Marietta split in push for historic district

Preservationists want to turn this old neighborhood into the city’s first locally controlled historic district in a residential area. That would hinder anybody from changing Kennesaw Avenue’s look and feel, an important part of Marietta’s image as a historic city.

The street, which extends northwest from Marietta Square and goes toward Kennesaw Mountain, features homes dating back to the 1840s. One, the Greek Revival Howell House, reportedly sheltered U.S. Gen. H.M. Judah in 1865 when Northern troops occupied Marietta.

Opponents say the government wants to stick its nose into their private lives.

“I don’t think the Historic Preservation Commission has made a payment on this house,” said Dennis Payne, who has lived in a bungalow 41 years. “Why should they have a say in what I do with it?”

If a historic district is formed, the owners of about 25 homes inside the district would have to obtain a “certificate of appropriateness” from the Historic Preservation Commission before making changes to the exterior of their houses. They couldn’t tear down a house or make an addition without approval, either. Paint color wouldn’t be included.

Jim Corley is one of many Kennesaw Avenue residents who favors the idea. He’s lived five decades in a three-story Italianate house built in 1882.

“I think it’s a good thing,” Corley said. “I think it’s to protect the rest of us from tear downs and alterations that are incompatible with the neighborhood.”

Marietta, population 68,000, is hardly the first city in Georgia to struggle with historic preservation.

Decatur already has four historic districts but backed off turning the Oakhurst neighborhood into one because of residents’ opposition. Newnan, which has its share of 19th-century homes, flirted with the idea in 2003 before deciding against it.

The resistance is always led by homeowners who think their property rights are being violated.

Georgia has 137 cities and counties with historic preservation ordinances, but many have been tweaked to reflect local sentiment, like Marietta’s. Only 78 have ordinances accepted as part of the National Park Service’s Certified Local Government program. Cities in that program are eligible for grants usually used for the administration of a historic district. Sometimes homeowners can get tax breaks for repairs.

Marietta residents may have mixed feelings about the ordinance, but the town loves and capitalizes on its history, much of it tied to the Civil War and nearby Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park, which draws thousands of visitors.

The town has its own history museum, a Gone With the Wind museum, a U.S. military cemetery with 17,000 graves, a separate Confederate cemetery with 3,000 graves and five neighborhoods on the National Register of Historic Places. “It’s one of our most historic towns,” said Leigh Burns of the historic preservation division at the Georgia Department of Natural Resources.

But many history buffs hate the idea of government intrusion, including several owners of historic homes on Kennesaw Avenue.

“It gives people who don’t even necessarily live in the community a say in how you make changes, even repairs, to your property,” said Martin Kendall, who has lived in a 1911 bungalow on Kennesaw Avenue for 25 years. “This is a group that today may have good intentions. But down the road, who knows?”

“It’s one of the most intrusive aspects of government,” said City Council member Philip Goldstein, the council’s most vigorous defender of property rights.

But a lot of people disagree.

“Many of us believe it enhances property rights,” said Historic Preservation Commission member Becky Paden. “The historic ordinance keeps your neighbor from doing something crazy and diminishing the value of your own house.”

A historic district existed for one week early this year.

On Jan. 13, the City Council approved the Kennesaw Avenue Historic District after a long process of polling residents.

But Goldstein discovered the commission, made up of seven members appointed by the City Council, had failed to hold one of two required public hearings. The City Council had held two hearings.

Mayor Steve Tumlin vetoed the district Jan. 21 because he didn’t think it could stand up in court if challenged.

The city ordinance, modeled on a state version, said: “The commission and council shall hold a public hearing on the proposed ordinance. ...” A rewritten version will specify hearings by “each” group.

“We made one assumption and the City Council and ultimately the city attorney decided we’d not interpreted appropriately,” said Rusty Roth, city planning and zoning manager. “It was under my responsibility.”

The historic preservation panel was crushed. David Freedman, chairman of the volunteer commission, thinks some people in city government were determined to stop the district. City staff and attorneys advised the commission during every step, he said.

“We wasted a lot of time, and we received bad advice and bad direction from the city,” he said.

Before revisiting the historic district, the City Council is rewriting parts of the existing historic preservation ordinance. A vote is scheduled for Wednesday. Goldstein said the changes address weaknesses in the original code. Freedman said it’s just being watered down.

For instance, two residents of each historic district will be appointed to the Historic Preservation Commission to vote on issues related to their district. The council is also changing language so homeowners don’t need approval for minor exterior changes. Homeowners wouldn’t have to pay a $25 fee to request permission to make a repair.

“It’s just good old homespun wordsmithing,” Tumlin said. “There’s not as much strict compliance as there was. There’s more flexibility without throwing away the historic concept.”

If approved, the process of forming a historic district will start all over.

The city’s historic preservation ordinance requires residents of a proposed historic district to be polled to see if they like the idea. Sixty percent must favor the district before it can go ahead. When residents were polled earlier, for the district that lasted one week, 17 voted in favor, five against and four didn’t reply. Unanswered letters were counted as no votes.

Kendall said he plans to talk with more homeowners this time and drum up more negative votes. Corley thinks some people are now disgusted by the conflict.

“I’m not sure everybody who voted for it the first time would vote for it again,” he said. “If you’re not going to get a historic district on Kennesaw Avenue, it’ll be hard to get one anywhere else.”