Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Paulding County meeting approves setback variance at 69 Smallwood Lane
Summary
A Paulding County meeting approved a variance reducing the front setback from 35 to 29 feet and the side setback from 15 to 13 feet for a lot at 69 Smallwood Lane, citing a 40-foot platted drainage buffer that limits the buildable area.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A Paulding County meeting approved a variance that reduces the front setback for 69 Smallwood Lane from 35 feet to 29 feet and the side setback from 15 feet to 13 feet to accommodate an existing drainage easement and stream buffer.
The variance matters because the property’s 40-foot platted drainage buffer limits the buildable area on Lot 17 (Smallwood Farm), and the approval allows the applicant to construct a larger home on the parcel.
Will Summey, an engineer with Elite Engineering, presented the application on behalf of Riverwood Residential LLC and explained the need for relief. "We are seeking a variance for the front and side setbacks to build a larger home on the lot due to the 40 foot platted, drainage buffer that is shown on the plat that was submitted with the application," Summey said. The property is described in the application as Land Lot 344, District 1, Section 3 at the northwest corner of Ruth Way and Smallwood Lane; the street address provided was 69 Smallwood Lane.
The presiding officer noted, "We have had no noted opposition." A motion to approve the variance was made, seconded and carried on a voice vote. The transcript does not record individual vote counts or the names of the members who made and seconded the motion.
No conditions, amendments, or follow-up directions were recorded in the transcript. After the approval the meeting moved to adjournment.
Details recorded in the meeting record indicate the variance request was driven by a platted 40-foot drainage buffer and an existing drainage easement that the applicant said reduced the lot’s buildable area. The application packet included a plat showing the buffer and easement; the presenter offered to answer board questions but the board recorded no opposition and proceeded to a vote.

