Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stonecrest planning commission unanimously recommends rezoning parcels near PepsiCo to light industrial
Summary
On May 6, 2025, the Stonecrest Planning Commission voted 3-0 to recommend that two vacant parcels at 1810 Coffey Road and 6821 Stonecrest Industrial Way be rezoned from M-2 (heavy industrial) to M (light industrial), subject to seven staff conditions that ban certain noisy or high-impact uses.
The Stonecrest Planning Commission on May 6, 2025, voted 3-0 to recommend that the City Council approve a rezoning request (case RZ24-005) to change two parcels at 1810 Coffey Road and 6821 Stonecrest Industrial Way from M-2 heavy industrial to M light industrial, with seven conditions limiting specified uses.
The recommendation matters because the parcels lie adjacent to an existing PepsiCo plant and across from a Home Depot distribution site; the change would allow a small-scale industrial or distribution building on vacant, wooded lots that staff say include a small wetlands area. Planning staff recommended approval with conditions that prohibit several high-impact uses, and the applicant’s attorney accepted those conditions at the hearing.
Deputy Director (Planning Department) told commissioners the public-participation notice was mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet in March and that a Citizen Participation and Information Meeting (CPIM) was held in April at City Hall where one attendee raised concerns about the number of trucks, enforcement of compliance, and whether an environmental study had been done. The deputy director summarized the application as a request to rezone parcel 1613202-002 (1810 Coffey Road) and parcel 1613202008 (6821 Stonecrest Industrial Way) from M-2 to M to allow a light industrial manufacturing or distribution use.
Josh Mahoney, an attorney with Battle Law PC representing the applicant, presented a site plan that shows a driveway off the cul-de-sac of Stonecrest Industrial Way, a roughly 20,000-square-foot building with loading docks and parking, and stated the applicant accepts the planning department’s seven recommended conditions. Mahoney said, “We accept all 7 of these conditions,” and told commissioners the proposed use is intended to be a small-scale industrial or distribution building that would be consistent with surrounding development.
Mahoney also noted that one of the staff conditions—prohibiting vehicle storage yards—is already prohibited under the city’s M district use table. He said, “Vehicle storage yards are actually already prohibited under the M District.” He added that the applicant has not yet secured a buyer or tenant and therefore had presented a site plan and sought the broader M designation rather than a narrowly defined single use.
Staff’s recommended conditions, read at the hearing, included prohibitions on: truck parking as a primary accessory use; recovery/material processing facilities wholly or partly within a building; recycling and collection facilities; recycling plants; tow and wrecker facilities and services; and vehicle storage yards. The deputy director recommended approval with those conditions; the applicant accepted them on the record.
City counsel clarified a procedural point for the commission, saying that although a quorum of three commissioners was present, Stonecrest practice required three affirmative votes for the commission to recommend approval. Commissioners Eric Hubbard (chair, District 3), Joyce Walker (District 2) and Lemuel Hawkins (District 5) then considered the item. After discussion and with no members of the public offering testimony in favor or opposition at the public hearing, Hubbard moved to recommend approval of RZ24-005 with the planning department conditions; Walker seconded. The vote was recorded as a unanimous 3-0 recommendation to the City Council.
The applicant’s presentation and staff materials noted a small wetland area on the larger parcel and showed the site adjacent to the PepsiCo facility and near Home Depot. At a prior CPIM, one attendee raised truck-count, compliance oversight and environmental-study questions; commissioners asked staff and counsel about those concerns during the meeting. The deputy director said legal review and code compliance mechanisms are available and that specific operational details (such as an eventual tenant’s exact use) were not yet finalized.
The recommendation does not itself change zoning; the item will next go to the Stonecrest City Council for final action. Planning staff and the applicant indicated public notice was already mailed to nearby property owners and that the application had been discussed at a prior public meeting in April.
