Roswell City Committee Meeting: July 14, 2026 - Comprehensive Plan and Data Center Regulations

The City of Roswell held a committee meeting on July 14, 2026, to discuss several agenda items, including grant applications, the annual Capital Improvement Element update, the 2045 Comprehensive Growth Plan, and proposed data center regulations. Key discussions centered on residential protections, housing studies, and economic development. Public comments were permitted on the comprehensive plan for the first time in a committee meeting.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of minutes from June 23, 2026 committee meeting: Passed unanimously.
• Resolution to apply for and accept FY2026 Local Law Enforcement Grant for Cyber Crimes Program (DOJ): 100% federally funded, no match required. Passed unanimously.
• Resolution to apply for and accept Georgia Recreation and Parks Association BOOST Grant for 2026-2027 school year, up to $45,000, to offset costs of adaptive friendship camps. Passed unanimously.
• Transmittal of annual update to the Capital Improvement Element (CIE): Includes projects from recreation, transportation, and public safety. New items added: Hard Scrabble Phase 2 multi-use path (completed), Oxbow Road improvements (completed), Pond Reps (completed), Fire Station 28 (scope changed). Transportation: intersection at SR 9 and 120. Recreation: Records Rec Center and Park Asset Improvements, Cultural Arts Center. Passed unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

• By a vote of 5-1-1, the committee allowed public comments on the comprehensive plan (Item 5) for two minutes per speaker. Ten residents spoke.
• Corrine Bores: Urged word-for-word alignment between UDC and comp plan, exact lot sizes, hiring a landscape architect for buffers, opposed renaming Founders Park, and called for a pause on data centers.
• Dave Woodrow: Supported pausing to study higher density, warned of unintended consequences and past zoning lawsuits.
• Sean Wright: Asked if a land-use lawyer reviewed language changes; sought clear commitment that single-family neighborhoods won't be targeted for higher density.
• Claire Snedeker: Supported reverting to 2040 language for residential sections, citing weakening phrases like "pockets of other housing types" and "primarily" instead of "limited to."
• Steve Walsh: Emphasized housing and economic development are linked; noted WellStar's difficulty recruiting nurses due to lack of affordable housing for essential workers.
• Amanda Newton: Requested intentional, clear planning; concerned about density near her home and declining school population.
• Sally McKenzie: Thanked council; argued employers draw from a 15-20 mile radius, so housing supply doesn't directly drive economic development; supported diverse housing types, including rental.
• Karen Gilbert: Recounted the Vickers development (apartments granted height variance despite community opposition) as a cautionary tale urging clear language to prevent litigation.
• Karen Parrish: Stressed that the comp plan is a roadmap; warned that terms like "missing middle" have specific industry definitions (up to 30 units/acre); urged careful wording to protect neighborhoods.
• Courtney (no last name): Identified as "missing middle"; noted the plan's focus on activity centers, not neighborhoods; questioned why the 2040 language proposal wasn't raised earlier given councilmembers on the stakeholder committee.
• Mark Shafani: Polled the audience; majority raised hands to keep 2040 language; noted some council had not read 2040 plan; asked for grace.
• Joyce Cross: Recalled legal challenges from the East Roswell Target development; argued that decisions made before July 27 public hearing render that hearing meaningless.

Discussion Items

• 2045 Comprehensive Growth Plan (Item 5):

  • Michelle Alexander, Community Development Director, presented the plan's framework: a policy document focused on economic development, with over 1,000 survey participants, six stakeholder committee meetings, and a focus on 12-15% of city land (activity centers).
  • Residential Language: Council debated whether to retain the 2040 plan's detailed three-page descriptions per residential character area or accept the shortened one-page version in the 2045 draft. Councilmember Sells proposed "forklifting" the 2040 language verbatim. Councilmembers Hall and Philippi supported comparison. Councilmember Beeson argued the language is substantively identical and accused critics of hyperbole. Councilmember Zach suggested staff provide a side-by-side comparison. Ultimately, council agreed to let staff produce a comparison document and give feedback within 48 hours.
  • Housing Study: There was consensus to include a housing study in the community work program (CWP) to identify needs. Debate over whether to include "and execute a strategy to address findings" – some wanted binding action, others preferred separate council approval. Left in with clarification that execution requires council direction.
  • Activity Centers and Transition Zones: Discussion on whether to include language in the comp plan or rely on the UDC. Council leaned toward including policy language on minimum transition zones, buffers, and screening requirements, with specific CWP items (LU6, LU11) to develop standards.
  • Other Edits: Council reviewed a list of revised edits, including changes to population growth language (from "moderate" to "intentional growth focusing on age distribution"), replacing "subdivisions" with "neighborhoods", and consolidating catalytic site strategies for all five activity centers.
  • Data Centers: Councilmember Zach clarified that the goal is to protect against data centers, not encourage them; he doubted any would come to Roswell.

• Data Center Regulations (Item 6):

  • Michelle Alexander presented findings from a white paper: data centers consume significant energy and water, generate low noise nuisance, and provide few jobs (20 permanent for an 80,000 sq ft facility vs 320 for office). Property tax revenue can be high (e.g., $2.5M vs $100K for warehouse).
  • Staff recommended a tiered regulatory approach based on energy usage (megawatts):
    • Exempt: <1 MW (hospitals, small businesses).
    • Tier 1: 1-4.99 MW – conditional use in light industrial (LI) zones, 200-foot buffer, prohibited adjacent to residential.
    • Tier 2: 5-20 MW – conditional use in LI only, 1,000-foot distance from residential, additional noise and water studies.
    • Prohibited: >20 MW.
  • Requirements: noise study (including low-frequency), water consumption/sustainability plan, decommissioning plan, fire safety, prohibition of evaporative cooling systems.
  • Councilmember Brumley asked to cap at 20 MW explicitly. Councilmember Beeson suggested a decommissioning bond. Council provided general support for the direction; staff will prepare a formal ordinance for August.

Key Outcomes

• Votes on Consent Items: All four items (minutes, law enforcement grant, BOOST grant, CIE transmittal) passed unanimously.
• Public Comment Vote: Motion to allow public comment on the comprehensive plan passed 5-1-1 (Councilmember Beeson opposed, citing prior notice that no comment would be taken; one abstention).
• Comprehensive Plan: No formal vote. Council directed staff to produce a comparison of 2040 vs. 2045 residential language for review within 48 hours, with feedback to be sent via email. Staff to prepare edits as discussed, including preserving 2040 language as default unless otherwise directed.
• Data Centers: Council expressed general support for the proposed regulatory framework; staff will prepare a formal ordinance for a future meeting (target August) to be heard by the Planning Commission before the moratorium expires September 20, 2026.
• Next Steps: The comprehensive plan transmittal public hearing is scheduled for July 27, 2026. The data center ordinance will be developed and brought back for council consideration.