Meeting Minutes 5/2/2024  THE: FAYETTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION met on May 2, 2024, at' 7:001 P.M. in the Fayette County Administrative Complex, 140 Stonewall Avenue West, Fayetteville,  Georgia.  MEMBERS PRESENT: John H. Culbreth Sr., Chairman  John Kruzan, Vice-Chairman Danny England Jim Oliver Boris Thomas  STAFF PRESENT:  Debbie Bell, Planning and Zoning Director Deborah Sims, Zoning Administrator  NEW BUSINESS 1. Call to Order. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of Agenda.  Debbie Bell requested to amend the agenda to add approval oft the following minor final plats: Adams Farm 1805, LLC and William Jerry Cleveland as item number 5, 405 Bankstown Road as item number 6, Veterans Pkwy and Lees Mill South, LLC as item number 7, and Veterans Danny England made a motion to approve the agenda with the addition oft the Minor Final Plat oft the Adams Farm 1805, LLCand William Jerry Cleveland Property as item number 5, Minor Final Plat of4 405 Bankstown Road as item number 6, minorf final platf for Veterans Pkwy and Lees Mill South, LLCas item number 7, and Veterans Parkway Tract 1 as item 8. Public Hearing items will now be items 9-13. John Kruzan seconded the motion. The  Parkway Tract 1 as item number 8.  motion carried. 5-0.  4. Consideration of the Minutes of the meeting held on April 4, 2024 Jim Oliver seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.  Danny. England made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting held on April 4, 2024. 5. Approval of Minor Final Plat of the Adams Farm 1805, LLC and William Jerry Cleveland Debbie Bell stated this is a minor plat subdividing the tract. The minor final plat has been  Property.  reviewed and approved by staff.    John Kruzan made the motion to approve the Minor Final Plat oft the Adams Farm 1805, LLC and William Jerry Cleveland. Danny England seconded the motion. The motion  passed unanimously.  6. Approval oft the Minor Final Plat for 405 Bankstown Road.  Deborah Sims stated this is simply aj plat to subdivide one parcel into two parcels. It has been John Kruzan made a motion to approve the Minor Final Platfor 405 Bankstown Road.  reviewed and approved by staff.  Danny England: seconded. the motion. The motion carried: 5-0.  7. Approval of the Minor Final Plat for Veterans Pkwy and Lees Mill South, LLC.  Deborah Sims explained this is the west side of the US Soccer Federation. One of the conditions of rezoning was the combination of parcels. This final plat is the combination of parcels on the west side of Veterans Parkway. This plat has been reviewed and approved by John Kruzan made the motion to approve the Minor Final. Plat for Veterans Pkwy and Lees Mill South, LLC. Danny England. seconded. the motion. The motion passed unanimously.  staff.  8. Approval of the Minor Final Plat for Veterans Parkway Tract 1.  Deborah Sims explained this is the east side of the US Soccer Federation property. This plat John Kruzan made the motion to approve the Minor Final Platj for Veterans Parkway Tract 1.1 Danny England: seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.  has been reviewed and approved by staff.  PUBLIC HEARING  9. Consideration of Petition No. 1345-24-A, David Asa Lamb, owner; LDO Fayette, LLC, applicant; Randy Boyd, Agent, request to rezone 0.964 acres from A-R (Agricultural- Residential) to R-50 (Single-Family Residential) for the purposes of developing a residential neighborhood of single-family detached homes; property is located in Land Lot 85 of the 7th Debbie Bell introduced petition 1345-24-A. This is one (1) parcel of three (3) being rezoned for the development of one (1) neighborhood. There is a total of19.272 acres to be rezoned from A-R to R-50 and concurs with the Future Land Use Plan of one (1) unit per one (1)acre. All parcels are legal lots of record. The staff report will be presented once, but there will be The existing house on parcel 0722 003 does not meet the dimensional requirements, SO staff recommends conditional approval with the demolition of this structure within 90 days of  District and fronts on Ellison Road.  separate hearings for each parcel.    rezoning.  The existing barn on parcel 0722 062 does not meet the requirements of an accessory structure inl R-50. Staffrecommends the existing barn be demolished within 90 days oft rezoning. The included concept plan indicates parcel 0722 010 will be used primarily for stormwater detention. There are no significant environmental factors affecting this development. Staff recommends the three (3) parcels in this rezoning be combined into a single parcel with an Randy Boyd is representing the children oft the Richard E. Lamb, Sr. Estate and LDO Fayette, LLC,al Brent Scarbrough company. LDOI Fayette, LLCI has a current contract ont this] property and intends to develop the property ift the rezoning petition is approved. This is a 19.272 acre tract ofland on the west side ofEllison Road currently zoned A-R which is five (5) acres. The applicant is requesting R-50: