As Atlanta grapples with a rapid population increase, the city’s lush green tree canopy, which has long earned it the nickname of the ‘City in the Forest,’ is steadily receding.
In response, the Atlanta City Council is contemplating new legislation aimed at making it more difficult and costly for developers to remove trees for construction projects.
However, this proposed tree protection ordinance has ignited a debate among residential developers and housing advocates, who argue that such measures could hamper the city’s efforts to provide necessary housing, particularly affordable units.
Established in 2001, Atlanta’s current tree-protection ordinance limits the penalty for developers cutting down trees to $5,000 per acre.
Fines collected are utilized to plant replacement trees elsewhere in the city.
Under the new proposal, developer costs to remove trees—dubbed “recompense” fees—would soar by nearly 800%.
For instance, when Windsor Stevens Holdings was preparing to build The Proctor, a 137-unit apartment complex featuring 41 affordable apartments, they paid nearly $20,000 to cut down 19 trees.
Under the proposed ordinance, that expense would balloon to $155,000.
Rod Mullice, the founder of Windsor Stevens Holdings, argues that such exorbitant fees could effectively freeze multifamily and single-family housing projects in tree-dense suburban neighborhoods, where such development is urgently required.
The current ordinance permits the city to charge developers $100 for each tree removed, plus an additional $30 per inch of diameter that exceeds the size of the replacement tree.
As it stands, removing a tree with a 10-inch trunk diameter to allow for a 6-inch sapling elsewhere costs developers an extra $120.
In contrast, the new legislative proposal would drastically raise that per-inch fee from $30 to $260 and eliminate the $5,000-per-acre cap on clearcutting.
The nonprofit organization HouseATL has urged the Atlanta City Council to maintain a cap on costs per acre for tree removal and to exempt fees for projects that include affordable housing units.
This is crucial for meeting Mayor Andre Dickens’ ambitious goal of achieving 20,000 affordable housing units by 2030.
The executive director of HouseATL, Natallie Keiser, expressed concern about how various aspects of the new ordinance might obstruct this housing target during a communication with council members.
In contrast, Trees Atlanta, a nonprofit focused on planting trees throughout the city and instrumental in drafting the new ordinance, believes current recompense fees have been too lenient.
Greg Levine, executive director of Trees Atlanta, stated that developers have been paying far less than the actual costs associated with replacing the tree canopy.
His sentiment reflects a broader belief that the proposed fees would more accurately reflect the true costs of tree replacement.
The new ordinance does include provisions to reduce the financial penalty for developers involved in affordable housing construction.
If a multifamily developer commits to pricing at least 15% of units for households earning 80% or less of the area median income (approximately $86,000 for a family of four), they would receive a 50% reduction in the penalty for each tree removed.
Similarly, the discount would also extend to developments where 10% of the units are priced for households earning up to 60% of the AMI ($64,500).
Furthermore, if a multifamily developer manages to produce a larger number of deeply affordable rental units—specifically 20% for families making up to 50% of the AMI ($53,750) or at least 40% at up to 60% of the AMI—they could have the tree-removal fees entirely waived.
Similar reductions are also proposed for condominia and single-family homes available for sale.
Another contentious aspect of the ordinance pertains to the requirement that newly constructed single-family homes must have a specific number of trees planted on their lots, depending on size.
According to the ordinance, all single-family lots must meet a minimum requirement for trees ‘growing on site’ before receiving a certificate of occupancy.
With the stipulation of planting 21 trees per acre, a lot of 0.2 to 0.34 acres would need four to seven trees either kept or planted in the front yard of new homes.
This particular regulation could render several single-family lots nearly unbuildable, asserted Eric Kronberg, principal of Kronberg Urbanists + Architects.
His firm specializes in developing smaller residential projects, including compact homes and accessory dwelling units on pre-existing single-family lots.
He criticized the ordinance for prompting a disheartening conflict between the need for housing and tree preservation.
Kronberg contended that Atlanta’s city government ought to take on more financial responsibility for maintaining the tree canopy instead of relying on private developers to handle this obligation.
Moreover, the city’s Housing Commission, an independent body instated by the Atlanta City Council to formulate housing policy guidance, has suggested that the city allocate public funding, possibly through a bond, to support long-term tree canopy management.
This could allow for greater flexibility in the construction fee structure by permitting a combination of fees and incentives rather than focusing solely on punitive measures.
Progress on the ordinance has been delayed, with the Atlanta City Council’s Community Development and Human Services committee currently holding it in abeyance.
Council member Michael Julian Bond, the primary sponsor of the ordinance, has been diligently working on enhancements for tree protections for years.
Despite receiving pushback from the development industry, he believes that inaction would exacerbate the loss of the city’s tree canopy.
Bond expressed his sentiments that further delays—whether six months or longer—aren’t warranted and that every single day lost is a day the city loses more trees.
image source from：https://atlantaciviccircle.org/2025/04/21/atlanta-tree-protection-affordable-housing/
