Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Acworth aldermen agree to deny townhome front-setback variance request
Summary
The Acworth Board of Aldermen moved to place a denial of variance request 2026-01 on the upcoming consent agenda after staff and members said preserving the 20-foot front setback protects driveway access and neighborhood consistency.
The Acworth City Board of Aldermen voted to place a denial of variance request 2026-01 on the consent agenda after a public hearing and staff presentation on Monday, Feb. 2.
The request, filed for multiple townhome parcels at 2600 Baker Road and adjoining addresses, sought relief from the city’s 20-foot front setback under §50.5G to allow variable setbacks between 11.5 and 13 feet, applicant counsel Danny Blumenthal told the board. Blumenthal said the relief was needed to provide usable rear patios, meet building-separation rules and reduce steep rear-yard slopes that arose after the site was graded under a prior developer.
City staff reviewed the request under the city’s variance criteria and told aldermen the grading and pad sizes that created the problem predated the current developer and owner. Staff noted the request conflicted with the ordinance’s intent to maintain consistent front setbacks across neighborhoods, though staff said a reduced front setback would not imperil public health or safety. The planning and zoning commission previously recommended denial by an 8–0 vote.
During board discussion, members repeatedly flagged driveway access and pedestrian safety as deciding factors. One alderman said the exhibits show an 18-foot minimum driveway from the back of sidewalk to garage would be provided but that maintaining a 20-foot setback helps ensure vehicles can park without blocking sidewalks. The applicant’s counsel said the proposed 18-foot measurement was intended to accommodate standard trucks and vans.
After questions about how the subdivision was originally graded and whether regrading or footprint adjustments were feasible, several members said they would vote to deny. The board directed the city clerk to put the denial on the consent agenda for the Thursday meeting and then closed the public hearing.
What happens next: The denial will appear on the board’s consent agenda at the next regular meeting; no final vote on the variance was recorded at this hearing.
Speakers quoted or referenced: Danny Blumenthal (applicant counsel), Mr. Brown (city staff/planning), Mayor and multiple aldermen.
Authorities referenced: Ordinance 2020-20/2021 (rezoning/conditions), city code section §50.5G (front setback requirement), planning & zoning commission action (Jan. 27, 2026).
