6Feb23: Decatur Eliminates Single-Family Zoning

All three powerful groups want to rezone Atlanta for "higher density."

Urban planners across the US (see a growing set of examples in "The Threat" section of this website) have changed city zoning based on the belief that:

1. Greater density is good and needed 

2. Single-family zoning is bad

3. Denser development has to be forced on neighborhoods via zoning change if those neighborhoods don't fall in line.

ATL's Dept of City Planning is no different. They clearly state their goals for the  zoning rewrite going on right now:  1) end single-family zoning and 2) increase density in intown neighborhoods.  

Big money investors (Goldman Sachs etc.) and MARTA want greater density near transit stations like the Arts Center Station to cash in on federal funding to promote "transit-oriented" development (TOD).

One example is the creation of the Beltline Overlay District with its plans for high-density/multi-family housing. About 50% of the homes in Ansley Park are in that overlay area. 

In the Beltline's own words: 

"Encourage a proactive rezoning criteria for Atlanta BeltLine areas and determine appropriateness for Transit Oriented Development (TOD)." 

TOD could apply to the planned light rail stop(s) for the Beltline Overlay District along our border behind Ansley Mall. Click here for the latest.

(Some folks say: "MARTA doesn't have the money to build light rail on the Beltline." Maybe MARTA doesn't, but the federal government does.  MARTA and the city hope to get tens of millions of federal dollars to build it - but only if they can get greater housing density near transit stops.)

Politicians want greater density too because it helps their case for federal TOD money (think tens of millions). 

The Biden Administration is dangling the carrot of federal transportation grants in front of cities willing to "reform" their zoning and land-use policies to spur more dense and diverse housing development. 

Don't think the city is unaware of this. Expect pressure over the next DECADE to "reform" its zoning for greater density in order to secure federal housing and transportation grants. 

THIS IS NOT SPECULATION.  IT HAS ALREADY BEEN TRIED ONCE HERE IN ATLANTA! AND IT WILL BE TRIED AGAIN.

City Councilman Amir Farokhi - now head of the Council's Transportation Committee - was a leader of the 2021 effort to pass three zoning ordinances that would have dramatically increased density in Ansley Park.  

Actually, the proposals would have affected all Atlanta R-4 and R-5 single-family zoned neighborhoods - except those designated as Landmark or Historic Districts.

Quoting the AJC, 13DEC21:

"The new laws would have rezoned over 2,000 single-family properties near MARTA stations to allow them to become small apartment buildings; permit more types of “accessory dwelling units” (also known as in-law apartments or carriage houses); and eliminated all residential parking requirements from the city’s code.

Specifically, one of the three proposals  would have zoned 25% of Ansley - that part that is within 1/2 mile of the Arts Center MARTA station - for much higher density: up to a 12 unit apartment building with 75% lot coverage on ANY lot regardless of existing zoning, and on smaller lots.  

The Beltline organization has proposed a light rail stop in the Ansley Mall  that would likewise affect another 50% of the homes on the Piedmont-Monroe side of the neighborhood, as they are in the Beltline Overlay District.

And just when we thought our poor neighborhood volunteers could relax ...

Councilman Farohki stated publicly (see AJC, 12/13/21) - after the effort was "tabled" - that he thought the proposal was "mainstream" and that he would absolutely try again.  

Zoning Strings? Is this how the City will eliminate R-4 single-family zoning?

ATL Zoning 2.0 is the city's vehicle to completely "overhaul" Atlanta's current zoning laws.  It is the first such rewrite of the zoning ordinance since 1982 (40 years) and it is happening right now.

The driving document behind this effort is "Atlanta City Design-Housing" first published in May of 2021. 

This "zoning supplement" to Atlanta City Design is where the Department of City Planning (DCP) clearly and plainly states that one of its primary goals is to "end exclusionary single-family zoning." 

Need more? 

Here's a 10Feb21 article by Joshua Humphries, Director of Housing and Community Development, and Leah LaRue, Assistant Director, Neighborhood Planning - from the Department of City Planning's blog:

"Through researching the history of the City and the contemporary patterns of inequality, we find that land-use policies that restrict density and foster racial and economic segregation are one of the most critical problems facing Atlanta.

"We believe remedies that change the fundamental planning framework of our City, foremost among them zoning rules, are necessary if we are to create a city that is designed for everyone."

Again, that's coming from two of the top bureaucrats in the City's Zoning Department.

Remember 2021?

It was/is all in addition to the "ATL Zoning 2.0" threat. 

From The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on December 13, 2021:

"What's next for Atlanta's contentious rezoning debate?"

"In the shadow of this year’s local elections in Atlanta, another divisive debate was unfolding over the future of the city’s housing supply and the design of its residential neighborhoods.
 

"With backing from Keisha Lance Bottoms’ administration, Councilman Amir Farokhi introduced legislation months ago aimed at increasing Atlanta’s residential density by allowing for more types of housing to be built.

