motion to deny. Is there a second? It's got to be approved or denied, folks. Second.

There's a second by Miss Williams. All in uh all in favor of denial of the variance request by show of hands, please. One, two, three, four, five, six. All opposed to the denial. One, two. All right, that's six to two. This variance has been denied. Thank you. Um, what should I You can get with planning and zoning the staff afterwards. I appreciate it. They'll tell you what to do. Thank you very much for coming.

Oh, question. Does staff have all the objectors? Uh, information, naming staff. Do you have all the objectives information? It was four of them. Okay. Thank you. Just making sure.

All right. We'll go ahead and take the next time it on the list, please. Okay. BZA-25-2, a petition by 1631 Cleveland Street, LLC, requesting a variance from section 21A and 13-9 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance to reduce the required opening space for a new town home subdivision containing five dwelling units from 25% to 0% on a property located at 1631 Cleveland Street. Staff represent.

All right, Kevin Boy, development services manager. This is a request um BZA 2602. Um it's a variance request that applies to a 0.38 uh acre parcel located at 1631 Cleveland Street, approximately 140 ft south of Walton Way at the corner of EMTT Street and Cleveland Street. The applicant proposes to develop a five uh unit town uh subdivision on the property. The proposal does not include a public open space or common area which is contrary to section 13-9 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance.

Staff findings. The subject property uh measures approximately 130 ft wide and approximately 120 ft deep. The property is currently vacant but has an existing uh curb cut access and some impervious surfaces and abandoned a monument sign. Permitting records indicate that a permit was issued to demolish a two-story apartment building back in September 2018. A total of five uh town home units are planned for the site. Each are situated on individual lots. According to the elevations, the town homes measure two stories high um and contain attached garages. Uh section 21-1A and 13-9 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance states that not less than 25% of the development shall be maintained as permanent open space. Such open space may include common areas, buffers, landscape yards, water areas, and any natural areas. Uh the applicant states that the site uh will maintain more than the 25% um open space but it would be private and uh no public or common space will be provided in the development. Uh this uh development will satisfy the minimum setback requirements and buffer requirements per section 13-3 and 13-14 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance. The proposed development will significantly improve the overall appearance of the property and add diversified housing op options to the area. At this at the completion of the staff report, staff has not received any inquiries regarding this uh variance application. That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Boyd. Is a representative present for 1631 Cleveland Street LLC? Thank you very much. If you would please state your name and address for the record. My name is Ingred Duk, 1631 Cleveland Street. Thank you. And you have up to 10 minutes to add anything that you may like. No additional comments. And we just wanted to say thank you to the board.

Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Is there any opposition present today uh regarding this application? Seeing none and staff at the time of completion, there was none. Further, no further. No comments from Thank you. All right, we'll open it up to any questions or comments from this board. Miss Williams, can we have Steph's recommendation? Sure. The planning development staff recommends approval of the variance request as it meets the criteria established in section 23-5B of the comprehensive zoning ordinance of Augusta, Georgia as amended. That concludes staff recommendation. I make a motion to approve. Second.

There's a motion by Miss Williams, a second by Miss Morton. All in favor of approval of the variance request by show of hands. All opposed. Abstension down here. All right, we've got Amber. Sorry, we voted. Huh? We approved it. [laughter] Mr. Pascal abstension, but everybody else approved. Okay, you have approval of your variance request. Thank you for coming in.

We'll go ahead to the next one, please. All right. BCA-26-03 a petition by Elizabeth McGee Cedarham Fletcher Scott on behalf of Cath of the Catholic Dascese of Savannah requesting variance from section 8-8A of the comprehensive zoning ordinance to reduce the front yard setbacks on Mcdow Street from 30 ft to 7 ft and reduce the front yard setback on Monosel Monoseno Avenue from 30t to 11 ft on the property located at 1420 Mono Center Avenue staff represent.

Thank you, Mr. Vasser, Mr. Chair, members of the board, ladies and gentlemen. Good afternoon. Todd Kennedy, planning and development. Background on this case is as follows. This petition is for a variance request on several parcels that are connected. This request seeks front yard setback deviations for the construction of a new parish life building and a social hall building on the campus of St. Mary on the Hill Catholic Church. This site pertains to a large 3.88 acre parcel. The parcel number is as follows. 044-1-055-0000-1420 Montasano Avenue located on the southeast corner of Montasano Avenue in McDow Street. This parcel or excuse me, this proposal also encompasses five other parcels that lie to the east and north of this parcel. Those parcels include the following. Number one, 044-15625 and that address is say as 2516 McDow Street. Um the the last three one of the three digits in the parcel 57 0572504 McDow Street, 0582502 McDow Street, 059-250 McDow Street, and 060145 Arsenal Avenue. It is anticipated that all six of those parcels will be combined into one large parcel prior to permit issuance. The resulting combined parcel will be a grand total of 5.61 acres plus or minus roughly. This pro this proposed project is required to be reviewed with multiple entitlement process including a reszoning request, a special exception request and a certificate of appropriateness request. The applications for those uh those process have been submitted and the information and statuses are listed below. They are

