×

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.

Discussion Draft Use Table

Review and comment on the draft Use Table

The Discussion Draft Use Table shows the uses allowed in each Use District. The draft includes allowed use standards from over 200 existing zoning districts, plus new Use Districts that emerged from ongoing public input. In future drafts of ATL Zoning 2.0, the Use Table will be a part of Chapter 3: Use Standards. The table will also show uses where use standards apply.

Please use this an opportunity to share any thoughts you might have on the Discussion Draft Use Table with us. These 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%

Click anywhere in the document to add a comment. Select a bubble to view comments.
Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio
View all

Comments

Close

Add comment

in reply to cara cummins's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:22PM on page 34

Answer
There are alternative standards for corner stores in the Form & Frontage districts. These allow them to match the historic corner store patterns seen in many neighborhoods. However, new buildings must be all current trash and life safety codes.
replies
in reply to cara cummins's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:21PM on page 34

Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:20PM on page 34

Answer
Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:20PM on page 16

Answer
Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:20PM on page 32

Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:19PM on page 25

Answer
Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:19PM on page 26

Answer
Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:19PM on page 26

Answer
Thank you for your comment. We will take it into consideration as we prepare the revised drafts.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:18PM on page 26

Answer
Thank you for your comments.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:18PM on page 28

Answer
Thank you for your comments.
replies
in reply to M I Scarlett 's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:17PM on page 28

Answer
Thank you for comments. We will take them into consideration as we revise the drafts.
replies
in reply to Corliss Claire's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:15PM on page 34

Answer
These districts currently prohibit "Park-for-hire facilities on surface lots" but allow it for parking structures. We're not sure why they were originally written this way.
replies
in reply to Peter Davis's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:14PM on page 34

Answer
Under current zoning, guest houses are allowed in R4, in addition to ADUs.
replies
in reply to Daniel Solberg's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:12PM on page 15

Answer
Thank you for comment. Cell tower placement is regulated by federal law.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:10PM on page 26

Answer
This entire section will be updated citywide based on feedback.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:09PM on page 25

Answer
Numeric limits on establishments that are tied to zoning districts have been replaced with distance separation requirements. A 1,500 linear feet separation requirement proposed citywide.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:05PM on page 26

Answer
Thank you. This has been corrected in the use table.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:03PM on page 26

Answer
In an attempt to create consistent "breaks" that correspond to the true impacts of uses, 12,000 SF is no longer a size classification. The closest classification is 8,000 SF.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 4:02PM on page 7

Answer
In an attempt to create consistent "breaks" that correspond to the true impacts of uses, 12,000 SF is no longer a size classification. The closest classification is 8,000 SF. Are you aware of any large office spaces over 8,000 SF in the Village?
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 3:56PM on page 23

Answer
The pre-1945 provision only applies in U1-U5 districts that do not otherwise allow the uses. The uses are allowed in NC. That is why the standard is not applicable.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Jill Murray's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 3:54PM on page 7

Answer
This has been corrected in the draft. Thanks!
replies
in reply to MIchael Williams's comment

SiteAdmin Jul 15 2024 at 2:58PM on page 132

Answer
Could you please clarify your question? The existing 20-foot transitional yard is required, regardless of lot size.
replies

Steve Pracht Jul 10 2024 at 10:59AM on page 2

Question
What’s the justification for increasing the number of ADU’s from one to two? This will have a devastating effect on single-family neighborhoods throughout the city.
replies

cara cummins Jul 10 2024 at 7:26AM on page 1

A corner store with what kind of frontyard setback? How is this possible with the lot coverage requirements? What about trash? Deliveries. There is one street in Atlanta where this is successful, Cabbagetown- and that is a life safty issue everyday.
replies

cara cummins Jul 10 2024 at 7:23AM on page 1

Suggestion
2 Accessory Units but not a Duplex? 2 small dwellings that do not have enough space for a family ...this make no sense
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:41PM on page 7

Suggestion
Limited commercial activity should be allowed in current RG3 districts. RG3 belongs in U7. Allowing work/life activities reduces traffic and pollution in this city.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:39PM on page 5

Suggestion
Limited commercial activities should be allowed in current RG3 districts. RG3 belongs in U6. Please allow these voices to be heard over the louder ones.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:37PM on page 4

Suggestion
Limited commercial activities should be allowed in current RG3 districts, as is already the case in Ansley Park. RG3 belongs in U7. This allows for a diverse, rich urban environment, supported from the quiet voices, who agree with this modern, futuristic approach to Midtown living and its current reality.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:33PM on page 4

Suggestion
Limited commercial activities are and should continue to exist in current RG3 districts. RG3 belongs in U7 to ensure the current reality of use in Ansley Park, and no additional permitting should be required.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:30PM on page 3

Suggestion
Limited commercial activities should be permitted in current RG3 - residential neighborhoods. A few, privileged loud voices should not be valued over the hundreds who agree with this statement. This is the current reality and current zoning in Ansley Park, not yesterday’s fantasy.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:27PM on page 3

Suggestion
Limited commercial activities should be permitted in current RG3 - residential neighborhoods. Today’s economic reality is that in order to reduce commuter time, traffic and environmental stree that working from home is both an environmental and economic necessity. Economic development should not be restricted by a few loud voices.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:24PM on page 3

