On June 11, 2025, the Cobb County Board of Zoning Appeals voted 4-0 to hold variance case B65, a request from William A. Lane to retain an accessory structure (about 578 square feet) closer to property lines than the zoning code permits, and to send county building inspectors to inspect the structure and provide a punch list before the board’s regular meeting in August.

The item concerns a request to reduce the accessory-structure setback from 35 feet to 14 feet on the western property line and to 2 feet on the northern property line for a property at the northwest corner of Friendship Ridge Lane and Friendship Ridge Court. The case was pulled from consent for discussion after code enforcement reported possible violations.

The board’s action followed testimony from Michael Allman, Cobb County Code Enforcement, who said a complaint prompted an inspection and that an officer "took photos of a kitchen area, a bathroom, and a couch and a desk" inside the structure. Allman also told the board the officer met with a tenant named Israel and that the written notice listed both the single-family dwelling ordinance and the accessory-structure ordinance identifying the setback requirements.

Applicant William Lane told the board he and his contractors had renovated an existing shed and asked that the structure remain. He told the board, "we built a shed. We kind of renovated a shed that was already there." Lane also said the unit is used for storage and some office work and that employees "come and go," but he denied anyone was living in the structure.

A county staff message to the board noted no permits had been obtained for the structure; a member of the building department confirmed the permitting manager advised that permits for heating, air conditioning, electrical and plumbing had not been pulled. During discussion the board and building-department staff described modifications that would clarify the structure’s nonresidential use, including removing a toilet, shower and kitchen fixtures if they remained. The chair asked whether the applicant would rather remove the structure or work to preserve it; Lane said he preferred to keep it and was willing to consider modifications.

The board’s motion—approved 4-0—held the case until the board’s regular August meeting to allow Cobb County building inspectors to inspect the structure and provide a punch list. The clerk restated the motion with a note to the applicant that no modifications were required between the June and August meetings. The board’s hold instructs building inspections to examine the foundation, plumbing/electrical runs and permit status and to report back with items needed to bring the structure into compliance or to establish that it cannot remain as constructed.

Next steps: the file will return to the board at the August meeting with a punch-list from building inspections. The board noted that if the structure remains in a condition that could be construed as a dwelling, additional enforcement or permit requirements could follow.