as follows. Number one, resoning requests from R1 and R3B to R1 that was submitted and recommended for approval by the planning commission back on December 1st, 2025. I can also report back on January 6, city commission made a motion to approve that reszoning. Number two, special exception to allow a church expansion in the R1 zone submitted and recommended for approval by the planning commission back on December 1st, 2025. Back on January 6, city commission uh voted to approve that special exception. And number three, COA request for the demolition of the existing buildings and the new construction of the new buildings on the site. that was submitted and scheduled to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission at their hearing tomorrow, January 22nd, 2025 or excuse me, 2026 per COA number 25-0 um 79, excuse me. Um Mr. Chair, I just want to give give a quick update on that. In addition to the information in the premeating, um it has been that case has been postponed by HBC to the February meeting. Just want to give that information up. All right. Staff findings are as follows. number 1 through eight. The subject property following uh the anticipated lot combination will have a polygon shape uh like shape with six sides and will occupy most of a city block. The subject site will be bordered by McDow Street on the north side, Montasano Avenue on the west side, and Arsenal Avenue on the east side. Number two, according to tax records, the property contains a 4,390 ft square foot church and was constructed in 1919. Other buildings uh include an office building built in 1968, a daycare center built in 1986, and an additional church built in 1955. Number three, the applicant seeks to construct new buildings that will benefit the church property and enhance its usage for members. A full realignment of the

existing parking is proposed to improve the parking capacity. With this new alignment, as well as the new construction of two large buildings, will require four existing uh buildings to be demolished. Number four, section 8-8B of the comprehensive zoning ordinance states that parcels within the R1 zone shall have a minimum front yard setback of 30 ft. Number five, an established building line exists along Montasano Avenue, reflecting the reduced front yard setbacks of the adjacent parcels. This reduced setback applies to the existing church as well. Number six, an established building line along Mcdow Street reflects the reduced front yard setbacks of the adjacent properties and applies to the existing church. Number seven, the proposed demolition and new construction will require a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission. A COA with has been submitted and is scheduled to be heard by HBC its regular meeting on January 26, 2020 um January 22nd, 2026 under uh COA 25-79, but as I stated, it's going to be postponed. Number eight, at the time of the completion of this report, staff did not receive any inquiries regarding this variance application. Mr. Mr. Chair, that concludes my presentation.

Thank you very much, Mr. Kennedy. As always, you are a cup of coffee in this meeting. It always brings us up. All right. If Miss Elizabeth McGee will address the podium for us, please. And as always, you know the drill. Elizabeth McGee, she Fletcher Scott, 420 and a half street, Augusta 3091. Thank you. And you have up to 10 minutes to add anything that you may like.

Hey, I don't really have a lot to add. I'll just um say that the parcels are have been for many many years in church use. So um really all we're doing is seeking to combine them and consolidate them, but they have already been in church use for many years. Um and then also I'll just if you look at the site plan you can see that um although we are um violating the setbacks and and therefore asking for a reduction in the setbacks um the new construction plan does not protrude any closer to the street than the existing buildings that are already there. I'll be glad to ask answer any questions.

Thank you Miss McGee. And I see you brought some people with you uh today. If you are in support of the variance request, will you please show your hand? All right, seeing through there. All right. Do we have any in opposition today present? Seeing none, and having heard none from staff, I'll turn it over to questions with Miss Williams. Can we have staff's recommendation?

Sure. The planning development staff recommends denial of the variance request as it does not meet all criteria established in the section 235B of the comprehensive zoning ordinance of Augusta Georgia as amended. Should the board decide to approve the variance request, staff recommends the following conditions. Allow for a front yard setback of 7 ft and a street front yard setback of 11 feet as shown in the submitted plans. The lot combination must be completed and recorded rec prior to any building permits being issued. That concludes that recommendation. Miss Williams.

Uh I will make a motion to approve with staff's recommendation and also add uh the approval for the CO COA from HPC. Adding that as a criteria as a criteria. Second. All right. Just so that we read that incorrectly. It's going to be the existing conditions as well as ensuring that HPC approves it. Okay. Are you agreeable to that? Yes. All right. So, we have a motion and a second here. We're going to show all of hands. All in favor of approving the variance uh request. All right. I am seeing it as unanimous. Thank you very much for your time today.

All right. Before we leave, do we have anything from legal? Miss Pitts? We do. Oh, [laughter] well, this is rare. Can you please activate your microphone?

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Thank you. Bye. Yeah. Sorry, it's a legal matter. I forgot. Yes. Yeah. Uh, can we go ahead and motion to adjourn this uh meeting? I make a motion to adjourn our meeting. Second. Um, a motion to go into Oh, go into legal. I make a motion to go into legal. Yes. Thank you. Got it. Second. All in favor by show hands. Excellent. Seeing no opposition to going into legal, does that mean we go ahead and cut YouTube? [laughter]

Just give us a second until he gives us the Okay. Hold up. I don't know that he's got He wants us to give us a second. I don't want anything to get picked up.