Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Convenience Stores topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newton County reviews UDO changes that would limit convenience stores with two‑mile separation and tougher standards
Summary
At a March 3, 2026 work session, Newton County commissioners reviewed proposed UDO amendments that would add a two‑mile separation requirement for convenience stores, tighten lighting and screening rules, and clarify the 5,000‑square‑foot size limit; commissioners pressed staff on enforcement and treatment of existing nonconforming stores.
The Newton County Board of Commissioners reviewed proposed changes to the county’s Unified Development Ordinance on March 3, 2026 that would add placement limits and clearer standards for convenience stores.
County staff presented a draft amendment to UDO section 510200 that keeps existing rules on lighting, screening and a 5,000‑square‑foot cap but adds new provisions on placement and separation. The draft would bar any convenience store, with or without gasoline pumps, from locating within two miles of another convenience store measured from property line to property line, while allowing up to two stores at a single intersection if they are on diagonal corners.
The changes also clarify that the 5,000‑square‑foot limit applies to the convenience store space itself and does not count adjoining retail suites; existing screening requirements—an 8‑foot visual barrier or a combination of fencing and evergreen vegetation providing roughly 95% opacity—remain and are clarified in the draft.
The proposals drew immediate questions from commissioners about how the county would enforce the new standards. “We have to make sure that anything that’s in the perimeter…there has to be some type of, I don’t know, if we do a 12‑month bond to make sure that the plants don’t die the minute they put them in the ground,” Commissioner Long said, urging language that would require maintenance and provide enforcement remedies.
Long also argued the ordinance should address existing, nonconforming stores and limit whole building suites to 5,000 square feet to prevent developers from creating adjacent anchor spaces that effectively increase a store’s footprint. Other commissioners raised similar concerns about how to handle properties that receive zoning or permits but do not build: several urged a review process (for example at 18–24 months) that would prompt the board to revisit zoning if no construction or meaningful progress has occurred.
Commissioner Cooper recommended using conditional or special‑use permits so that larger or district‑sensitive sites return to the board for review rather than being approved automatically through zoning. Commissioners also asked staff to draft clear rules for reconstruction, redevelopment and triggers that would subject a previously grandfathered store to the new requirements.
County staff said the draft is intended to give the board options and that the planning and development services team will continue refining enforcement language and nonconforming‑use treatment before the board considers a final ordinance.
The presentation did not include formal motions or votes on the convenience‑store amendments; staff indicated the draft will be revised based on commissioner feedback and returned for further discussion.
