Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Statham council hears proposal to rezone 1862 Railroad St. for seven single‑family homes
Summary
Applicants told the Statham City Council on Dec. 3 they seek to rezone 1862 Railroad St. to residential for seven homes (one existing to remain). Councilmembers and residents raised concerns about historic character, septic systems, buffers from train noise and binding conditions; no rezoning vote was taken.
Statham City Council on Dec. 3 held a public hearing on a request to rezone 1862 Railroad St. (Case R‑24‑01) from commercial to residential to allow seven single‑family homes, with one existing house to remain on site.
Applicant representative Jakob Sullins of Sullins Engineering said the owners seek residential zoning so the property can be developed without large clear‑cuts. Rob Scott, owner of RAC Properties of Athens, Inc., described plans to build four houses in front and three to the rear and said the developer is open to council‑requested conditions about general architectural fit, minimum two‑car garages and 2,000 square‑foot minimum homes.
Councilmembers pressed on several material points. Councilmember Penn said his main concern was preserving the scale and character of nearby historic Broad St. and asked whether the builder would construct all lots. Scott said he expected to build most lots but would not guarantee he would be the builder on every lot. Councilmember Patterson questioned marketability given proximity to the railroad and the number of unsold homes in other Scott developments.
Scott told the council the lots would need septic systems rather than city sewer and said he expected many existing trees could be retained. He estimated the new homes would likely list in the $400,000–$500,000 range and said, "they would probably be in that price range." He also said he would use Hardie plank siding and typically uses stone or brick on about 20% of a house’s facade.
City Attorney Jody Campbell clarified that any zoning conditions the council attaches to an approval would apply to subsequent builders as well as the current applicant. Councilmember Burnette and others discussed sidewalks, streetlights and garage configuration (side‑entry to preserve front appearance), and whether requiring side‑entry garages would force additional tree clearing.
Several residents spoke both for and against rezoning. Supporters including Dwight McCormick and Councilmember Kurt Bogenrieder said residential use would better match the neighborhood and preserve greenspace than highway‑business zoning. Opponents including Kathy White and Gayle Steed urged keeping the property wooded or limiting development to small homes or family‑friendly businesses. Laura Gutsmann said she favored residential use in principle but not the specific product shown by the builder.
The public hearing closed at 7:22 p.m. after the applicant said the property is not under contract and reiterated willingness to work with the city on conditions. No final rezoning decision or council vote on the application was recorded at the meeting; the matter remains pending further council action.
What happens next: The council heard testimony and exchanged questions and clarifications about buffers, septic, design standards and enforceable conditions. Council staff did not present a final ordinance vote at this meeting, so any formal action on R‑24‑01 would occur at a later meeting or agenda item.