zoning which requires a 2,100 square foot house. Ellison Road is a collector road on the Fayette County Thoroughfare Plan. Collector roads require an 80-foot right-of-way. Research indicates the right-of-way was dedicated in 1967. Applicant has completed the level one soils analysis, SO minimal changes in the final Completing the recorded plat within ninety (90) days should not be a problem, but the demolition of the existing house currently has a tenant. State law requires a notice of at least sixty (60) days to tenants to vacate the property. Should the tenant not vacate as requested, the applicant would have to an approved eviction prior to demolition. The eviction procedure can take anywhere from fifteen (15) to seventy-five (75) days toj proceed through the court system. Tax: records indicate the home was constructed in 1962. Prior to the approval of a demolition permit, the structure would have to be tested for lead based paint and asbestos. Structures with The applicant humbly requests 180 days to remove the existing structures. Ifall went perfectly, itc could happen in ninety (90) days, but things don't seem to go that way now. That allows time for the tenant to relocate and any mitigation required for demolition of an older structure. Mr. Boyd also requests 180 days to remove the barn. Demolition requires heavy equipment and multiple dumpsters. It would save ift the applicant only had to pay one ()mobilization  approved, recorded plat within 90 days ofr rezoning.  Posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour. development are expected.  lead and/or asbestos are required to have a mitigation process.  expense.  No one else spoke in favor or opposition of the rezoning.  Boris' Thomas asked why the tenant had not already been notified since the property was under contract and what was the anticipated price point oft the proposed development.    Randy Boyd stated the anticipated price point was $750,000.  Boris Thomas stated traffic was already aj problem for people coming onto Tyrone Road from Dogwood Trail. He wondered how much longer it would be before Fayette County would Randy Boyd explained he did not have those numbers in front ofhim, nor were traffic studies required for rezonings. Mr. Boyd said he will speak with) Phil Mallon at Public Works to seei if he had that answer. In response to the notice question, the clients preferred to wait until the rezoning was approved to give notice to the tenant. The rental income from the tenant assists Jim Oliver asked Debbie Bell if rather than staff placing specific time requirements on Debbie Bell explained the specific time was ai recommendation by the county attorneys. There is a currently a property that was rezoned with the condition of five (5) foot right-of-way dedication prior to site plan approval. The property has never been developed, SO the right-of- While iti is unlikely this applicant would not follow through on the rezoning conditions for this project, should the property not be developed, the county would have allowed a structure less than the minimum square footage and not have an avenue to make the property come into Staff does not have any objection to extending the time frame to accomplish the conditions. Danny England asked how burdensome it was for the petitioner to extend the time frame in a Debbie Bell explained the petitioner is required to submit a new rezoning petition to change and/or remove any of the conditions approved with the original rezoning. Staff has not yet acted on an unmet condition that quickly. Staff: sends letters attempting to bring the property into compliance prior to taking the rezoning back to the board. Currently, staffi is working an applicant with a condition to demolish a building that is more than one (1) past due. While this procedure is not reassuring nor is it a guarantee additional time would be allowed, iti is Danny England suggested this be discussed during a work session. Ifthe time lapses, it seems onerous for the petitioner to be required to follow the entire rezoning process to allow for additional time to meet the conditions. He recommended agreeing to 180 days. Boris Thomas stated he agreed with staff's current recommendation of ninety (90) days or maybe an additional thirty (30) days. The shorter time frame would be a motivator for the  have to install a traffic light or some type oft traffic control in the area.  inj paying the tax requirements until the property can be sold.  demolition, it be a condition of before the approval oft the minor final plat.  way has not been dedicated to the county.  compliance. That is why legal has requested a time frame.  The time frame concern is legal. condition ofrezoning.  currently the practice.  developer to meet the conditions.    