Council defers rezoning request for 6671 Mableton Parkway after wide public comment

Mableton City Council voted to defer consideration of REZ2025009, the rezoning request for 6671 Mableton Parkway, after a lengthy public hearing where applicants, neighbors and staff presented competing views on the property's history and suitable future uses.

Senior planner Sunday Oduo told the council the parcel has been zoned R-20 (single-family residential) since the 1970s in city records but has operated as commercial in practice. Staff recommended denial of a permanent rezoning to Neighborhood Retail Commercial (NRC) because it conflicts with the city's future land-use plan, and instead recommended approval of a temporary land-use permit (LUP) with conditions including a two-year term, demolition of front canopy within two years, billboard removal within six months, a minimum 25-foot vegetative buffer with opaque fencing, restricted hours of operation (7 a.m.–10 p.m.) and a long list of prohibited uses.

Applicant Leonie Johnson urged approval, saying she and her husband have run a faith-based hair salon at the site since 1995 and faced financial hardship after a 2022 accident interrupted operations. “We have used that building since 1995 as a hair salon,” Johnson said. She and supporters said county tax and deed records indicate commercial use and asked for a permanent fix rather than repeated renewals.

Neighbors, neighborhood groups and the SAE school principal backed staff and the Planning Commission's recommendations for a temporary permit with strict conditions. The Mableton Improvement Coalition warned that NRC is a broad category that could allow high-intensity or automotive uses if the property later changed hands. Scott Starwitz, CFO of the SAE school across the street, cited safety concerns: “The average speed on Mableton Parkway is 62 miles an hour,” he said, urging careful mitigation for traffic and pedestrian risk.

Council members asked staff to verify deed history and the tax-assessor classifications and debated whether the LUP term should be two years as staff recommended or longer to reduce administrative burden on the owner. One council member noted a zoning-code provision permitting discretionary periods for special-use authorizations and recommended extending the LUP to four years while staff examines broader compatibility.

After discussion, Councilman Michael McNeely moved to defer the item to allow staff to gather historical documents and address outstanding questions; the motion passed by voice vote. No permanent rezoning or LUP renewal was adopted at the session.