Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Hwy34 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies two variances for proposed convenience store at Highway 34 and Bruce Jackson Road amid safety concerns
Summary
Commissioners denied a buffer‑reduction variance (4–1) and a request to reduce the arterial setback and canopy distance (3–2) for a proposed convenience store and fueling canopy at the SR‑34/Bruce Jackson intersection after neighbors and some commissioners cited crash history and corridor standards; staff had recommended conditions if the board had approved.
Get email alerts on the Variance Hwy34 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The board considered two related variance petitions for a commercially zoned 1.83‑acre parcel at the southwest corner of State Route 34 West and Bruce Jackson Road. The applicant sought reductions to required vegetative buffers and a reduced arterial setback to allow a convenience store with fueling canopy and proposed mitigation (turning lanes, landscape measures, and voluntary intersection improvements).
Opponents at the hearing said the site is part of a largely rural corridor, that intersection crash data show a history of incidents, and that the proposed buffer reductions and canopy setback would erode corridor standards. Lyle Miller and Randall Duncan urged denial; Randall Duncan noted the applicant was requesting a reduction of roughly 17,000 sq ft of buffer area (about 20% of the lot), and flagged GDOT access and corridor overlay standards.
Staff said the Board of Zoning Appeals had recommended denial of the buffer variance (4–1) and had split 3–2 on the front‑setback request; staff noted that, should the board choose to approve the setback reduction, conditions should require a fixed reduction to 93 feet and a left‑turn lane into Bruce Jackson installed before final occupancy. Commissioners debated whether those mitigation measures would sufficiently address sight‑distance and safety concerns.
The board denied the buffer variance (VAR26‑02) by a 4–1 vote and subsequently denied the front‑setback/canopy variance (VAR26‑03) after an approval motion failed 2–3 and a denial motion passed 3–2.
