BZA backs large front-setback variances for proposed Frasier convenience store amid neighborhood opposition

The Coweta County Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 25 recommended approval of variance 25-09, a request from Frasier 3 Holdings LLC (identified in packet) to reduce front setbacks on a triangular parcel bounded by Fisher, Major and Shaw roads in Sharpsburg (District 4) to accommodate a proposed 3,420‑square‑foot convenience store with five gasoline pumps. The parcel — roughly 2.16 acres with approximately 1 acre zoned old commercial and the remainder zoned RC — was created by a county road realignment in 2009, which staff and the applicant said significantly constrained the buildable area.

Zoning manager Lisa Eschman described the requested reductions: Fisher Road to 85 feet from the centerline (a 50‑foot reduction from the 135‑foot requirement for that classification), Major Road to 88 feet (12‑foot reduction from 100 feet), and Shaw Road to 39 feet (61‑foot reduction from 100 feet). Eschman said the applicant also submitted a concurrent rezoning application (REZONE 25‑007) that the Board of Commissioners will consider at its Oct. 21 hearing; the variance hearing concerned only setback relief.

Neil Spradlin, who identified himself as representing Micah Frasier and Frasier 3 Holdings LLC, urged the board to find a hardship tied to the 2009 road realignment and described a traffic study submitted with the application. Reading from the traffic report, Spradlin said the study’s executive summary concluded that "all the study locations are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service under all scenarios" and that site‑generated traffic would not cause appreciable increases in delay. He said the site plan had been adjusted to incorporate the traffic‑study recommendations for driveway configuration (right‑in/right‑out, right‑in/left‑in but no left‑out, and a median to discourage cut‑through traffic).

Several residents and an in‑person opponent argued the traffic study used flawed counts and timing and urged denial. One opponent told the board the study was conducted May 7, 2025, and cited school scheduling anomalies and seasonal counting as reasons the growth‑rate estimate (2%) was unreliable; that speaker also argued the application failed the legal variance standard and described the hardship as self‑created. Staff read an emailed comment from Michael Bateau urging more setback from the road and suggesting a reduction in driveways might reduce the need for variances; two other residents (Sid Brown and Phyllis Brown) filed cards citing proximity, light/noise pollution, traffic, crime, runoff, odor and glare.

Board members discussed whether the hardship was caused by county action (the road realignment) and whether older 'old C' setback standards (historically 50/20/20) should be honored; several members said they viewed the parcel’s configuration and the updated setbacks as creating a practical hardship for development. After deliberation a motion to approve the setback variances with staff conditions was made and seconded; the board voted by voice to recommend approval. The Board of Commissioners will consider the rezoning and final approval on Oct. 21, 2025.