Commission moves against Samaritan Drive townhome CUP after staff recommends denial
July 17, 2025 | Cumming, Forsyth County, Georgia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
City planning staff recommended denial of Conditional Use Permit 2025071, a request by Samaritan Holdings LLC to build 10 townhomes at 102 Samaritan Drive, citing nonconformance with the comprehensive plan and insufficient parking, landscaping and buffering.
An applicant representative described the proposal as a 10-townhome development intended to provide mid-market, walkable housing near downtown. The representative said the project would include three-story townhomes with options for a single-car garage and a bonus room, roof decks and balconies, and that the design includes underground storm detention to address site drainage where a pipe was previously routed through the lot.
Scott, the city planning staff member, said the property is vacant and located directly behind the Dunkin’ shop, and recommended denial: “There’s not sufficient landscaping, open space, and provision of screening to buffer from incompatible uses. Ingress and egress to the proposed development will be from a private way to Samaritan Drive to an unsignalized intersection with Canton Highway. This will exacerbate the already difficult traffic movement of turning west on the State Route 20. For the above mentioned reasons, staff recommends, denial of the CUP as presented.”
After discussion, a commission member moved “we send conditional use permit number 2025071 forward to the council for denial based on our staff report.” The motion was seconded; the meeting record states only, “By vote. Thank you. Motion denied.” The transcript does not provide additional clarification in the record about whether the commission’s motion to forward a recommendation of denial passed or failed, nor does it record a roll-call tally.
The commission’s action — as recorded in the transcript — therefore documents that staff recommended denial and that a motion to forward a recommendation of denial was made and was recorded in the minutes with the phrase “Motion denied.” The item will appear in the council packet according to the commission’s usual process; the transcript does not specify next administrative steps or an exact council date.
Speakers at the public hearing did not offer additional public comment for or against the application during this meeting.
An applicant representative described the proposal as a 10-townhome development intended to provide mid-market, walkable housing near downtown. The representative said the project would include three-story townhomes with options for a single-car garage and a bonus room, roof decks and balconies, and that the design includes underground storm detention to address site drainage where a pipe was previously routed through the lot.
Scott, the city planning staff member, said the property is vacant and located directly behind the Dunkin’ shop, and recommended denial: “There’s not sufficient landscaping, open space, and provision of screening to buffer from incompatible uses. Ingress and egress to the proposed development will be from a private way to Samaritan Drive to an unsignalized intersection with Canton Highway. This will exacerbate the already difficult traffic movement of turning west on the State Route 20. For the above mentioned reasons, staff recommends, denial of the CUP as presented.”
After discussion, a commission member moved “we send conditional use permit number 2025071 forward to the council for denial based on our staff report.” The motion was seconded; the meeting record states only, “By vote. Thank you. Motion denied.” The transcript does not provide additional clarification in the record about whether the commission’s motion to forward a recommendation of denial passed or failed, nor does it record a roll-call tally.
The commission’s action — as recorded in the transcript — therefore documents that staff recommended denial and that a motion to forward a recommendation of denial was made and was recorded in the minutes with the phrase “Motion denied.” The item will appear in the council packet according to the commission’s usual process; the transcript does not specify next administrative steps or an exact council date.
Speakers at the public hearing did not offer additional public comment for or against the application during this meeting.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
