City’s first comprehensive zoning rewrite since 1991 is expected to be completed by April 2027
BY MICHELLE KEY
Publisher
OPELIKA — Opelika residents raised concerns about development density, traffic, neighborhood compatibility, housing affordability, construction quality and short-term rentals during a July 29 public meeting on the city’s first comprehensive zoning ordinance update in 35 years.
The city hired Birmingham-based KPS Group to review the ordinance, gather public input and recommend changes intended to prepare Opelika for continued growth. Planning Director Matt Mosley said the ordinance shapes where businesses and other land uses are allowed, how densely property may be developed and what future development will look like.
“We want to make sure that the zoning ordinance meets the requirements for the future, for today and as we grow,” Mosley said.
Jason Fondren, principal planner with KPS Group, compared the existing ordinance to outdated computer software that has received individual patches over the years but now needs a complete overhaul.
The ordinance has been amended periodically, but it has not been comprehensively updated since 1991. Opelika’s population has grown from approximately 22,000 in 1990 to more than 35,000. Fondren said the city could approach 50,000 residents by 2040 if recent growth trends continue.
“It’s really critical to update the zoning ordinance and do it in a way that you really think about how you want the community to be,” he said.
Moratorium provides time for review
Opelika adopted a comprehensive plan in May 2025 to guide decisions involving growth and development. The city later approved a one-year moratorium on major new residential development entitlements to allow officials time to evaluate infrastructure, transportation, schools, public services and development policies.
Fondren said the comprehensive plan would serve as a policy guide during the update. KPS Group will also review the city’s subdivision regulations to ensure they align with the revised zoning ordinance and Public Works standards.
The process began in April and is expected to be completed by April 2027. It will include input from residents, city staff, the Planning Commission, the City Council and developers. Draft regulations will eventually be made available online and presented during work sessions and public hearings before the Planning Commission and council.
Survey identifies concerns
More than 500 people responded to the city’s Smart Growth Matters survey following approval of the moratorium. Transportation and traffic ranked as the leading concern, followed by infrastructure and community services.
Respondents also said city policies should manage the effects of development, plan for long-term growth, preserve Opelika’s identity and maintain green space and tree cover. Fondren said the survey also revealed concern about the balance between residential construction and commercial development.
“The feel and identity of Opelika needs to be preserved, and green space and tree cover throughout the community maintained,” he said.
Possible zoning changes
The zoning ordinance applies within Opelika’s city limits and primarily regulates future development. It governs permitted land uses, residential density, lot sizes, setbacks, building heights, parking, signs, landscaping and approval procedures.
Subdivision regulations apply within the city and its planning jurisdiction and address how land is divided, along with requirements for streets, sidewalks, utilities and other public improvements.
Fondren outlined several possible changes under consideration, including:
- Strengthening Planned Unit Development requirements and the approval process.
- Creating clearer review criteria for rezonings, site plans, conditional uses and variances.
- Developing separate standards for small-lot homes, duplexes, townhouses and multifamily developments.
- Removing inappropriate nonresidential uses from some residential districts.
- Combining or eliminating redundant zoning districts.
- Adding options for cottage housing and conservation developments.
- Creating a separate heavy-industrial zoning district.
- Limiting businesses in institutional districts to uses typically associated with institutional campuses.
- Creating an overlay district intended to make development near downtown and historic neighborhoods more compatible with existing street and lot patterns.
The update will also address uses that did not exist or were not widely anticipated in 1991, including short-term rentals and data centers.
PUD standards draw attention
Planned Unit Development zoning allows developers greater flexibility to combine housing types, lot sizes and other uses within a larger project without dividing the property among several conventional zoning districts. Fondren said much of Opelika’s residential development during the past two decades has occurred through PUDs.
Residents and officials said that flexibility should come with clearer expectations. Suggested standards included open space, neighborhood amenities, architectural diversity, stronger building and material standards, conservation, street character, walkability and a mix of housing types and prices.
One speaker described the current PUD ordinance as a “blank check” and said some projects presented attractively during approval did not ultimately develop as expected.
Fondren said the city should identify measurable benefits a developer must provide in exchange for PUD flexibility.
“What can I present to you that is going to convince you that the development I’m going to plan and build is going to be worth granting this PUD zoning?” he asked.
Housing, streets and neighborhood design
During a visual-preference exercise, residents reviewed examples of small-lot homes, duplexes, townhouses, cottage neighborhoods, multifamily developments, residential streets, commercial areas and signage.
Some attendees questioned whether the exercise placed too much emphasis on appearance rather than density, traffic and infrastructure. Mosley and Fondren said the goal was not to select architectural styles but to identify development characteristics that could be translated into objective regulations.
