Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stream Buffer Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews Alta Vista and Warren Hall variance packages; staff cites stormwater plan as key change from prior denials
Summary
Staff told the board that the Alta Vista and Warren Hall filings now include a stormwater management site plan absent from prior applications; the filings request stream-buffer reductions and front-setback relief, and staff proposed conditions on limits of disturbance, replanting, and verification of stormwater calculations before permitting.
Brookhaven staff combined two related filings on Alta Vista Drive and Warren Hall Lane and told the board the principal change from earlier similar applications is the inclusion of a stormwater management site plan. The combined requests seek multiple variances: reductions of the stream buffer (from 75 feet down to a measured buffer in the high‑teens/20s depending on limits of disturbance), a reduced front-street setback (staff recommended measuring from the back of curb and set a conditional 24-foot distance instead of the much smaller encroachment proposed), and reduced interior side setbacks.
"Reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 25 feet, reduce the front street setback from 30 feet to 8 feet, and reduce the interior side setback from 7.5 to 6.5," a staff presenter said when summarizing the requested relief; staff recommended approval with multiple conditions, including moving limits of disturbance out of the 25-foot buffer and replanting disturbed areas to city arborist standards.
Staff also flagged a calculation discrepancy on one lot: "the amount of storage they're providing only treats 92.3% of the impervious coverage on the lot," a staff member told the board, noting the design used the encroachment number rather than total impervious coverage. Staff emphasized that stormwater calculations must be verified before any building permits are issued and that the stream-buffer ordinance requires compliance before permitting.
Board members discussed combining the two legal lots as an option to reduce some setback requests, but staff explained that the parcels are two legal lots of record from DeKalb County and applicants have the right to pursue variances for each. The board asked whether the proposed riprap and rain garden would materially improve existing erosion; staff characterized the proposed measures as an upgrade that would slow runoff and improve erosion control compared with the existing piped headwall condition.
Staff noted citizen letters expressing long-standing maintenance concerns and said enforcement tools exist via MS4 permit requirements and code enforcement if the city does not maintain a structure; ownership and maintenance responsibilities would be addressed during permitting. The board did not record a formal vote in the transcript and requested clarified site plans and numeric corrections to conditions before proceeding to a hearing.
