×

Warning message

The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.

Module III - Discussion Draft Chapter 9: Administration

Review and comment on the draft Administration chapter.

The Administration chapter contains the standards and procedures used in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Most of the standards within this chapter are unchanged from existing standards but have been reorganized.  

Please share any thoughts you have about Administration with us. Your comments will be used to shape the future drafts of ATL Zoning 2.0.
File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-
Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%
Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio

Comments

View all Cancel

Commenting is closed for this document.

Laurel David Feb 18 2025 at 2:51PM on page 13

Question
Does the resolution need to be passed before the TDR application can be submitted? or can they happen concurrently?

Actually I see my answer below ... maybe reference that section here
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 4:19PM on page 4

Answer
MOSE events and alcohol licenses are not regulated by zoning, but would come continue to appear before the NPU, as is current practice. No change is proposed regarding the process for appeals of administrative decisions. These are legal proceeding and do not appear before NPUs, although anyone may speak for or against the case when it is heard by the BZA, as is allowed by law. The BZA also accepts written comments in advance.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:52AM on page 30

Answer
Yes. Hardship is a required criteria showing. See 9.6.4.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:50AM on page 27

Answer
These updates will be outlined in Chapter 3, which we are currently revising. We determined that a one-size-fits-all approach would be problematic, so the updated chapter will specify the types of relief available. Generally, such relief will only be permitted in the denser zoning districts, consistent with current practice. Certain standards—such as building height, uses, use standards, and regulations in House-Scale districts—will not be subject to variation or waiver without BZA approval.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:46AM on page 27

Answer
The specific standards will be outlined in the updated Chapter 3. Generally, any variance exceeding 30% will require BZA approval. Currently, the Director has the authority to grant 100% relief without notification or BZA approval through the SAP process in most commercial, mixed-use, and multifamily areas of the city and within the Beltline Overlay.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:42AM on page 12

Answer
As noted above, everything in this subsection is required by State Law. Any proposed zoning changes would still need a CDP amendment.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:38AM on page 11

Answer
This section is required in every zoning code in Georgia under O.C.G.A § 36-66-4. In 2022, the Legislature amended this statute to impose additional standards when local governments propose rezoning properties from single-family to multifamily. As a result, such rezonings are subject to more stringent requirements than other types of rezoning.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:33AM on page 9

Answer
Please see the answer to your "usability" question. This is also a term interpreted by the Georgia Courts.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:31AM on page 8

Answer
Currently, the Director has the authority to vary or completely waive zoning standards in most zoning districts through the SAP process, except R1-R5. The proposed update will impose limits on the extent to which the Director may modify a standard in these districts; any variation beyond that limit will require BZA approval. The specific standards eligible for variation or waiver will be outlined in the updated Chapter 3. Overall, this update will reduce the Director’s ability to grant administrative relief in most areas.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:23AM on page 9

Answer
The term "usability" has been removed from the Official Code of Georgia. Given this, we will assess whether to keep this term in the next draft.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:17AM on page 3

Answer
Yes. The Director interprets and administers the Zoning Ordinance.
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 12 2025 at 9:15AM on page 3

Answer
There is no change for legislative and quasi-quasi-judicial procedures -- we are just aligning the Zoning Ordinance with other City codes that mention NPU review. However, for administrative variations (which are currently handled as part of the SAP process), NPUs would be given a formal review and comment role.

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 7:13AM on page 30

Question
Is there still a criteria to show a "hardship" lot to obtain a variance?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 7:10AM on page 27

Question
I could not find which development controls could be reduced or waived with a CAV. Could you explain the circumstances when a CAV could be issued for a reduction of controls and a list of controls that could be waived entirely?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 7:06AM on page 27

Question
Just so I understand, CAMs are the percentages listed in the Relief sections - anything above the percentages (most are 10%) would require a Variance?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 6:47AM on page 12

Question
Does this new procedure preclude the need for a CDP amendment if the City wanted to rezone districts or the entire city to multi-family?

Please explain how this new procedure differs from what is existing?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 6:43AM on page 11

Question
Needless to say, I find this whole section very triggering. It flies in the face of all of the public input gathered from the CDP update, the small area plans, the concept of Growth and Conservation Areas in the Atlanta City Design, NPU input. We have been told in the CDP process that the City will not be issuing "blanket re-zonings" like what was proposed a few years ago with MRMU in TOD. This section seems to pave the way for just that with little regard for Atlanta's existing neighborhoods. Can you explain how this procedure differs from what is in place now?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 6:29AM on page 8

Question
Will this new rezoning standard allow variances and administrative allowances/variations for the new building in the new zoning category? If so, will there be a cap to the number of variances and administrative allowances/variations for an application to proceed?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 6:14AM on page 9

Question
How do you define "usability"? Would an adverse effect on an adjacent property be the deprivation of air and light from new construction of a higher land use intensity?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 6:04AM on page 9

Question
How do you define a "reasonable economic use"? This seems like a developers loophole to tear down existing viable structures so they can make more money with new construction.

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 5:52AM on page 4

Question
Would the NPUs still comment on MOSE applications (special events) and liquor licenses? Do they currently get to comment on appealed BZA decisions?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 5:43AM on page 3

Question
Hi,
Has the Director always been the decision maker in these areas?

Jennifer Friese Feb 12 2025 at 5:41AM on page 3

Question
Hi, Can you explain how this differs from the NPUs current purview?
in reply to mdolan's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 10 2025 at 7:06AM on page 8

Answer
Generally, this asks the City to consider whether there is land already zoned for the proposed use, either in the vicinity or nearby - depending on the request. For example, if there is no undeveloped land zoned for "X" in a neighborhood, but there is a lot of land zoned for "X" in another part of the city, this may be considered. For example, if a mixed-use skyscraper was proposed within low-density neighborhood, this City would consider that there are already hundreds of acres of vacant (parking lots) in Downtown already zoned for this purpose. There are also some uses that state and federal law require cities to have land zoned for - these must also be considered.
in reply to mdolan's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 10 2025 at 7:00AM on page 8

Answer
Thank you for your input. The Comprehensive Plan must consider multiple opinions about land use in shaping its policies.
in reply to mdolan's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 10 2025 at 6:57AM on page 3

Answer
Only the bodies with "D" in the applicable column can approve or deny a request. All bodies with review and comment or review and recommendation authorities are advisory. The latter allows public input into the process, while acknowledging that there are legal and technical considerations that must also be considered by the decision-making authority when rendering its decision.
in reply to mdolan's comment

SiteAdmin Feb 10 2025 at 6:49AM on page 8

Answer
The Comprehensive Plan's policies are typically informed by current and future needs. Other needs not in the Comprehensive Plan would fall under 8: Other conditions.

mdolan Feb 9 2025 at 8:47AM on page 8

What does this mean? How is public need assessed?

mdolan Feb 9 2025 at 8:27AM on page 3

This process is so complicated and opaque. If a RR group does not recommend a project, is it dead? What criteria are RR groups supposed to use when considering a proposed project or change, or can they put down a project based on vibes? A decentralized process has good intentions but ends up being costly, inconsistent, and unpredictable. Not good planning!

mdolan Feb 9 2025 at 8:20AM on page 8

This is so backward. We just went through a CDP that changed almost nothing, and a parcel-by-parcel approach is not good planning. What small developer can risk the delays that are inevitable in this approach? Either nothing creative will get built or those with resources will bribe public officials to make zoning changes happen for their projects.

Dr.LouisPrevosti Feb 4 2025 at 12:02AM on page 1

Question
Is this where I can start to leave a comment?
View all