Residents repeatedly said the appropriateness of a housing type depends on its location and surrounding neighborhood. They discussed parking placement, street trees, sidewalks, porches, buried utilities, open space and the relationship between buildings and streets.
One resident said porches help neighbors interact and reflect the historic character many people associate with Opelika. Others said mature trees should be preserved when possible and new trees should be required where existing trees cannot be saved.
One local business owner said small-lot housing does not necessarily mean houses must be placed extremely close together. She also said some duplex designs offer residents a greater sense of privacy and separation than others.
Accessibility was another concern, with one attendee noting that designs featuring stairs or raised entrances may not work for people with disabilities.
A developer who spoke during the meeting said the cost of installing residential lots in Opelika can be comparable to Auburn, despite higher land prices in Auburn. He said developers sometimes reduce building quality to keep Opelika homes more affordable and urged the city to consider quality or design standards.
Another participant cautioned that smaller homes are needed for people who cannot afford larger properties and said those residents may not have been well represented in the room.
“The reality is we have a lot of people in Opelika who need a smaller home that they can afford to live in,” the speaker said.
Pocket neighborhoods — small groups of cottages arranged around shared green space — also received attention. Fondren said they generally would not be permitted under current rules unless developed as a PUD because many homes would not have direct street frontage.
Some residents expressed support for the concept but said architectural and construction-quality standards would be needed to prevent developers from using the format simply to place more homes on less land.
Mixed-use development and neighborhood businesses
The discussion also turned to mixed-use development and whether the ordinance should allow smaller neighborhood businesses near or within residential areas.
Several participants supported limited-scale businesses such as small markets or restaurants that residents could reach on foot. Others cautioned against adding commercial uses inside established neighborhoods where residents did not expect them.
Fondren said the city’s existing commercial districts are primarily designed for larger developments along busy roads and generally do not provide a good framework for neighborhood-scale retail.
Residents said any new district or provision should clearly distinguish between a small neighborhood-serving business and a larger commercial use that could disrupt nearby homes.
Infrastructure and growth capacity
Residents also questioned whether Opelika’s water, sewer, power and road systems could accommodate continued population growth.
Mosley said developments are required to provide the infrastructure needed to serve their projects and said Opelika has not experienced the same water-supply limitations reported in some nearby communities. He acknowledged that zoning decisions must still be considered alongside infrastructure capacity.
Fondren said the ordinance itself can address infrastructure only to a point. Ultimately, staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council must decide where higher-density zoning is appropriate based on the capacity of roads, utilities and public services.
Short-term rentals emerge as major issue
Short-term rentals such as Airbnb and Vrbo properties emerged as one of the strongest concerns near the end of the meeting.
Residents described homes being used by changing groups of visitors, multiple vehicles parked outside, trash cans left at the street and properties that were not maintained. Some said short-term rentals operate as commercial businesses inside residential neighborhoods and should be restricted or prohibited in some districts.
Others cautioned against taking away property owners’ rights and said the city should be careful not to regulate every problem through zoning.
Fondren said the city would have to determine what constitutes reasonable use of private property and whether short-term rentals should be prohibited, limited in number or dispersed within residential districts.
Additional issues raised
The city was also asked to reconsider the ordinance’s 800-square-foot minimum dwelling size. One participant said more compact homes could provide affordable options for seniors and others seeking properties that require less upkeep and proposed varying the minimum square footage by area rather than applying one universal standard citywide.
Accessory dwelling units, including garage apartments and so-called mother-in-law suites, were suggested for areas around downtown. Sign regulations, including illuminated and digital signs in residential districts, were also discussed.
Questions were raised about historic-preservation requirements for church-owned property and whether existing ordinances are being adequately enforced. Mosley said matters such as junk vehicles, weeds and property maintenance generally fall under other sections of the city code rather than the zoning ordinance.
Mosley said the city expects to meet the April 2027 deadline, although drafts may be revised after review by the Planning Commission and City Council.
“We’re going to try to make sure that we provide what we feel is the best response to the issues being raised,” he said.
Additional public input planned
Mosley said the city plans to provide several additional opportunities for residents and stakeholders to participate in the zoning ordinance update.
At least one more public meeting will be held, although the date and format have not yet been determined. The city also plans to hold stakeholder meetings with builders, developers and other members of the development community to hear concerns from their perspective.
Multiple work sessions will be held with the Planning Commission, and the City Council will receive an update during the process. Before the formal approval process begins, the proposed ordinance will be made available for public review and comment.
At least one public hearing will be held before both the Planning Commission and the City Council prior to adoption.
Mosley said the process remains flexible and that issues generating greater public interest could lead to additional opportunities for input.
“The Planning Department and I are always happy to sit down and discuss any issues with concerned residents or stakeholders,” Mosley said.
