Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public hearing opened, then paused, on hunting‑camp conditional use permit for 468 Manta Rd

Unified Government of Cusseta–Chattahoochee County Board of Commissioners · March 3, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners opened a conditional‑use permit hearing for a proposed hunting camp on a 534.70‑acre parcel at 468 Manta Rd. The applicant said he’s used the site for 14 years; neighbors raised trespass and future‑development concerns. Commissioners asked Planning & Zoning to vet health, noise, waste and ownership issues.

Chairman Charles Coffey opened a public hearing March 3 on a conditional‑use permit application from Jose Perez to establish a hunting camp on a 534.70‑acre parcel at 468 Manta Rd.

Jose Perez said he has used the site for years and was not aware the county required a conditional use permit. "I've been at this location for 14 years; I didn't know I needed a CUP," Perez said, and told commissioners he had removed hunting stands and cooperated with cleanup requests after county contact. Resident Al Robertson opposed the permit, telling the commission he has experienced trespass on his adjacent property and worries a hunting camp could hinder future residential development on his 20‑acre tract.

Commissioner Jason Frost questioned the current process for hunting camps. "I don't understand why we're using a conditional use permit for a hunting camp," Frost said. County Attorney Bin Minter explained that under the county ordinance a hunting camp is treated as a land "use" and processed similarly to short‑term rental rules: "the hunting camp is a 'use' and that is considered a short‑term rental," Minter said. County Manager Thomas Weaver said the ordinance language may merit revision to clarify permitting or permit types.

Commissioners noted there were letters both for and against the permit, and that outstanding issues — including health‑department requirements, waste/sewage disposal, visibility from the road, noise mitigation, limits on permanent structures, and proof of legal authority to sign documents — should be resolved before a final decision. The commissioners unanimously moved to adjourn and table further action until Planning & Zoning completes its review and returns a recommendation to the board.

Next procedural step: Planning & Zoning review and any required health‑department clearances; the board did not vote on the permit itself at the March 3 meeting.