Johns Creek council approves remanded rezoning for drive‑through at Medlock Corners over resident objections

The Johns Creek City Council voted Jan. 12 to approve a remanded land‑use petition, RZ23,001, and two concurrent variances to allow a 4,720‑square‑foot drive‑through restaurant on a 0.72‑acre outparcel of an 8.65‑acre C‑1 property at 5805 State Bridge Road (Medlock Corners).

Director Van Song told the council the rezoning and variances (VC230002 and VC230003) were remanded by Fulton County Superior Court and staff recommended approval with 12 conditions. "In January 2026, the rezoning case was remanded back to the city for reconsideration and final action by the mayor and council," Song said.

Tyler Morrison of Willow Capital Partners, the applicant, said the developer worked with city staff and "we are in agreement with those conditions, and ask for your approval." Morrison said the applicant has no proposed user for the parcel now and that previous interest by Shake Shack had moved on.

Several residents urged denial. Joan Compton, who lives less than two miles from the site, told the council the proposal conflicts with the city’s guiding documents, saying she continued to "ask that this zoning case and concurrent variances be denied" because it does not fit recommendations in the 2018 comprehensive plan or the 2024 revitalization plan for Medlock Corners. Dale Huff warned of negative public reaction if a historic tree is removed. Jean Veeneman asked the council to defer the vote, saying legal advertisements ran on Dec. 25 and Jan. 1 and many residents were away for the holidays.

Council members pressed staff and the applicant about traffic, interparcel circulation and property lines. Director Song said the driveway that has caused concern is wholly on adjacent property and that the applicant and the neighbor operate under reciprocal easement agreements. Council members asked whether the use would be a quick‑serve restaurant (QSR); Morrison said the conditions the applicant agreed to limit the use toward fast‑casual examples such as Chipotle or Panera rather than a high‑impact QSR.

Council member Larry Dibiase moved to approve the petition as presented. Several council members said the council’s hands were constrained by the court remand but that the negotiated conditions provided limits on traffic and use. The mayor called the question and the council voted to approve the remanded rezoning.

Key factual details stated on the record: the parcel is 8.65 acres; the proposed outparcel is 0.72 acre to be developed with a 4,720‑sq.‑ft. restaurant; staff included 12 recommended conditions; one variance reduces required parking (the application cited a reduction from 355 to 299 parking spaces) and the other eliminates certain landscape strips along interior property lines. The council did not record a detailed roll‑call tally in the public record during the vote on the motion presented, but the mayor announced approval.

The item follows a July 25, 2023 council denial of the same application and a subsequent lawsuit by the property owner that led to the court remand in January 2026. Council members and the applicant said the developer will provide notice to the city before any tree removal and indicated willingness to coordinate with adjacent property owners on internal flow improvements, though Director Song noted the city does not routinely conduct post‑implementation traffic counts.

The zoning approval is subject to the conditions on file with city staff; the council did not identify a tenant at the meeting and several members emphasized limits on the type of restaurant and on traffic impacts. The council adjourned the public portion shortly after, moving to an executive session for land, legal and personnel matters.

What happens next: The developer will work with staff on final permitting and the conditions attached to the approved site plan; any tree removal is to be communicated to the city in advance, per statements on the record.