Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setbacks And Variances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cobb BZA approves Brown family variance for backyard shed with drainage and buffer conditions
Summary
The Cobb County Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance for an accessory structure at 979 Brickleberry Lane, requiring permitting and inspections plus a county‑approved buffer plan and on‑site runoff control after a neighbor objected that the shed encroached on his property.
The Cobb County Board of Zoning Appeals on Jan. 15 approved variance V‑129, allowing a roughly 182‑square‑foot accessory structure closer to property lines than zoning rules permit, subject to permitting, inspections and neighbor‑agreed buffering and runoff mitigation. The board moved the case from the consent agenda after a neighbor, Reed Howard, objected that part of the structure and an overhang sat on his lot.
Adam Rosen, attorney for applicants Charles and Diane Brown, told the board the Browns had believed the shed would be 3 feet from a fence that they and a neighbor had used as a reference point. Rosen said the owners submitted an as‑built survey, cut back the overhang and proposed landscaping or a fence at the applicant’s cost to address the neighbor’s concerns. "We recognized the encroachment," Rosen said, describing steps taken to remove the overhang and to route roof runoff into on‑site drainage.
Neighbor Reed Howard said a later survey showed the structure’s roofline came within an inch of his property and that the encroachment posed potential title, loan and resale problems. "If a building's on your property, you got problems getting loans, you got problems selling it," Howard said, and he urged that a 3‑foot offset be achieved or that the corner be modified to permit future fence installation and building maintenance.
County Water Management inspector Andrew Heath said he visited the site and observed a small depression and a stone‑lined channel that directs water back onto the Brown property; Heath recommended a rock‑filled swale or similar measure to avoid runoff onto the neighbor’s yard.
Commissioner Swanson moved to approve the variance with conditions mirroring staff recommendations and additional stipulations: development inspection comments, the structure to be permitted and inspected, applicant and neighbor to review a buffer plan with the county landscape architect having final approval, and the applicant to maintain a rock‑filled swale or equivalent runoff control on the applicant’s property. The motion was seconded and the board approved the case.
The approval requires the applicants to complete permitting and inspections and to implement the agreed buffer and drainage measures; the board closed the public hearing after the parties described their willingness to accept those conditions.