Danny England said the impetus was on developers to move as quickly as possible to allow them to proceed to the next project. Situations when the development did not proceed and has unmet conditions are outside the control oft the Planning Commission. County legal is wanting to enforce a time frame that potentially the real-world development schedules cannot meet. "There is a disconnect between what we would like to see on the county's 's side and what is actually attainable in real life. We've got to be a little sensitive to that and not throw out hurdles and barriers to development that the people in the field trying to meet just can'tdo." Randy Boyd explained he is currently scrambling to submit a rezoning application for a property that was rezoned to C-H in 1988 with a couple of conditions. The conditions only allowed certain businesses, SO the applicant needs to rezone from C-H Conditional to C-H to remove the conditions. When you get conditions like this that are unmet, the required: drezoning  process adds a significant amount of time to the development process.  Jim Oliver made the motion to recommend approvalofPetition 1345-24-A withti thefollowing  amended conditions:  1. Within 180 days of approval of the rezoning, the developer shall obtain the appropriate, permit and demolish or remove the existing structures on parcel0722 2. Within 120 days of approval of rezoning, all parcels that are a subject of this petition shall be combined into a single parcel with an approved recorded plat.  003.  Danny England. seconded the motion. The motion carried. 5-0.  10. Consideration of Petition No. 1345-24-B, David Asa Lamb, owner; LDO Fayette, LLC, applicant; Randy Boyd, Agent, request to rezone 17.171 acres from A-R (Agricultural- Residential) to R-50 (Single-Family Residential) for the purposes ofdeveloping a residential neighborhood of single-family detached homes; property is located inl Land Lot 85 of the 7th  District and fronts on Ellison Road. Debbie Bell stated the amended conditions.  There was no one to speak ini favor or opposition of the rezoning.  Jim Oliver made the motion to recommend approval of1 Petition 1345-24-B with thefollowing  amendedcondtions:  1. Within 180 days of approval of the rezoning, the developer shall obtain the appropriate permit and demolish or remove the existing structures on parcel 0722 2. Within 120 days of approval of rezoning, all parcels that are a subject of this petition shall be combined into a single parcel with an approved recorded plat.  062.  Danny Englandseconded. the motion. The motion carried: 5-0.    11.C Consideration of Petition No. 1345-24-C, David Asa Lamb, owner; LDO Fayette, LLC, applicant; Randy Boyd, Agent, request to rezone 1.137 acres from A-R (Agricultural- Residential) to R-50 (Single-Family Residential) for the purposes of developing a residential neighborhood ofs single-family detached homes; property is located in Land Lot 85 oft the 7th  District and fronts on Ellison Road.  Debbie Bell stated the amended conditions per previous discussion. There was no one to speak ini favor or opposition oft the rezoning.  Jim Oliver made the motion to recommend. approvaloPetition 1345-24-Cwithi thefollowing  amended conditions:  1. Within 120 days of approval of rezoning, all parcels that are a subject of this petition shall be combined into a single parcel with an approved recorded plat.  Danny England: seconded the motion. The motion carried. 5-0.  12. Consideration of Petition No. 1346-24, Allegiance Homes, LLC, owner; C. Mark McCullough, Agent, request to rezone 15.87 acres from A-R Agnculum-Residemtaly to R-80 (Single-Family Residential) for the purposes of developing a residential neighborhood ofs single-family detached homes; property is located in Land Lot 199ofthe Debbie Bell explained the applicant is proposing to develop three (3) lots without any additional roads. This complies with the Future Land Use Plan. The existing house has been demolished since the staffreport was prepared, sO thati isi nol longera a condition. There isa a small stream on the property, but it does not pose a major environmental impact. The houses will most likely be toward the front of the lot, SO they do not have to cross the Trent Foster with Allegiance Homes stated the main reason for the rezoning request was to prevent oddly shaped lots. He does not like houses that are looking into the neighbor's Raymond Lewis at 423 Snead Road spoke in opposition. He is surprised to see a request for sO many homes on such a narrow piece of land. The rezoning decreases the setbacks along the side and rear. He would prefer not to look into the neighbor'syards as well. He does not want to see the additional lights from the new homes, the tree removal, nor the additional stormwater runoff. He stated he would prefer the property be developed as Jeri Troesken of 455 Snead Road spoke in opposition. She stated the stream is not a little stream, it is Lake Horton. Itis a major stream. Itis a torrent of water. Her problems began when Snead Road was paved. She receives all the runoff. She is having a terrible time with sediment. Itl has basically choked her pond. Itl has tol be al huge torrent to be able  4th District and fronts on Snead Road.  stream.  back yard.  A-R without any standardization.    