Summary of Form and Use District Updates

Allow ADUs to be built in all residential zones. It is an effective way to increase the housing supply.

This is an unwise decision. Half of home park houses, where unaffiliated students live harmoniously, would have to kick out roommates, reducing the effective housing supply and exacerbating the affordable housing crisis! The limit should be kept at 6.

I've watched the comments at 49m as directed. There doesn't seem to be an explanation as to WHY the reduction from 6 people (in a family) to 3 people (in a household) is appropriate. What is the reasoning, beside (paraphrasing) "other jurisdictions are even less permissive" and "taking the sum of all possible persons under the current definition plus an unlimited number of domestic servants all in one residence could be overburdensome"? But that doesn't explain why capping a household at three unrelated persons is the right move. This proposal seems like it will have a negative impact on the ability of (a) low income/low wealth persons (b) migrants and immigrants and (c) young people entering the workforce (among other possible groups) to find housing. This seems like a way to enforce against such groups of people, even when there may be no threat or risk to public health.

What perceived issue does this rule change help to solve? It seems to conflict directly with previous recommendations from the Department of City planning that Atlanta should support a wide variety of housing options in order to meet the current market and needs. Additionally, it places increased pressure to provide smaller, affordable units for those who would have otherwise rented or purchased a home with others in order to preserve affordability. This can increase pressure for affordable housing funding, which is already unable to meet current demand.

TLDR: this is bad policy, will affect lots of different Atlantans adversely, and will further exacerbate housing demand and higher costs. This change will lead to more problems with housing demand, higher housing costs overall, will increase the pressure for low-density residential and small single family units for rental and purchase. By changing this definition, it increases the number of individuals seeking housing without addressing available housing inventory (of which we already know we lack adequate small single-family, low- and mid-density residential housing). This will lead to an increase in demand at a time when housing costs have risen dramatically in the last 4 years, and stand to continue along with projected high in migration into the City of Atlanta. It will also further exacerbate displacement of lower income individuals in already gentrifying parts of the city such as East Atlanta, The West Side, West End, and other areas where individuals have taken on roommates to continue to live in their longtime homes that are becoming less and less affordable. Who stands to be impacted? Seniors without family who live on fixed incomes, students and young professionals, single parents who wish to live with other single parent families, families who may wish to temporarily house friends who are in-between housing options, first-time homebuyers who would not be able to afford a mortgage without taking in renters, anyone who cannot find housing currently who would like to move in with a group of friends, artists who often live together to share studio space and collaborate (and who because of lack of suitable artistic workspace in Atlanta, often find working from home is not compatible with high-density residential living) , unmarried partners who have children from past relationships. In mostly single family residential neighborhoods it would be nearly impossible to maintain mixed incomes, especially as existing housing is redeveloped to cater to this preference. If the perceived problem is that there would be disruption to other residents by multiple unrelated individuals living together, the city should address this by penalizing owners of specific properties causing disruption rather than limiting the number of people who can live together and exacerbating the housing issues we already have. This is a case of using a zoning rule change as a fix where better enforcement would be more appropriate.

I agree with this, I am tired of seeing all the Mexicans and illegals pile on top of each other to share a house because they are broke. If you can't afford to live on your own, go back to your country.

Can two couples who are dating share a 2 bedroom apartment together? Like one couple per bedroom?

I never would have been able to afford college or my first house without having roommates. So sad to see you take away that option for affordability from so many.

Is more than one accessory residential structure ever allowed on a lot? For example, can there be a pool house and a tool shed? Can there be a guest house and a mechanical shed?

Thank you the clarification and the useful definitions and terms.

I agree with reducing the number to 3. Striving to increase affordable housing is a good thing. Overcrowding is not.

Are new Special Public Interest Districts allowed in Zoning 2.0? I have heard from a city councilperson that SPIs were going away. Is that true?

Why would the city change the number of dwelling units from what they are now in 2.0? Is the intent of the city to increase the number of dwelling units in some lots over time without having to wait for or rewrite new zoning code?

THIS IS DESPICABLE. What will you say when your new law evicts hundreds of people just trying to get by with roommates? We're talking about thousands of young people, college students who are forced by our housing crisis to get roommates to split rent, and then we want to ban their only option? People shouldn't have to get married to be allowed to live. We're not in the 50s any more, don't take us back.

This is absurd. We have a housing crisis. We have a homelessness crisis. Allow ADUs in R1-3 you cowards. Let homeowners build affordable options for their family and neighbors.

Does all of these changes allow missing middle housing to be built in residential neighborhoods? If not we should allow for all types of small and medium scale builds to increase the housing stock.

Where do we see if a District is eligible for an Alternate Form? Thanks