Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Commercial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planners deny rezoning request for flooring showroom after neighbors cite runoff and a 40x50 warehouse close to property lines
Summary
The planning commission denied a rezoning request (Z‑15) that would have changed property from LRO to NRC for a flooring showroom. Neighbors testified the applicant built a 40x50 warehouse 8 feet from a property line, that grading caused runoff concerns and possible foundation risk; commissioners voted 5‑0 to deny.
Cobb County planning commissioners denied a rezoning request for a proposed flooring showroom after neighbors raised concerns about stormwater runoff, drainage and a large outbuilding sited close to adjoining homes.
The case, Z‑15 of 2025, involved a property at the southwest corner of Shallow Road and Shallow Court. Opponent Justin McLean told the commission that the applicant had constructed a 40‑by‑50‑foot warehouse eight feet from his property line and that grading associated with the structure had caused dirt to pile against his fence and created runoff problems. McLean said he had raised the issue with stormwater staff and that neighbors had experienced foundation problems elsewhere on the same steep slope.
‘‘My main concern … is the large warehouse that they built in the back of the property. It’s 40 by 50 square feet. It’s eight feet from my property line,’’ McLean said. He told commissioners that the building is visible from the street and that the regrading placed water against neighboring foundations. He also estimated potential property‑value losses of 5 to 18 percent for nearby homes.
Planning commissioners discussed whether relocation of the structure or additional buffers could mitigate impacts, but concluded the rezoning to NRC for commercial use was inappropriate in the existing residential context. Commissioner Dantz moved to deny the rezoning; the motion passed 5‑0.
Decision vs. further action: The denial means the applicant’s existing outbuilding and grading are subject to code enforcement and development‑inspection review. Planning staff said denial would trigger enforcement steps (notice of violation and citation for building without permit) if work had been completed without required permits.
Next steps: The county’s code‑enforcement and development‑inspection units will follow up if unpermitted work is confirmed; the applicant may pursue other zoning avenues consistent with staff guidance.
Facts: Opponents presented photos and communications with stormwater staff; commissioners voted to deny the rezoning request 5‑0.