"The new laws would have rezoned over 2,000 single-family properties near MARTA stations to allow them to become small apartment buildings; permit more types of “accessory dwelling units” (also known as in-law apartments or carriage houses); and eliminated all residential parking requirements from the city’s code.

"The proposals were met with pushback from neighborhood organizations and cheers from progressive housing advocacy groups. The issue of zoning, rarely a mainstream political issue, suddenly sparked intense debates on platforms like Nextdoor and prompted conversations about the city’s growth and how it gets input from residents.
 

"The opposition forces won the battle. The day before last week’s runoff elections, a City Council committee effectively killed Farohki’s legislation, which had been scaled back following neighborhood input.

"But in the new year, when the council term restarts and eight new members join the 15-member legislative body, Farohki is able to introduce the ordinances again. And he plans to do so.

“The housing challenge is not going away. The solutions that were put forth, still in my opinion good policy solutions, they remain on the table,” Farokhi said.

"He acknowledged the proposed ordinance may have been “more complex than it needed to be.”
 

“There were very distinct concepts being put forward, but packaged together, I think it created opportunity for confusion and misinformation,” he said, adding that in the future the council may take the proposals one by one.
 

"Many critics worried the proposals were too broad and wouldn’t work for every neighborhood.

“It was one of those sledgehammer things … of across-the-board zoning changes that didn’t take into account the particular issues of particular neighborhoods,” said Gloria Cheatham, the president of the Tuxedo Park Civic Association in Buckhead, who said she started an informal alliance with neighborhood leaders across the city to oppose the bill.
 

"Farokhi said he is also open to tweaks in the future, possibly going neighborhood by neighborhood to “talk about what makes sense, what doesn’t make sense.”
 

"The timing of the proposal likely didn’t help its prospects; smack-dab in the middle of an election year, officials may be less likely to rock the boat on major zoning decisions. Uproar over the rezoning proposals has also become a rallying cry for leaders of the Buckhead cityhood movement.
 

"During last week’s meeting, council members opposing the legislation brought up the neighborhood opposition to the proposals: Of the city’s 26 Neighborhood Planning Units, 17 recommended the council vote them down.

"That opened up a larger discussion about which residents have the most influence through the city’s traditional NPU process, where homeowners are typically the most involved.

 
“The voices of those who rent aren’t part of the conversation,” he said, adding that he is hopeful heading into 2022, when several new councilmembers — including several who campaigned on progressive housing platforms — are set to join the body.
 

"Incoming Councilmember Liliana Bakhtiari, who won a runoff to represent an Eastside district, said the proposals should be brought up again next year, with improved execution and rollout, and a few gray areas ironed out.
 

“There needs to be outreach into each of the communities educating and preparing them for what’s coming down the line. A lot of people feel bulldozed and … density has become this trigger word that means pro-development in a lot of people’s minds and that’s understandable, so there’s a lot of misconceptions about it,” Bakhtiari said.

Cheatham said she is “convinced we’re going to have to fight the same battles all over again” in 2022.

The outcome could also depend on Mayor-elect Andre Dickens’ stance. At a campaign meet-and-greet in Ansley Park last month, Dickens criticized the public input and communication process the city followed, saying many officials and residents were confused about the proposal.

He said the city does need density in some places, but said the best way to do that is to build on vacant Atlanta Housing land. If the issue is revisited next year, he said, “we’ll be ready to have a full conversation with each neighborhood. ... You’ll never say you weren’t talked to.”

Our reaction: getting "talked to" is not the same as getting listened to.

The Beltline "Overlay" is a high priority area - 1/2 mile on both sides of Beltline Trail - zoned for high-density multi-family housing and mixed use.

This high-density zoning overlay does not apply to areas that fall within the 1/2 mile overlay that are zoned for ”single-family."

50% of Ansley Park falls within the Beltline Overlay.

But what happens if Single-Family Zoning is eliminated by the City - which it says it will do - when it rezones? 

That’s a real question. No one knows the answer. 

Especially when the ATL Zoning 2.0 FAQs state, in response to the question "Will My Property Be Rezoned?":

"Maybe. The new Zoning Ordinance might result in renamed, consolidated, edited, or replaced zoning districts. If this occurs, it may be necessary to update the Official Zoning Map to reflect these new changes."

In addition, based on July 2022 Beltline.org documents (here), there are plans for at least one light rail stop.

That stop would be used by the Atlanta Streetcar, operated by MARTA, coming north from Ponce City Market, running east of Piedmont Park, heading to Lindbergh Station via Armour Yards.

TOD could apply to this planned light rail stop along our border behind Ansley Mall. Click here for the latest.

Some folks say: "MARTA doesn't have the money to build light rail on the Beltline." 

Maybe MARTA doesn't, but the federal government does.  

MARTA and the city hope to get tens of millions of federal dollars to build it - but only if they can get greater housing density near transit stops.

