Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brookhaven staff recommends conditional approval for Druid Hills setback variances despite board concerns about tree removal
Summary
Staff told the board the applicant revised plans for a Druid Hills Road property to place the main house at a 20-foot footprint and a porch encroaching to 15.8 feet; staff recommended approval conditioned on a planting plan and arborist support even though board members questioned whether the variance undercuts the intent of the front-yard average setback rule.
Brookhaven staff presented a modified plan for a property on Druid Hills Road that asks the board to allow the porch to encroach to 15.8 feet while keeping the main house footprint at 20 feet. Staff also reported a rear setback reduction from 40 feet to 25.2 feet and that the application proposes removal of two specimen trees; staff said the recommendation is conditioned on a tree-planting plan supported by an arborist's evaluation.
"They are now requesting a setback to 15.8 feet," said a staff member during the presentation, and later stressed that "trees located in the city right of way must be preserved unless otherwise approved by the city's tree canopy manager." Staff characterized its recommendation as consistent with the arborist report and the planting plan.
Board members probed whether approval would conflict with code language and the intent behind the front-yard average setback. One board member said the report felt "very in the middle" and questioned how the requested variance squared with code text that limits relief to situations where a property cannot reasonably be developed without an exemption. Staff acknowledged the tension and described the weighing of criteria as roughly balanced: "it's almost 50/50 on arguing the criteria either way." The board also discussed whether the specimen trees were in the public right-of-way; staff clarified they are adjacent to, but not in, the right-of-way.
Members asked staff to add a clear condition to prevent removal of right-of-way trees and to ensure that any allowed specimen-tree removal is tied to specific mitigation and a planting plan. One member asked board staff to confirm the survey and orientation issues that determine the average setback, and staff reviewed the calculation method used in the packet.
There was no formal vote recorded in the transcript. The matter remained under board consideration with staff recommending conditional approval tied to tree protections and planting plans as described in the packet. The board indicated follow-up questions for the applicant would be addressed at the hearing stage.
