Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Smyrna council unanimously denies Atlantic Billboards’ permit appeals, citing timing and ordinance violations
Summary
After a two‑hour hearing, Smyrna’s mayor and council unanimously denied multiple appeals by Atlantic Billboards, finding several appeals untimely and upholding community development denials on substantive zoning and sign‑code grounds.
Franklin Lemon, an attorney representing Atlantic Billboards, told the Smyrna mayor and council that his client submitted 10 sign‑permit applications on March 28, 2024, and that the city failed to provide written notice within the 45 business‑day period required by the city’s sign code.
"The city shall process all applications within 45 business days and shall give notice to the applicant of its decision by hand delivery or by mailing a notice to the address on the sign permit application on or before the 45th business day," Lemon said, quoting the code and arguing the city did not hand‑deliver or mail the notices to Atlantic’s address.
Lemon pressed several legal theories in support of reversing the denials: the procedural deadline in the sign code; the claim that several proposed sign locations sit on railroad‑owned parcels that were not zoned and therefore not subject to the city’s sign restrictions; and a preserved challenge that the city’s sign ordinance adoption may have failed to meet Georgia’s zoning procedure notice requirements. Lemon also cited four court decisions in which courts ordered permits issued after municipal time limits were missed.
Scott Cochran, the city attorney for Smyrna, told the council that constitutional and adoption validity questions were matters for courts to resolve and not for the council to decide at the appeal hearing. Cochran said the city’s communications through its online portal — including emails sent to the address listed on permit applications — constitute mailing under the ordinance’s terms and that, as a consequence, several of Atlantic’s appeals were untimely under the code’s deadlines.
"Those aren't issues to be resolved today," Cochran said of the constitutional and adoption claims, adding that portal communications and the process reflected in the application records supported the city’s procedural position.
Councilman Lindley moved to deny the appeals for permits 24‑70 through 24‑79 as untimely under section 82‑17(e)(1) of the Smyrna sign ordinance and to affirm the community development department’s denial letters dated May 6, 2024; the motion directed the city attorney to prepare a written summary. The motion passed unanimously, 7‑0.
The council then considered a separate appeal for permit 24‑120, a location the applicant said is on railroad property and therefore outside zoning constraints. Cochran responded that several ordinance prohibitions — in particular the requirement that signs be ground‑based monument signs — apply citywide and are not tied to zoning, and that the denial on that basis should be upheld. Lindley moved to affirm the denial for 24‑120 on the ground that the proposed sign is not a ground‑based monument sign; that motion also passed unanimously.
The council’s action affirms the community development department’s written denials and closes Atlantic Billboards’ administrative appeals in this session. Cochran and staff will prepare written summaries of the council’s decisions for the record.
What happens next: Lemon preserved arguments about ordinance adoption and First Amendment plausibility for the record; those legal claims remain available to Atlantic Billboards to pursue in court or in further proceedings but were not resolved by the council at this hearing.
