Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Variance Powder Springs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors and applicant spar over 200-foot buffer in Marietta rezoning hearing
Summary
A public hearing on a Powder Springs Street property drew debate after the applicant's representative said a 200-foot buffer for commercial landscapers would render much of the lot unusable; neighbors raised driveway, access and historic-district concerns, and a council member moved to deny other variances.
City staff opened a public hearing on a rezoning/variance request for a Powder Springs Street property after a speaker asked to rezone a single lot so it could be divided. The applicant's representative told the council the property, vacant since about 2015 and owned by Jenny Cunningham's family since 1962, has a ready buyer: a commercial landscaping company that would rehabilitate existing structures and park box trucks and pickups for daily operations rather than store bulk landscaping materials.
The representative said a 200-foot buffer applied to commercial landscapers effectively makes a significant portion of the lot unusable. "I requested that we remove the 200 foot buffer," the representative said. She added the buyer would use existing structures for operations and would fence and landscape the site to make it visually acceptable.
Nearby property owners raised practical concerns. Susan Moore, who identified herself as an owner of Divers Automotive, asked the council to confirm the proposal would not affect her property and sought guidance on how to get zoning clarification. She asked how box trucks would enter and exit through a long-standing 12-foot driveway that leads to Powder Springs Street; staff confirmed the historic access pattern (right turn onto Powder Springs Street) remained the only way out.
Council discussion addressed competing goals: the representative framed the request as a way to bring a long-vacant lot back into productive use and onto the tax rolls, while other speakers emphasized neighborhood aesthetics, pedestrian safety and recent housing development along Powder Springs Street. One council member described the commercial corridor overlay as intended to promote pedestrian mobility and aesthetics on the corridor and said overlays remain tied to the property even after a business leaves.
At least one motion was made during the discussion: a council member (speaker 3) moved "to deny of all other variances." The transcript does not record a second or the result of a vote on that motion.
Residents also raised broader process and neighborhood-protection issues during public comment. A Forest Hills resident urged the Historic Preservation Commission and the city to require an automatic suspension of a building permit and a new Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) when approved plans are modified for properties in historic districts, and recommended requiring structural-engineering reports before permitting major additions to century-old homes. The same resident suggested improved digital notifications for neighbors in place of or in addition to mailed notices.
The hearing recorded multiple unresolved questions about exact buffer rationale, paving vs. gravel for parking, and whether alternative access could be secured; the transcript ends without a recorded final vote on the rezoning or variances.
