Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Drayton topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables 20‑acre rezoning after residents raise safety, traffic and school‑capacity concerns
Summary
The Marietta City Council on Dec. 10 paused consideration of a rezoning that would allow 76 detached single‑family homes on a nearly 20‑acre site, citing neighborhood safety, traffic and infrastructure questions; the motion to table passed 5–2.
The Marietta City Council voted 5–2 on Dec. 10 to table a rezoning request for about 19.45 acres (case Z2025‑17) after several residents and council members raised concerns about traffic, pedestrian safety, school capacity and on‑site infrastructure.
Kevin Moore, speaking for the applicant (identified in the record as Drayton/Trayton Homes), told the council the current proposal reduces unit count from 79 to 76 to address driveway‑length requirements and preserves more than seven acres of streams and buffers. "We agreed to a contribution to the City of Marietta in the amount of $107,000 to go to the road improvements that are needed for Scott Drive and Crestridge Drive," Moore said, describing a stipulation derived from the project traffic study.
Why it matters: Neighbors argued the development’s connections to local streets and the number of units posed hazards and precedent issues. Willie Reed, a neighborhood resident who spoke during the public hearing, urged the council to cap the number of homes at 51 to meet the city’s stated zoning purposes and reduce traffic and fire‑access risks. "Cap the development at 51 units and make sure that number is a condition of the rezoning," Reed said.
During the public hearing residents also pointed to an earlier fatal crash at Scott Drive and Powers Ferry, questioned whether independent traffic studies fully addressed pedestrian safety, and raised noise and air‑quality concerns near I‑75. City staff and the applicant responded that the traffic study—prepared by an independent professional and accepted by Public Works—found minimal operational impact within the study network and that buffers between the interstate and the new homes would be left undisturbed. The applicant also said construction traffic would be routed from Blanche Drive rather than through neighborhood streets.
Council discussion focused on several recurring concerns: alley widths and how sanitation service will be handled for homes with alley access; the location and leases for four existing billboards on the property (the owner, not the developer, retains billboard leases); the alignment of a proposed entrance near Matthews, and whether existing fire‑ and life‑safety requirements are satisfied in future construction plans. Mark Rice of Public Works confirmed the proposed Scott/Crestridge improvements would be completed within existing right‑of‑way and would not require additional private land.
A substitute motion to approve the rezoning failed 4–3. The original motion to table the item until the next month then carried 5–2; the council instructed staff and the applicant to revisit the specific concerns raised by residents and by council members, including alleys, sanitation access and the Matthews alignment. No final rezoning action was taken; the item was rescheduled for further review.
What’s next: The council’s tabling leaves the application open for additional revisions and staff follow‑up; the applicant asked the council to approve the rezoning with stipulations set out in its application letter. The council will revisit the item at the next meeting after staff and the applicant provide the requested clarifications.