Suggestion
Commercial use should be allowed in what are now R4 neighborhoods. This should be allowed without permitting by SUP. This will allow for more vibrant, diverse neighborhoods, like Virginia Highlands or Morningside without the drama of Ansley Park.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:21PM on page 2

Suggestion
Limited commercial use in zones like RG3 makes communities like Charleston South Carolina pleasant and enjoyable. Our group of 300 in Midtown/Ansley Park supports limited commercial use in RG3. Please note that current “community consensus” in Ansley Park is insufficient for deciding limited commercial use and is really bullying and harrassment more than discussion. Current decision making lacks inclusivity of different voices or different opinions in determining “community consensus,” without an open forum for discussion and public meetings with voting. NPU-E must revise its rules for limiting open discussions on current topics with less than 30 days written notice to be responsive to current community needs. Current NPU-E rules provide little or no flexibility to respond to topical issues from different, more diverse voices. This includes people who have experiences living in diverse, safe and walkable urban communities.
replies

M I Scarlett Jul 9 2024 at 11:07PM on page 1

Suggestion
Live/work SHOULD be permitted in current RG3 as this creates work/life balance and diversity of incomes consistent with affordable housing espoused by the Mayor. Live/work is consistent with norms of working at home since the pandemic. Atlanta has the largest income disparity by race of any city in the US, and this makes affordable housing options difficult, without balancing with work/life options in RG-3. This is today’s reality. In some cases, live/work at home is not a luxury, rather an economic necessity.. Please continue to ensure that Ansley Park reflects its historic mix of commercial, multifamily residential and some single family residential units. This means maintaining the 1/3 multifamily housing that it currently has, about 800 units.
replies

Peter Davis Jul 9 2024 at 7:55PM on page 1

Site admin answer to a previous question: "R4 converts to U2 because R4 currently allows 1 accessory dwelling unit plus "guest houses, servant quarters, or lodging facilities for caretakers or watchmen...." Is this correct? My understanding is that the guest house rules apply only to R-1 through R-3, NOT R-4.
replies

Corliss Claire Jul 9 2024 at 7:54PM on page 10

Question
Rational for not allowing a commercial parking lot but allowing a commercial parking structure though SUP?
replies

Peter Davis Jul 9 2024 at 7:46PM on page 4

Suggestion
Strongly oppose this provision. Allowing TWO accessory units will allow investors to convert primary housing into effective duplexes AND add an accessory structure as well. BAD idea!
replies

Daniel Solberg Jul 9 2024 at 7:31PM on page 2

Suggestion
I would prefer not to have a cell tower antenna in front of our cottage style homes in Edgewood. Not just because of the looks, but because of the RF radiation.
replies

Daniel Solberg Jul 9 2024 at 7:28PM on page 1

Suggestion
our little R4a converted lots are too tiny for 2 ADUs! please consider limiting to one.
replies
in reply to Israel Kates's comment

Jennifer Jul 9 2024 at 7:21PM on page 50

Suggestion
Yes, I understand the desire for some RG3 areas to have commercial use but that needs to happen through community consensus and a re-zoning. Currently only RG3 properties that have over 50 units may have commercial uses, the rule should not apply to all RG3 with under 50 units. This process is meant to be an apples-to-apples conversion.
replies
in reply to Jennifer Friese's comment

Israel Kates Jul 9 2024 at 5:01PM on page 50

Suggestion
I would also like to see more restaurants and bars in residential areas, and would ask that we not allow the loud voices of a minority of homeowners to dictate the urban form this city will take on over the next several decades.
replies

Steve Pracht Jul 9 2024 at 3:55PM on page 1

Suggestion
Allowing two accessory dwelling units for R-4 and R-4A will be detrimental to these neighborhoods. Should be limited to one.
replies

MIchael Williams Jul 9 2024 at 3:05PM on page 1

Question
How will street frontage C-2 parcel be assessed 20 foot buffer between residential and single family homes.
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 1:16PM on page 14

Suggestion
Outdoor Displays: NC-2 requires an SAP/CE for outdoor displays "along Moreland Ave or any parcel that shares a side yard with Moreland Ave".
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 1:11PM on page 11

Question
Specific NC Limitations - How does Zoning 2.0 address specific limits included in NC ordinances (e.g. NC-2 limits "tattoo and body piercing establishments" to 3, "auto service stations" to 2, etc.)?
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 1:04PM on page 11

Suggestion
Beauty, Hair, Nail Salon: NC-2 limits size to 4K SF.
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 1:03PM on page 11

Suggestion
Animal Care: NC-2 allows for "clinics (including veterinary...)" up to 12K SF.
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 1:00PM on page 10

Suggestion
General Office: N-C-2 allows "professional offices" up to 12K SF.
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 12:57PM on page 9

Suggestion
Entertainment & Rec - NC-2 allows > 8K SF with an SUP (vs "n/a").
replies

Jennifer Jill Murray Jul 9 2024 at 12:55PM on page 9

Question
Eating and Drinking ("n/a within a pre-1945 shopfront) - How is this "n/a" since there are E&D establishments in NC-2 that are in pre-1945 shopfronts (e.g. Wing Bar @ 494 Flat Shoals Ave. - located in a section of the Madison Theater built 1927 (1940 per tax records))?
replies
View all