Skip to main content

Residents Against Apartments at Sprayberry Crossing

994 Comments

T
Tony Shawver
5 years ago

This type of housing has been consistently opposed in East Cobb and should continue to be to keep the feel of the community which attracted us to but here’s.

A
Anonymous
5 years ago

I am against the proposed apartment/townhome/senior living facility.

D
Debbie Yang
5 years ago

Please no apartments. We need to keep our property values up. This will decrease them.

R
Richard Corbin
5 years ago

Wynfair Subdivision No rezoning of Sprayberry Crossing with high density rental apartments!

R
Raj Ramakrishnan
5 years ago

Walton Reserve

J
Julie Healy
5 years ago

No high density apartments!

J
Jay Mathis
5 years ago

No high density apartments please!

L
Laura Weiss
5 years ago

In April 2006, the BOC voted 5-0 to accept the stipulations that the Northeast Cobb Homeowners' Group, Cobb staff and Commissioner Tim Lee had worked MONTHS on an agreement for Sprayberry Crossing properties. I spoke at that meeting! I remember that the vote was 5-0, PASSING MORE RESTRICTIONS ON THIS ROD because of its location. Now, this national developer wants to ignore the community and the BOC's previous decision to force this high-density project on our community. Don't allow this! According to Cobb Comp Plan, RODs need to be adjacent to highways; this is the very reason why the NECHG put MORE STIPULATIONS ON THIS SPRAYBERRY CROSSING ROD!!! This developer has a history of building highly-dense apartment/condo complexes and then selling when units are about 90% sold. Tell this developer that we don't want a hit-and-run developer in our community telling us what we need!!!

T
tom coe
5 years ago

this area is already overcrowded with terrible traffic. Chestnut Grove Sub.

C
CHERYL A COE
5 years ago

this is not supposed to happen.

C
Christopher Peters
5 years ago

I live in Brownridge Sub-division. I can't believe that there isn't a better option to redevelop this area than to cram in 178 apartments in a five story building, more senior housing and townhomes. Also it violates the 2006 Sandy Plains/E. Piedmont Corridor land use plan that was made with community input and voted affirmatively by a 4-0 vote. We're watching and will take this into account when we vote in a few weeks on the County Commission races.

T
Tabitha Higdon
5 years ago

Post Oak Village

A
Anonymous
5 years ago

Traffic on Sandy Plains!! Windsor Oaks

J
James Kutzman
5 years ago

High density apartments in this area is totally inappropriate. Let the commissioners consider the residents who live here already. Do we need more stores in the area? How about supporting the existing zoning

J
Jacqueline Mercer-Hollie
5 years ago

Hampton Oaks Subdivision

J
John Tillapaugh
5 years ago

Autumn Lake

A
Anonymous
5 years ago

Traffic & property value among a couple principle reasons.

P
PJ Bohlin
5 years ago

The traffic is already bad enough In this area and we don’t need this additional housing!

B
bob hamiton
5 years ago

No apts period. Traffic will be grid locked and we never got a straight up answer to the traffic problem.

L
Larry Peek
5 years ago

To much traffic now