Cusseta‑Chattahoochee Commission approves five conditional use permits after work‑session debate on CUP process

The Commission of the Unified Government of Cusseta‑Chattahoochee County voted unanimously at a Feb. 27 called meeting to approve five conditional use permits that had been heard during public hearings on Feb. 24.

The permits approved were: 201 Massey Rd. (Mia and Derico Countryman, 0.74 acres, R3, proposed stick‑built home), 711 GA Hwy 26 (Julie and Jerome Wooten, 18.11 acres, R1, place mobile home), 109 Nelson St. (Sierra Smith, 0.75 acres, R4, replace unsafe stick‑built dwelling with mobile home), 136 Patty Dr. (Curtis Stroud Jr., 0.46 acres, R3, replace mobile home), and 454 Old Louvale Rd. (Walter Miller, plat 52 acres with 1.35‑acre parcel for long‑term tenant). Approvals remain conditioned on compliance with county building and zoning ordinances, health‑department inspections, and required permits or plats.

Why it mattered: the Feb. 24 work session exposed a recurring procedural issue — several applicants who sought manufactured homes or small replacements were routed to the commission under the county’s conditional use permit (CUP) process because of how the zoning code and septic/lot‑size requirements interact. Planning & Zoning Chair Brent Ingersoll told the commission the Countryman parcel reached the commission because "it doesn't meet the state's one acre lot requirement for septic," even though a perk test for that site had reportedly passed. Planning staff recommended approval in each case with standard conditions tied to health‑department and building‑code compliance.

At the Feb. 24 work session, members of the planning board and commissioners pressed the county attorney and staff for clearer zoning language so manufactured‑home siting would not be unintentionally subject to CUP review. Attorney Bin Minter said the conditional‑use process is governed by state zoning procedure law but that local zoning code language controls when a CUP is required. Planning board member Willie Brown urged careful drafting rather than wholesale repeal: "I don't want to just throw anything out there," he said, advising deliberate revisions that save time for both boards.

Chairman Charles Coffey framed the discussion around fairness and litigation risk. He said the county must be consistent: "If we give you an exception, then that opens us up that we didn't do the same for someone else," and later warned that inconsistent handling had prompted legal challenges in the past. Commissioners debated handling several CUPs at the Feb. 24 session by vote; an amendment to approve three CUPs at that meeting failed after Coffey and other commissioners expressed concern about perception and consistency.

Public‑hearing record and outcomes: The Feb. 24 hearings drew the applicants and some neighbors; in most cases no one spoke in opposition. Applicants said utilities and septic work had been completed or inspected — for the Wootens, the record notes "Nicole with the health department has come out and inspected the septic." The Feb. 27 called meeting recorded motions and seconders for each approval (examples: Walter Miller approved on a motion by Commissioner Timothy Biddle, seconded by Commissioner Jason Frost), with unanimous votes recorded for each permit.

What happens next: Approvals were entered with standard caveats: applicants must obtain any required permits, have plats signed by planning and zoning where applicable, and pass health‑department and building inspections before occupancy or construction proceeds. Commissioners requested staff and the county attorney draft proposed ordinance language clarifying when manufactured homes require a CUP; that work was to be returned to a future work session and regular meeting for deliberation.

Provenance: The matters were introduced at the Feb. 24 public hearings and concluded at the Feb. 27 called meeting. The hearings and work‑session discussion are recorded in the meeting transcript (topic introduced SEG 017–SEG 019; approvals recorded SEG 026).