Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
14‑unit plan at 5037 Peachtree Road draws opposition over parking, waivers and reliance on railroad easement
Summary
Staff recommended denial of some architectural and landscaping waivers for a 14‑unit proposal at 5037 Peachtree Road while supporting several variances tied to lot constraints; neighbors and the Shell Front board objected to the high number of variances and an uncertain off‑site parking easement.
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff presented a constrained redevelopment proposal at 5037 Peachtree Road for a 14‑unit multifamily building and a request for numerous variances and waivers: higher impervious coverage (80%→88%), reduced open space (10%→3.5%), ground‑floor residential closer than 100 feet to the public street, reduced on‑site parking (18→4 spaces claimed on‑site with 15 spaces proposed in a revocable railroad easement), and architectural articulation waivers.
Staff said the applicant had secured a lease for part of the Norfolk Southern right‑of‑way to provide 15 parking spaces but cautioned the easement was revocable and could be revoked by the railroad, which would remove the off‑site parking option. Staff recommended denial of several architectural and landscaping waivers (tree density and facade articulation) while supporting other variances tied to lot constraints and asked that any approval be conditioned on the plan dated 03/06/2026 and revised to reflect denied requests.
The Shell Front homeowners association submitted a memorandum and spoke in opposition, listing four primary concerns: site inadequacy given the number of variances (staff cited 9 variances and 6 waivers), traffic impact on an already strained corridor, a parking deficit that could shift demand to surrounding streets, and likely negative effects on neighborhood character and property values. Multiple residents echoed parking and traffic worries and said they had not received timely mailed notice.
The applicant acknowledged the parking concerns but said the project is designed to be transit‑oriented, with proximity to the MARTA station and potential reliance on public transit and nearby parking. Council did not take a final vote on the item at this session; staff and several residents asked for revised plans to address denied waivers and parking questions.
