Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council denies variance to let a mostly opaque frontage fence; height variance fails

Peachtree City Council · May 22, 2026
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

After a public hearing on a corner-lot request to install a 6-foot privacy fence with less-than-50%-visibility frontage material, the council split votes: the motion to permit 6-foot fencing in certain front-facing pieces failed (2–3), and the council voted to deny the opacity variance (3–2).

Peachtree City Council considered a homeowner’s request to allow a 6-foot privacy fence and to permit solid (more than 50% opaque) material along certain frontages of a corner lot. Planning staff explained the ordinance requires front-yard/frontage fence components be no more than 4 feet high and at least 50% visually open as viewed from the street for safety and sight-line reasons.

Applicant Alex Wilhelm described moving to Peachtree City with his young children and requested the 6-foot privacy fence for child safety, privacy and to mitigate traffic and visibility from passersby. “A 6 foot privacy fence provides a much safer, more secure barrier for both our children and then other neighborhood children as well,” he said.

Council members debated public-safety sight-triangle and ordinance consistency. One member argued granting the variance would amount to a special privilege and could set a precedent; another urged a compromise that would provide privacy while preserving visibility on front-facing portions. The council split the issues: a motion to allow certain 6-foot sections while keeping the two small front-facing sections at 4 feet failed 2–3, and a separate motion to deny the variance that would permit an opaque frontage fence passed 3–2.

Council members who voted to deny the opacity variance cited safety and sight-line concerns for corner lots; supporters of limited height relief argued the homeowner’s safety and neighborhood privacy were important but that material and location adjustments should protect visibility standards. The decision leaves the ordinance’s 50% visibility requirement intact for the frontage components and denies the applicant’s request for greater opacity.