ZOUTF To Meet with Residents to Go Over Potential Zoning Changes to Encourage Accessory Dwellings
Decatur Metro | August 30, 2012 | 10:38 amDecatur Planning Director Amanda Thompson sends along this announcement…
Zoning Ordinance Update Task Force MeetingWednesday, September 5, 20127:00-9:00 PMDecatur City Hall509 North McDonough StreetThe Zoning Task Force has been hard at work researching and crafting new city ordinances to help implement the 2010 Strategic Plan. You are invited to learn about the proposed changes to encourage Accessory Dwellings (e.g. garage apartments or granny flats) and define appropriate transitions between residential and commercial properties in downtown Decatur. From 7:00-9:00 PM city staff, task force members and PlaceMakers, LLC will be available to present the proposed changes, facilitate discussion and collect your comments. We need your input! The City Commission will consider the proposed changes in late October, 2012.The following 2010 Strategic Plan tasks will be up for review and comment:
Task 3A: Adopt new transitional design standard to integrate commercial, mixed use and residential districtsIn recent decades, Decatur has used buffers and height limits to transition between existing single-family neighborhoods and new developments in existing commercial and mixed- use zoning districts. These have focused on separating such areas, rather than unifying them. As an alternative, new design techniques should be explored to provide appropriate connection between new development and existing neighborhoods, such as improved architectural design, scale and massing and landscaping.Task 3E: Improve the predictability and efficiency of the process for new development approval by establishing development standards and requirements that are consistent with the goals of the strategic planTask 15B: Adopt ordinance changes that allow smaller homes, support accessory dwellings and encourage other creative housing options that provide affordable housing in single family neighborhoods. Educate the public about their characteristics and benefits.For more information contact Amanda Thompson, Planning Director at [email protected]
Over three days and not a single comment! Maybe viewers are confused by the promenent term, thinking “Why should I care about a wish making machine from an old movie” or maybe people are more interested in making plans for the book festival. But for me, an advocate of a smaller, less intrusive government, this is a tasty topic. I am opposed to this. It will allow our government to expand, write more regulations, and increase fees and taxes. It will increase population density in our already over crowded neighborhoods. It will confuse zoning regulations in single family dwelling neighborhoods. Neighbors of property owners that add these types of dwellings (really apartment units) will loose some of their backyard privacy. The scary thing is that, based on the lack of comments with this proposal, these changes might sail through the commission without any drama. We shall see.
Anyway there are more important things to do this weekend. Attend the festival, drink the local Kool Aid, and wonder about the building going up across the street from the high school.
Since you seem to be trying to stir the pot here, and speaking only for myself, any modifications to our zoning standards, categories and processes which serve to encourage accessory dwellings are a fabulous thing. I intend to endorse and support the City’s pursuit of that goal in every meaningful way available to me. I don’t quite understand your perspective that easing restrictions represents expansion of government control, but I guess we’re each entitled to our point of view, however incomprehensible to others it may be.
Ha! Loved the Big reference.
I too am disappointed when there’s limited conversation around these topics, regardless of people’s position on them.
I’m guilty of skimming the headline and noted “encourage accessory dwellings,” thought the changes were a good thing, and moved on along without reading further. We’ve discussed this before and the regulations are dated. I think it also came before that if someone wanted to build a smaller stand alone home on a lot, there are regulations that could prohibit that. Since developers are trying to fill every inch of a lot, I doubt that would ever be an issue. But if someone wants to do that, they should be able to. The rest, I’m opinionless on because they seem rather vague, not enough info.
Some of us just aren’t handy. If there isn’t already an accessory structure on our property, it ain’t happening. And when folks build a porch addition or stand-alone 3-car garage with upstairs apartment next to us, I just kind of stare in wonder. My father visits and mutters something about runoff and property values but I just think to myself that I stumbled as a single person into this great, ever more popular place called Decatur and should thank my lucky stars given that I had no clue. Plus whatever runoff disadvantages we have, we probably give back to the neighbors by not adding to the upscale ambience of the neighborhood.