Training center challenge appealed to Superior Court of DeKalb County

Law enforcement and construction crews were seen Monday Feb. 6, 2023 at the site of Atlanta’s proposed public safety training center in anticipation of construction beginning on the controversial facility. From The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. (John Spink / John.Spink@ajc.com)

Credit: John Spink / AJC

Credit: John Spink / AJC

Law enforcement and construction crews were seen Monday Feb. 6, 2023 at the site of Atlanta’s proposed public safety training center in anticipation of construction beginning on the controversial facility. From The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. (John Spink / John.Spink@ajc.com)

A challenge of the land disturbance permits issued for Atlanta’s planned public safety training center has been appealed to the Superior Court of DeKalb County.

DeKalb County Commissioner Ted Terry filed paperwork on Wednesday against the DeKalb County Zoning Board of Appeals’ decision that the county acted appropriately during it’s lengthy permit review process for the construction site.

Terry wasn’t immediately available for comment Thursday morning.

DeKalb County gave the go ahead for construction to begin in January, nearly a year after Atlanta applied for land disturbance permits to build the facility.

In February, two DeKalb County residents, along with Terry, filed a formal appeal of the permits which accused the city and county of overlooking existing restrictions on sediment discharges.

But the DeKalb County Zoning Board of Appeals rejected the challenge during a meeting in April after unanimously deciding that the county’s months-long process to issue the permits complied with all requirements, and denied a request to halt the project.

A Fulton County Judge also denied an injunction that would have pressed pause on construction prior to the zoning board’s decision.

The appeal to the Superior Court of DeKalb County argues again that the planning director for the county overlooked environmental concerns caused by additional sediment deposited into Intrenchment Creek due to construction.

“The (Zoning Board of Appeals) erred by upholding the land development permit because the proposed construction will add sediment into Intrenchment Creek in violation of state law,” the new filing reads and requests the Superior Court takes up the case for review.