Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves Hazel Stinson barn variance after neighbor objections and conditions
Summary
The Cobb County Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing a 2,730‑sq‑ft barn on Hazel Stinson’s lot after neighbors raised concerns about proximity, visibility and burning; the board required finishing the exterior, permitting and inspection, paving the driveway and other conditions before approval.
The Cobb County Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance on July 15 allowing a 2,730‑square‑foot barn at the Stinson property after neighbors objected to its location and appearance.
The board added B65, a non‑agenda variance request for Hazel Stinson’s property, to the regular agenda and heard testimony from applicant William Stinson, who said the pole barn will house horses and farm equipment and that trucks will be kept inside once garage doors and siding are installed. Neighbor Kim Florence told the board the building sits much closer than required and that construction included heavy trucks and occasional burning that produced strong odors. Florence said from her backyard she can see “everything that’s in that building” and described the barn as “a nuisance building.”
County zoning staff clarified the measured distances on the site: the structure is 62 feet from the applicant’s immediate property line and an additional 50‑foot strip on an adjacent parcel places the barn roughly 112 feet from the complaining neighbor’s property line. The applicant said work stopped after county notice and proposed to enclose the building’s doors so parked trucks would not be visible, complete exterior siding so the barn “wouldn’t look like it was thrown together,” and pave the gravel driveway.
The board’s motion to approve B65 included explicit conditions: finish the barn exterior to match a residential appearance, pave the driveway, obtain Cobb County permits and inspections, and comply with any standard staff comments. The board also asked county staff to have the county farm marshal advise the applicant about allowable burning practices. The motion carried 5–0.
The decision authorizes the accessory structure with the stated restrictions; the board recorded conditions designed to limit visibility and potential nuisance impacts for neighboring properties.
