BOC Hearing: Construction Requirements for
Residential Infill Development

Statement made on behalf of the Infill Task Force
by Liz Beyer, Co-chair

September 27, 2005

This morning I would ask that you consider two things:

The first is to immediately approve the implementation of those provisions of the Ordinance that are recommended for inclusion in Chapter 7.

The second is to defer the remaining portions of the ordinance full cycle for the purpose of allowing the recommended revisions to Chapter 27.

It’s been a year and a half since CEO Vernon Jones appointed the Infill Task Force and in that time, our committee has heard from residents negatively affected by infill housing – as well as those in new infill homes, their builders and their realtors.

- I have no doubt that many of your email inboxes are a testament to this as well.

A fundamental objective of the Task Force in formulating its recommendations is to soften the transition between new homes and those already existing in an established neighborhood by preserving character and scale. We seek to preserve character and scale by limiting building height and changes in grade in infill construction.

Since the unveiling of our recommendations to you on May 5th of this year, we have had two public presentations in addition to several for the building community – including two seminars specifically for infill builders sponsored by the Development Dept, and numerous community email responses through our DeKalbInfill.org website. This has been an open process.

In spite of the availability of access, we are aware that misinformation has been recently circulating about what is allowed under these proposed amendments.

As a reminder, the proposed ordinance amendments before you today only address one-for-one infill building – the tearing down of an existing house and building a new one on the same lot.

We fully recognize that the application of this Ordinance can result in some home designs that cannot be built. This is not an unexpected result.

We also seek to limit the change in grade that may be used on the infill lot. Change in grade has been used to contour lots to create a daylight basement, thereby raising the height of the new home above that of the adjacent homes. This strategy has often had highly undesirable consequences to adjacent properties, including increased stormwater runoff.

It is the out of character and out of scale home that has engendered the ground swell of support for the imposition of building controls, not only here in DeKalb County, but across the state and nation. And the issue isn’t limited to just a few neighborhoods within DeKalb – we’ve watched it fan out to Tucker, Stone Mountain, Duwoody and more recently to areas around Avondale Estates and south DeKalb.

All DeKalb residents should be afforded protection from the negative consequences of infill building already studied by our committee, and therefore we strongly recommend the adoption of this countywide Quality of Life Ordinance and not the Residential Infill Overlay District.

The extraordinary commitment of time and effort required for the overlay option to be truly effective is daunting to even an existing organized neighborhood. Remember, they would have to study and explain to their community these same legal documents that you have before you today, proceed to define their boundaries and then follow through the application process and hearings - which is a period of time that allows far too many infill houses to be built while the community is seeking protection.

In conclusion, we urge you to approve today those changes included as proposed revisions to Chapter 7, including changes to work hours, dumpster and port-o-let placement, tree save and other requirements. This will allow our homeowners to enjoy a reasonably quiet environment at the end of their workday and weekends, and assist in preserving the streetscape and beauty of established neighborhoods.

And finally, the Infill Task Force recognizes the potential need for a variance process for building height. To that end, we support the inclusion of the variance process in Chapter 27, which provides for public notice and public participation through the Zoning Board of Appeals process. So we also urge you to defer the remaining portions of the ordinance full cycle for the purpose of allowing this and the other recommended revisions to Chapter 27.

Thank you for your attention.