Another site plan, another set of new issues have been raised for the East Cobb Church mixed-use rezoning case in the Johnson Ferry-Shallowford corridor.
A few days after attorneys for North Point Ministries submitted major changes to their proposal, the Cobb Board of Commissioners on Tuesday voted yet again to hold the case.
By a 4-0 vote, commissioners approved a 30-day hold on what’s become a contentious matter stretching since late 2020.
Traffic, stormwater and density issues have prompted the greatest concerns from nearby residents, who renewed their concerns in a packed board room Tuesday.
A total of 56 people turned out in favor of the request, and 46 were in opposition, according to a hand count conducted before the hearing.
The latest site plan (our previous post here) would cut off public access to Waterfront Drive at Johnson Ferry Road at the southern end of the 33-acre assemblage, where planned single-family detached homes and townhomes would go.
North Point’s plans would be to sell off 19 of those acres to Ashwood Atlanta, a local residential developer, with the East Cobb Church and proposed new retail space taking up the rest of the development.
But nearby residents protested that the road closure needs to go through a public hearing process, and that public safety and emergency access to their neighborhoods would be affected.
“The people who are being most impacted aren’t being listened to,” said Ruth Michels of the MarLanta neighborhood, who has been leading the opposition for several months.
Commissioner Jerica Richardson, whose District 2 includes the “JOSH” area, asked Amy Diaz of Cobb DOT if her agency has had time to study the proposed closure of Waterfront Drive, which connects Johnson Ferry with MarLanta and other subdivisions.
“We’ve had it for less than a week and haven’t had time for a review,” Diaz said.
That was enough for commissioners JoAnn Birrell and Monique Sheffield to support a second consecutive hold, after Richardson could not get enough support in August to approve the rezoning.
“I’m concerned about access to services for people who live on that road,” said Sheffield, of District 4 in South Cobb. “There need to be other ways to mitigate cut-through traffic.”
North Point attorney Kevin Moore said the closure was being proposed after getting feedback that some MarLanta residents wanted to be the only ones using Waterfront Road access.
“That’s not what a public road is for,” said Moore, who said continued cut-through use of that road would “serve to harm our project more than benefit it.”
He said sufficient access to those neighborhoods exist via Shallwford and Lassiter roads.
Earlier in the hearing, Moore upset residents in attendance when he described opponents of the rezoning as “clanging symbols and loud gongs that signify nothing.”
North Point had proposed 71 townhomes and 59 single-family detached homes in the RA-6 housing category—with more than 20 acres to be sold to Ashwood Atlanta, a residential developer.
But now the request is for 51 single-family detached homes and 44 townhomes under RA-5.
That would be on 19 units and the density of the homes would be reduced to 4.98 units an acre.
Michels called that “a disingenous calculation,” because a flood plain study required the Federal Emergency Management Agency would not take place until after a rezoning, and that the figure includes land where R-20 residences on Waterfront Circle would remain.
Moore said that if FEMA determined a flood plain exists, the developer would reduce the number of units to cap density at 4.98 units an acre.
But Chris Lindstrom of the East Cobb Civic Association said that while the project’s density is being reduced, the intensity would be increasing, including nearly 25,000 square feet of proposed retail that didn’t exist in previous site plans.
She also cited more than 100 variances for the civic group’s opposition.
Moore said the variances were necessary because they’re required for the single-family detached homes.
Richardson’s motion to hold the case includes provisions that include connectivity to the nearby neighborhoods from Waterfront Drive and downstream impacts from stormwater.
Chairwoman Lisa Cupid recused herself from the vote, citing a family member who attends a North Point church. She left the room while the case was being discussed and turned the gavel over to Sheffield, the vice chairwoman.
Related stories
- Major changes to East Cobb Church, Ebenezer Road rezonings
- Cobb zoning hearing changes made for social-distancing
- Ebenezer Road rezoning gets Planning Commission OK
- East Cobb Church rezoning delayed amid stalemate
- Richardson appoints new member to Cobb Planning Commission
- East Cobb Church rezoning gets Planning Commission approval
- Cobb commissioners approve Sprayberry Crossing rezoning
- East Cobb Church launches “Revitalize JOSH” campaign
Get Our Free E-Mail Newsletter!
Every Sunday we round up the week’s top headlines and preview the upcoming week in the East Cobb News Digest. Click here to sign up, and you’re good to go!
Should be “clanging cymbals” (not “clanging symbols”).
I agree and double-down on Chris and Sylvia’s comments and assessments. We should also ask each contiguous and adjacent neighborhhod HOA to provide an opposition vote and/or petition to the commissioners. Chimney Lakes should be all over this, for example; maybe they are? Also, this article’s author should have disclosed that the majority of folks attending last week’s meeting, in favor of the project, were NOT East Cobb residents that would be negatively affected by this anti-Josh project. There is little time remaining, before the next meeting and vote next month, to have the plan rightfully rejected.
NP ministries has only themselves to blame for this dragging on for over 10 months now. They could have simply bought only the land necessary to build their satellite worship complex and left the rest to be developed/sold in a separate transaction. Even one of the commissioners remarked that it would not have even required a rezoning.
By structuring the transaction as buying all the land and selling 2/3rds back to a developer, the appearance of impropriety is there. I hope the IRS is paying attention.
It would be nice if a journalist would dig into why this simple approach wasn’t taken, and what the real relationship between NP and Hanna’s “True Vine” company is.
Absolutely. I’m still wondering if they’re counting that density with all 33 acres or just the 20 or so that are being used for the housing. Another question is whether the flood plain acreage should count for the density percentage. Then, there’s the question of what all those offices are going to be used for. No church I’ve ever been to has needed or used (or even had available) that much office space.
That attorney needs to realize that they don’t have approval and that the “clanging symbols and loud gongs that signify nothing” can raise enough questions to get it overturned. Bullying his way in isn’t going to make it. If they need 100 variances for those 51 homes, then that’s a major problem, too.
In my opinion, they should have been turned down a long time ago; however, the next time this comes up for a vote needs to be the last. The commissioners need to take an approve or deny vote and be done with this debacle.