Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Local Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Builders say local zoning rules, architectural mandates and entrance requirements block lot production
Summary
Builders told the committee that local zoning preferences and municipal requirements — from street-entrance rules to architectural mandates and impact fees — often make small parcels undevelopable or push projects out of financial feasibility.
Home builders and developers told the Small Business Development Committee that local zoning rules, discretionary design requirements and certain fire-code interpretations are preventing some parcels from being developed into viable subdivisions.
Jay Knight cited the Georgia State minimum fire prevention code, Appendix D, section D107, which many municipalities use to require two entrances for subdivisions exceeding a certain number of lots. Knight said that rule can make development physically impossible on narrow or irregular parcels and told the committee a 50-lot parcel in Newnan could not be developed because the geometry prevented a second entrance. “Consequently, we can either build 25 houses, which is not financially viable…or we terminated the deal,” he said.
Wayne Hyatt and other builders said local architectural mandates — for example, high percentages of brick or stone on facades — lot-size minimums, and other highly prescriptive local standards add cost and time. Hyatt said the cumulative effect of lot-size rules, façade requirements and other local controls has turned what used to be an 18-month pipeline into three years or longer for many projects.
Bob Bernard and other presenters also raised impact fees and legal disputes. Bernard described a judgment in which the Home Builders Association secured a $9 million award against Henry County over improperly enacted impact fees; he said similar fee practices are appearing in other counties. The presenters said impact fees are sometimes presented as a way to make growth “pay its way” but that builders routinely pay only a portion of the total cost and that the remainder falls on existing taxpayers.
Builders asked the committee for state-level guardrails to limit the ability of municipalities to add local requirements that render parcels infeasible, and to standardize when local preferences may be used. The committee chair encouraged follow-up meetings with presenters to explore options.
The discussion was testimony and policy request; no formal action or legislation was introduced at the meeting.
