Search Tags <Palladian, NS, LRO,
Palladian, Inc. 770-509-3390, represented by Craig Wrigley, 770-509-3390, requests modifications to buildings approved in Z-53 in order to accommodate new client.
Property is located on the south side of Roswell Road, west of Robinson Road (3700 Roswell Road); 16th District, Land Lot 967, Parcel 14.
Proposed use(s): A condominium office park with buildings and grounds to be owned and maintained by medical practice in building 1 and other office businesses and professions in buildings 2 and 3.
Proposed building architecture: Two-story, traditional, four sides brick or stone, pitched roofs with architectural shingles.
Proposed hours/days of operation: Hours of use customary for office and professional business.
Reason for Request:
1) Increase the size of the building nearest
2) Palladian requests the ability to combine or alter building sizes and shapes along with parking to allow for flexibility in accommodating the space and access needs of building owners and users.
Other pertinent information: Palladian, Inc. has built five office parks in
Size of tract is 1.435 acres
Current zoning: NS
Contiguous zoning is: North: R-20 (wooded, undeveloped); East: O&I (2 story office building); South: RA-5 (single family home); West: RA-4 (
Current land use is NAC (
Contiguous land use is: North: LDR (Low Density Residential); East: NAC; South: MDR (Medium Density Residential; West: MDR.
Case manager is Marvin Shams
Planning Commissioner is
Proposed use: Professional & Medical Offices.
Previous Zoning
Staff Comments (Z-53):
Please click for Preliminary Zoning Analysis
Please click for Final Zoning Analysis
Staff recommends APPROVAL subject to the following conditions:
§ Site plan received by the Zoning Division on October 2, 2008, with the District Commissioner approving minor modifications;
§ Fire Department comments;
§ Historic Preservation comments;
§ Water and Sewer comments and recommendations;
§ Stormwater Management comments and recommendations;
§ DOT comments and recommendations; and
§ Owner/developer to enter into a Development Agreement pursuant to O.C.G.A. §36-71-13 for dedication of system improvements to mitigate traffic concerns.
ECCA position (Z-53): OPPOSE to request the following stipulations:
Primary concern is the adequacy of the landscape buffer and screening of the water quality/water detention pond. It appears that several adjacent residential homes may be adversely affected. The proposed buildings will be directly overlooking several home-owners backyard.
· Demonstration of the adequacy of the landscape buffer by showing the viewshed from the adjacent residential lots at 2 year, 5 year and 10 year intervals. County arborist to review and approve landscaping.
· Confirmation from
· Development limited to a maximum FAR of 0.36.
· Maximum impervious surface percentage not to exceed 70 % and no variances.
· Site plan specific with the District Commissioner approving minor modifications to the site plan, landscape plan and stormwater management plan.
· All staff comments and recommendations where not in conflict
Planning Commission Recommendation (unofficial) Z-53: APPROVAL with stipulations:
· Stipulation letter of October 28, 2008 amended:
Delete second sentence,
#2 to be deleted and “minor changes will be approved by district commissioner” inserted
· Arborist is involved
· We are at 70% impervious surface
· All staff comments and recommendations
Board of Commissioners Action Z-53 (unofficial): APPROVED zoning change from NS to LRO, subject to:
· Site plan dated November 10, 2008
· Remove two westernmost parking spaces in the parking area between Buildings
Staff Comments – Other Business Item 1 (OBI 1)
Please click for Preliminary Other Business Item Analysis
Please click for Final Other Business Item Analysis
ECCA Position (OBI 1): Additional stipulations required:
1) The finish floor level of each building remains the same as in the original plan;
2) The peak of the roof of each building remains at the same elevation. The distance between the top of the fence (between the development and adjacent homes) and the project’s roof peaks be no higher than that shown on the original plan;
3) The new arrangement of buildings causes no additional loss of privacy between the residential neighborhood and the office park.
<span style="