Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Traffic And Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board defers decision on Divine Circle redevelopment after residents raise traffic, safety and environmental concerns
Summary
A multi‑lot redevelopment proposal on Divine Circle that would build four homes, extend a right‑of‑way and construct a stormwater detention pond was deferred 30 days after neighbors raised safety, traffic and habitat concerns. The board asked the applicant and staff to explore road width, house footprints and alternatives.
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Traffic And Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Brookhaven Board of Appeals deferred a contentious proposal to develop four small, nonconforming lots at the north end of Divine Circle and connect the street to Mendel Circle. Neighbors said the narrow street already experiences dangerous congestion from Linwood Park events and warned that making Divine a through‑street would increase traffic and risk to pedestrians and children.
Applicant representatives and an engineer said the project would add a second access point, build a stormwater detention pond sized to handle upstream flows, and dedicate the pond and newly built public road to the city — actions they said would reduce downstream flooding and provide required fire access. The engineer argued that building four single‑family homes and constructing a public road is cost‑feasible only as an assembled project rather than piecemeal.
Neighbors described regular weekend congestion, tight street widths that force cars to squeeze past one another and recent incidents (a child knocked down during a busy event was cited by a resident). Several speakers urged denial or at least a narrower scope — fewer lots or a cul‑de‑sac turnaround — and requested more precise information on proposed home footprints, right‑of‑way width and stormwater visual impacts (e.g., fencing around the pond).
Board members acknowledged the community safety concerns and said some traffic and policy questions lie outside the board’s narrow variance authority; they nonetheless asked staff and the applicant to return in 30 days (the September 17 meeting) with information about possible mitigations, alternative site layouts and whether the roadway design can be widened or the homes reduced in footprint to create more breathing room. The motion to defer carried unanimously.
