Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alpharetta work session: staff proposes downtown and school parking ratio changes
Summary
City staff recommended adjusting downtown parking applicability by distance from core and doubling the elementary/middle school parking ratio from 1 to 2 spaces per classroom; council generally supported the changes and asked staff to proceed with code amendments.
Get email alerts on the Parking Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff presented a work‑session report on June 16 recommending zoning code changes to parking ratios in downtown Alpharetta and for elementary and middle schools.
Planning presenter Mister Woodman explained staff mapped 300‑ and 600‑foot walk buffers around existing public parking and recommended that properties north of Mayfield and south of Old Milton Parkway be held to citywide parking ratios rather than the downtown ratios. He said the guidance from the National Parking Association typically designs for a maximum walking distance of 300–600 feet.
On school parking, Woodman presented a recommendation to change the city code for elementary and middle schools from the current 1 parking space per classroom plus visitor spaces to 2 parking spaces per classroom and administrative office. Staff compared local examples — Manning Oaks Elementary and Hopewell Middle — and found those locations had about 2.12 and 1.94 parking spaces per classroom and administrative office, respectively; Fulton County Schools uses a design guideline of about 3 spaces per classroom.
Council members asked clarifying questions about scope and mixed‑use conversions. Councilman Dorito confirmed that when a site has multiple uses (for example a school plus office), parking would be calculated for both uses separately and not double‑counted. Mayor indicated support for raising the school parking ratio, saying he preferred to avoid under‑design that pushes parking demand onto neighboring properties.
The item was a work session and no ordinance vote was taken; council provided feedback supportive of the proposed amendments and directed staff to prepare formal code language to return for public hearing and adoption.

