East Point council upholds Planning Commission, denies rezoning for 0 Hedland Drive

East Point — The City Council on Nov. 17 voted to deny a developer’s request to rezone 0 Hedland Drive from R‑1 single‑family to R‑3 multifamily, accepting the Planning & Zoning Commission’s unanimous recommendation. The vote followed a public hearing that drew more than a dozen residents from Ridgecrest Lane and nearby streets.

Latequa Johnson, the property owner and applicant, told the council she planned an owner‑occupied multifamily townhome project of eight four‑bedroom units on a 0.731‑acre corner lot and said she had withdrawn a separate variance request after revising the site plan to meet setbacks. Johnson said a traffic study she commissioned predicted about 60 new daily trips and that the project could qualify for a 30% density bonus if specified amenities were provided.

Neighbors and the Planning & Zoning Commission strongly disagreed. Speakers including Anissa Abernathy and several other Ridgecrest Lane residents argued the proposal represented spot zoning that would double the density envisioned in the city’s comprehensive plan for that area, harm the single‑family character of nearby lots and worsen traffic and stormwater impacts. The commission voted to deny both the rezoning and the variance; staff had recommended approval with conditions limiting the site to six units and requiring a landscape buffer, compatibility review and no variance.

Council members questioned the applicant and staff about notice to nearby residents, the method for counting eligible amenities, how the density bonus was calculated and whether the parcel’s future‑land‑use designation — listed as neighborhood center with a small adjacent suburban residential sliver — supported a change to R‑3. Several council members said they were disinclined to rezone a parcel surrounded on multiple sides by established single‑family homes, even if the parcel itself is larger than neighboring lots.

After discussion, Councilmember Schrocker moved to accept the Planning & Zoning Commission’s recommendation to deny the rezoning and concurrent variance; the motion carried by voice vote. The council’s action preserves the current R‑1 zoning on the lot; the applicant may return with a revised plan or pursue other options under the city’s land‑use rules.

The hearing and debate illustrated a familiar tension in East Point: the city’s stated desire to add housing and reuse underutilized lots in neighborhood‑center nodes, versus neighbors’ insistence that small infill projects must fit the established character and infrastructure of long‑standing residential streets. The Planning & Zoning report and staff analysis are part of the public record and were the basis for the council’s vote.

Next procedural steps: because the council followed the commission’s recommendation to deny, no ordinance for approval was required. Any future rezoning application for the parcel would return to the Planning & Zoning Commission before appearing again before the council.