to get water into her pond. Iti is like an island in certain spots and down the stream. That means it overflows because it cannot freely go into the pond. The new homes will change the topography greatly. The runoff will be quite different. There is already a substantial wetland that is mosquito ridden and stays wet all the time. The natural springs that fed the area are no longer there because of the runoff. She would like something in the proposal Her son is an engineer in the Marietta/Woodstock area. Hej proposed the road department put ina ac concrete flume, and thati is all right. Itdoes capture some oft the water, buti it doesn't Ms. Troesken stated she is also concerned that no one on Snead Road received a notice. She has lived there for thirty-five (35) years, SO you can imagine how she feels about putting a "bunch of houses on that road." She realizes progress goes on, however she would like to limit the number ofhouses that can be put on this property to three (3). Danny England felt many of Ms. Troesken's concerns were beyond rezoning and get into engineering. Traffic and water are two of the most common concerns. Neither of these concerns are handled by the Planning Commission. The County Engineering Department would work to make sure the development does not put any additional pressure on the Ms. Troesken stated her son told her the Planning Commission meeting was the place to bring the concerns. Fayette County makes the rule on the rezoning and they need to be Ms. Troesken is also concerned about the line of sight. There is a curve in the road and a  toa assist with her problems.  take care oft the sediment that comes down the hill. Water is a concern.  creek.  aware oft the problem.  very steep hill. She has to be very careful exiting her driveway. Danny England explained sight distance was the next stage. Ms. Troesken asked how to keep the development to three (3) houses.  Danny England explained that the development plan submitted shows three (3) lots. Planning Commission can only react to what is presented. There wasn't anything preventing them from changing the plan ifit could meet the requirements. Trent Foster: stated he had no objections to a condition of only three (3) lots. Secondly, the water flows from the front of the lot to the stream, so it should not increase the stormwater  runoff.  Boris' Thomas asked ifit was possible to condition the number oflots.  Debbie Bell stated we couldn'trestrict the number oflots. Thej property could be developed Danny England stated he is glad Mr. Foster took the extra step to rezone in order to get  per the zoning.    three lots that give the proper relationship from house to house. This will also allow continuity of character. The rezoning leads to al better finished product. Boris Thomas thought it was an odd look and is concerned about the curve on Snead Road. He thought maybe there should be a sign on the driveways once the homes are built. Jim Oliver made the motion to recommend approval with thej following conditions: 1. Snead. Road is a County Local on the Fayette County Thoroughfare Plan. The developer shall dedicate land, as needed, to provide 30. feet of right-of-way as 2. Submittal of all warranty deed(s) and legal descriptions for right-of-way dedications shall be provided to the county within 60 days fo the approval of the rezoning request, or prior to the submittal ofa development site plan, whichever  measured from the existing centerline of Snead Road.  comes_first.  Danny England: Isecondedi the motion. The motion carried4-0. Boris Thomas abstained. 13. Consideration of Petition No. 1347-24, Luis Arango, owner; Jeff Lammes, Agent, request to rezone 1.446 acres from A-R Agnculuml-Residemtaly to R-50 (Single-Family Residential) for the purposes of developing an amenity area for a residential single-family Debbie Bell stated 1053 Highway 85 S. This is a landlocked parcel. It is a legal noncontorming lot. The house does meet the dimensional requirements of R-50 Zoning. This is a parcel the developer was unable to obtain initially. The development plan for Eva Gardens will be revised to incorporate this property into the new development. Jeff Lammes stated Eva Gardens is currently under construction. Changing the zoning allows this property to bei incorporated into Eva Gardens. The existing house will be used  neighborhood; property is located in Land Lot 60 ofthe 5th District.  for Fire EMS training before iti is demolished. There was no one to speak in favor or opposition.  John Kruzan made the motion to recommend approval of Petion 1347-24. Boris Thomas seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0. John Culbreth was absent.  ADJOURNMENT:  John Kruzan moved to adjourn the meeting. Jim Oliver seconded. The motion passed 5-0.  The meeting adjourned at 8.02 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION  OF    FAYETTE COUNTY CHE JOHN CULBRETH,SR. CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MalhehoD DEBBIE BELL  DIRECTOR, PLANNING & ZONING