Spalding County approves multiple High Falls rezonings, tables related office and data center requests after neighbors press for stronger buffers and limited Ṭ

The Spalding County Board of Commissioners on May 20 approved a set of rezonings to expand the High Falls Industrial Park along Arthur K. Bolton Parkway but deferred related proposals after residents urged stricter buffers and limits on access to Tomachichi Road.

The board voted 4-0 to rezone multiple parcels (applications 2508Z, 2509Z, 2510Z and 2518Z) to C‑2 manufacturing for light industrial uses and to consolidate them into the industrial park. The commission postponed consideration of adjacent office/retail and a gas-station proposal (applications 2511Z and 2512Z) and accepted a request from a data‑center applicant to re-advertise its items on a later agenda (2513Z, 2514Z and related special-exception filings).

Why it matters: The approvals move forward a long-envisioned employment corridor along Arthur K. Bolton Parkway (AKB) that county staff and the applicant say matches Spalding County’s comprehensive plan, while the postponements reflect continuing neighborhood concerns about traffic, lighting, noise and visual buffering between industrial uses and existing homes.

Developer attorney Steven Jones, speaking for High Falls 16 LLC, told the commission the rezonings are “a continuation application of the existing High Falls Industrial Park,” and that the parcels are “split zone between AR1, R2, and PDD,” language he said the comp plan anticipated for an AKB employment corridor. Jones said the consolidated site would accommodate buildings similar in scale and appearance to those already being built at the Lakes at Green Valley and in the existing industrial park.

County staff recommended conditional approvals and drafted design and landscaping conditions; Jones asked two changes: allow tilt‑up concrete as an acceptable exterior material (rather than strict brick masonry with a 17‑foot water table) and clarify that a 25‑foot landscaped buffer be implemented as “10 feet undisturbed and 15 feet graded and replanted” so evergreen screening provides year‑round visual separation. The applicant also asked that the record show diesel pumps are an allowed feature of any proposed convenience store intended to serve contractor fleets.

Neighbors pressed for different protections. Johnny McDaniel, a longtime resident and former county commissioner, cited language from the AKB overlay that says “strip or single lot commercial developments will undermine the objectives” of the overlay and warned against piecemeal development. Residents including Shelly Beal, Missy Morton and Lisonbee Smiley asked the board to deny or tighten conditions, calling for larger, replanted buffers, night‑sky lighting controls, limits on truck traffic on Tomachichi Road and enforcement of no‑parking rules along local rights of way.

GDOT access and future signal: Several speakers and Jones noted that Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) planning has contemplated a traffic signal at the AKB intersection adjacent to the site and that the parcels share existing curb cuts that were installed when AKB was widened. Jones said the project would rely on existing shared access and that any GDOT‑required improvements (including a signal) would be handled by GDOT.

Commission debate led to a mix of outcomes: the board approved the rezoning and site‑level conditions for the consolidated industrial parcels but explicitly required an enhanced, site‑shown vegetative buffer on the parcel edge closest to residences (the plan shows a 40‑ to 50‑foot screened buffer in places). Commissioners also asked staff and the applicant to align standards across the corridor so adjacent and future projects use consistent architectural, screening and lighting rules; that request prompted the board to table the nearby office/retail/gas station applications (2511Z and 2512Z) to let the applicant revise conditions that residents and one commissioner said should match protections previously negotiated for Tamachichi Road properties.

The board also accepted the applicant’s request to continue the data‑center applications (2513Z/2514Z/2503S/2504S) to the next hearing date; under the zoning code the property owner has one right to continue when a full board is not present. That postponement removed those items from tonight’s decision calendar.

What’s next: The developer and staff will refine final civil and architectural plans under the conditions adopted by the commission; the board signaled it expects consistent design and buffer language to apply across AKB rezonings. For the tabled office/gas proposals the applicant will return with revised conditions intended to address the neighbors’ requests. Public comment and GDOT decisions about curb cuts or a traffic signal remain likely determinants of the project’s final configuration.

Community members and officials may expect further land‑use hearings and staff reviews as site civil plans, lighting and landscaping plans are prepared for permitting.