Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stream Buffer Variance Impervious Setback topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel grants impervious‑setback encroachment for two lots with buried flow‑well mitigation
Summary
Paulding County approved a variance to allow two houses to encroach into the county’s 25‑foot impervious setback (distinct from state buffer requirements) provided the developer installs buried flow‑well treatment systems outside the city sanitary‑sewer easement.
The Paulding County Development Waiver Review Committee approved a request to reduce the county’s 25‑foot impervious setback for two lots on Old Cartersville Road to allow larger homes, provided the applicant installs buried flow‑well treatment systems and locates them outside the city sanitary sewer easement.
Elite Engineering, represented by Jonathan Jones, brought case 2025-03-SBV seeking to impact the local 25‑foot impervious setback (the transcript clarifies this is separate from the 25‑foot county buffer plus the state’s 25‑foot buffer). Jones said the proposed homes would be larger than the lots would otherwise allow if constrained by the setback: the requested encroachment area is about 2,200 square feet on Lot 11 and about 3,000 square feet on Lot 12.
Jones proposed a mitigation approach the panel has seen in neighboring jurisdictions: rooftop drains routed to buried «flow‑well» chambers that treat and slowly release roof runoff into the creek. He described the flow‑well system as a buried canister surrounded by stone and geotextile with a slow discharge (a low trickle) and said they are easy to maintain; he also offered a stipulation the flow wells would be located outside the city sanitary sewer easement. County staff and a committee member observed a sewer easement near Lot 11; the applicant agreed to ensure the flow‑well installations would not occupy the sewer easement.
Questions from the committee focused on maintenance, potential clogging, drain locations and whether the flow‑well would sit inside an easement. Jones said roof drains feeding the system should limit sediment, the canisters have bypass measures, and the applicant would place the devices outside the sanitary‑sewer easement. The committee added the condition that the flow‑well be installed and located outside the sanitary sewer easement.
A motion to approve the impervious‑setback encroachment with the flow‑well mitigation and the condition that the flow‑well be located outside the sanitary sewer easement passed unanimously.
County staff noted the final plat and individual house site plans (HLPs and tertiary permits) will reflect the mitigation and that the developer will provide detailed site plans for each lot before building permits are issued.
