Draft UDC consolidates use tables, removes 25% home‑occupation interior cap and adds limited administrative variance

Cobb County · November 14, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Installment 2 centralizes use regulations in Article 4, consolidates accessory and temporary use standards, removes the current 25% interior‑area limit on home occupations, and creates a limited administrative variance under Article 2 for modest staff‑level adjustments.

Jeff Green walked through Article 4 of the draft UDC, which consolidates principal uses, accessory uses, and temporary uses into a linked use table and organizes use‑specific standards in one location to reduce repetition.

Green said each use will have a clear permission code (P for permitted, S for special exception, L for special land use permit, and A for allowed in a planned development), with direct links to use‑specific standards. He highlighted that commonly repeated accessory standards — such as the customary home occupation rules — have been consolidated; the draft places the definition in Article 9 and lists standards once in Article 4.

The consultants removed a current ordinance restriction that limited home occupations to using no more than 25% of a dwelling’s floor area because enforcement was impractical. "That is very hard to enforce," Green said, noting the zoning office cannot reliably inspect private interior use.

On administration, Article 2 retains most current procedures but adds a new administrative variance allowing staff to authorize limited adjustments (for example, up to 10% to some dimensional standards) in appropriate site circumstances, reducing the need for a Board of Zoning Appeals variance in small cases. Green said development standards such as parking will be provided in Installment 3 and that staff‑level flexibility for parking requirements is being considered.