Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Planning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council review session outlines options for properties, flags nonconforming billboard language

3789488 · June 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City staff told council members that the Planning Commission’s approval included options to rezone property or address a nonconforming billboard; staff noted a likely clerical date error in the stipulation and that a nonconforming billboard could remain grandfathered if not addressed.

City planning staff briefed the Marietta City Council on several development cases and on a nonconforming billboard provision tied to a Planning Commission recommendation.

Staff said the Planning Commission’s approval included that the council could (1) rezone the property, (2) address the nonconforming billboard on-site, or (3) take other actions tied to the property’s status. Staff explained that if council chose not to address the billboard, it would remain nonconforming and grandfathered.

Council members noted a likely clerical error in one stipulation date. The stipulation reads "within 12 months of the permit or by 12/31/2025," language several members said did not make logical sense and may have been intended to reference a date in 2026. Staff acknowledged it could be a clerical mistake and confirmed council has options to consider when the item returns for final action.

Several individual addresses were discussed with staff reporting no new information: 1475 Canton Road; 595 Weaver Drive; 1751 Veil Ferry Road; 74 Austin Avenue; 266 Crescent Circle; and 462 and 480 Roswell Street. On Crescent Circle staff clarified the current owner purchased the property in 2017 and that the property lost its grandfathered residential status at that time; the council heard that a commercial tenant occupied the property in 2020.

No final rezoning or enforcement decision was made during the review session; staff framed the options and asked the council where they wished to proceed when the items appear again on a formal agenda.