The Biden Administration is dangling the carrot of federal transportation grants in front of cities willing to "reform" their zoning and land-use policies to spur more dense and diverse housing development. 

The City of Atlanta is 100% aware of this.  Expect pressure over the next DECADE to "reform" its zoning for greater density in order to secure federal housing and transportation grants. 

Some opponents of Historic District designation (do they not see the threat? Or do they speculate in real estate in Ansley and actually want higher density?) make it sound like the choice is between "Historic" and a regulation-free utopia. 

Wrong.  Our current state is far from perfect.

Current zoning already requires property owners to get permits, request variances, get various levels of review by the Zoning Committee, the APCA Board, NPU-E, and City's Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA").

And the system's performance speaks for itself.  A City audit of 2017 to 2020 shows: 

• 4,733 complaints submitted to regular zoning and code enforcement 
• Of these cases, 58 percent were not assigned an inspector. 
• Of these cases, half (2,407) had no case closure date (blank).

The proposed Historic District rules and process (see "Solution" section), administered by the City's preservation staff and the Urban Design Commission, REPLACE the existing BZA-driven process.

Some opponents of Historic District designation (do they not see the threat? Or do they make money when old houses are sold, torn down and replaced by cookie-cutter glass boxes?) complain that historic district status would have neighbors suing neighbors over construction. 

That already happens.  

Ansley Park's current R4 zoning and variance process allows that in Fulton Superior Court.

Immediate neighbor input into the current variance process, or action to stop code violations, costs money; individual neighbors pay for professional guidance, even without a lawsuit.

Many of these conflicts arise between homeowner and developers, not between actual neighbors. 

Most of the current demolition and construction in Ansley Park are not being done by homeowners -- they belong to developers or builders working "on spec". These aren't resident "neighbors" as most of us use that term.

Some opponents of Historic District designation (do they not see the threat? Or do they actually want a 12-unit building across the street) say:

"Historic Districts are a legislative creation of the City of Atlanta and nothing prevents the City Council from passing future zoning legislation that supersedes a Historic District."

One could apply that logic to any law ever passed anywhere.  

Instead of hypothetical scare tactics, opponents should be worried about the "future zoning legislation" being targeted for "superseding" (i.e., eliminating) ALREADY: single-family zoning in Ansley Park.

Because after that happens, what happens to the high-density Beltline Overlay rules that exempt areas zoned for "single-family"? (50% of Ansley Park lies within the Beltline Overlay.) 

When there is no longer single-family zoning.

Answer: politicians and bureaucrats will leverage the above opening - and the huge grassroots, financial and political momentum of the Beltline (with light rail) - to push through high density "half-mile-from-transit" zoning to, using the words of the AJC: 

"The new laws would have rezoned over 2,000 single-family properties near MARTA stations to allow them to become small apartment buildings ... and eliminated all residential parking requirements from the city’s code."

Three more truth bombs from the City of Atlanta:

1. "Since 1989, when the current Historic Preservation Ordinance was enacted, no historic or landmark district (22 across the city) zoning status has ever been removed."

2.  "Since 1989, the city has never passed zoning legislation that has superseded the zoning that these districts put in place themselves."

3. "If the Atlanta City Council or anybody else wanted to undo the Historic District zoning, there is a process to follow as well – the general City of Atlanta rezoning process."

The Atlanta City Council must follow this process and has no authority to vote on a rezoning application / legislation without the above process being followed."

The City of Atlanta will continue to be heavily involved in regulating Ansley Park.  The real question is: 

Which part of City government do you want to have to deal with?

Under Historic District designation, Ansley Park would work with the Urban Design Commission and (mostly) the City's preservation staff.

Ansley Park would no longer work with the Office of Zoning (the team that has said it wants to end single-family zoning and wants greater density).

Ansley Park homeowners would no longer use the current, cumbersome, ineffective zoning process nor be subject to decisions made by the APCA, the NPU, and the unelected Board of Zoning Appeals.

The City Preservation staff and UDC will advocate for Ansley Park (unlike the Office of Zoning) because they: 

• Focus on historic neighborhoods 
• Are more accessible 
• Have more professional staff (relevant degrees and background) 
• Are more likely to enforce (smaller enforcement coverage area) 
• Are the people we would design the rules with 

The City Preservation staff and UDC will enforce the rules WE decide on, as a neighborhood.

They are well-tested. They use the Secretary of the Interior‘s Standards, which have been used for 45 years on billions of dollars of rehabs nationwide. They are not arbitrary. 

The City Preservation Staff and UDC allow additions and other changes (as set forth by us), not seeking to freeze properties in time but to accommodate change while keeping existing significant elements. 

A group of experienced professionals providing objective, time-tested advice is very helpful in getting a good and most affordable project outcome. (Is a second set of "smart" eyes such a bad thing?)

Photo above shows SCAD's Ivy Hall (a rehabilitation overseen by the UDC).

IT'S NOT ABOUT TASTE, IT'S ABOUT DENSITY.