Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 02/20/2013 - Mins 02 20 13 Reg (Migrated from Optiview)Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 1 of 25 This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to transcribe proceedings verbatim. Any reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted and heard by Council, but not quoted. This document includes limited presentation by Council and invited speakers in summary form. This is an official record of the Milton City Council Meeting proceedings. Official Meetings are audio and video recorded. The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on February 20, 2013 at 6:00 PM. Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding. INVOCATION Pastor Jason Howard, Director of Adult Ministries with Stonecreek Church, Milton, Georgia CALL TO ORDER Mayor Joe Lockwood called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Councilmember Kunz, Councilmember Longoria (called in from Minneapolis, Minnesota), Councilmember Thurman, and Councilmember Large. Councilmember Absent: Councilmember Hewitt PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA (Agenda Item No. 13-038) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Kunz moved to approve the Meeting Agenda with the following changes: • Add an Executive Session to Discuss Current Litigation. • Add, due to an emergency situation, under New Business, Consideration of a Resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton in Opposition to House Bill 176, which is a Limitation on Municipal Zoning Authority for Cell Towers. Councilmember Large seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 2 of 25 PUBLIC COMMENT COivSEiv T AGENDA 1. Approval of the February 4, 2013 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 13-039) (Sudie Gordon, City Clerk) 2. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement (Task Order) between the City of Milton and Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for Additional Design Support for Birmingham Highway at Providence Road Intersection. (Agenda Item No. 13-040) (Carter Lucas, Public Works Director) 3. Approval of a Construction Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Engineered Restorations, Inc. for Bridge Deck Repairs to Wood Road Bridge over Chicken Creek. (Agenda Item No. 13-041) (Carter Lucas, Public Works Director) 4. Approval of a License Agreement and Email Distribution Agreement between the City of Milton and BrokerSavant, Inc. for Online Commercial Property Listings. (Agenda Item No. 13-042) (Jason Wright, Communications Manager) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation Recognizing National Girl Scout Cookie Day 2013 (Presented by Mayor Joe Lockwood) FIRST PRESENTATION (None) PUBLIC HEARING (None) Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 3 of 25 Zoning is transcriber) verbatim ZONING AGENDA 1. Consideration of RZ12-15 - 15260 Hopewell Road by Reunion Park, LLC to Rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) to H (Historic) District for the Existing Building to be Utilized as a Country Store on .5240 Acres. ORDINANCE NO. 13-02-1.59 (Agenda Item No. 13- 035) (First Presentation at February 4, 2013 Regular Council Meeting) (Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. The subject site contains .5240 acres. It is a vacant 1,179 square foot structure formally used as a country store. The applicant seeks a rezoning to the H (Historic District) for a country store. That sign shows you the existing zoning on the site which is AG -1. The next slide shows the 2030 Comprehensive Plan map and the Comprehensive Plan shows this area as called for agricultural, equestrian, and estate resident. The site plan was submitted October 4, 2012, however, this plan is superseded by a revised site plan submitted January 9, 2013. The essential differences between the original site plan and this revised one really dealt with the driveway entrances and the configuration of the parking on the site. The background is that on August 20, 2012, the Mayor and City Council designated the historic building as historic. This requirement must be met prior to a request to rezone to the H District. Additionally, section 64-95(3)(c) states the proposed historic use shall be limited to those historic structures identified on the subject property and may not be expanded. Therefore, if this request is approved, a condition will be provided listing uses to be allowed based on the previous historic use of the structure. This item was deferred at the November 27, 2012 Planning Commission meeting to the January 22, 2013 meeting to allow time to resolve traffic issues and propose zoning conditions. There were four citizens who spoke in opposition at the January 22nd meeting stating the following: • Inconsistency with the future land use plan and AG -1 uses surrounding the site. • Hours of operation not addressed. • Proof of fuel tanks removed not addressed. • Site distance issues. • Traffic study not conducted on a good date. • Parking issues. • Not to allow catering, delicatessen and carry -out uses. The Planning Commission's recommendation at the January 22"d meeting was Approval/Conditional. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 4 of 25 The Planning Commission recommended Approval/Conditional based on the following additional recommended conditions: • That the site distance of 45 miles per hour be satisfied. • That uses be the same as the prior use but not include delicatessen, catering or carry -out. • No food preparation can be conducted on the premises. • Proposed signage as proposed by the applicant should not be approved but shall be consistent with the requirements of the existing sign ordinance. In regard to the site plan analysis, pursuant to section 64-95(4) development standards for the H District states the following: In order to allow for the unique nature of the property receiving the H District qualification, there are no district specific development standards. However, all other requirements of the subject property's Overlay District and the City of Milton's Zoning Ordinance, including but not limited to those identified in section 64-95(5) shall be maintained. In addition, the Milton City Council shall consider the subject property's Overlay District and the City of Milton's Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to the proposed historic use and may adopt reasonable conditions of zoning with respect to the following without the need for a variance: Per the following sections, the applicant and staff are requesting the following conditions for the subject site as requested by a revised letter of intent as received by the Community Development Department on January 9, 2013. Section 64-1141(3)(a) Reduce the 50 foot buffer and 10 foot improvement setback to a 10 foot landscape strip along the south property line of the property intersecting with Hopewell Road and running north 68 degrees 21 minutes and 12 seconds west a distance of 89.69 feet. Staff notes that this is already mentioned in number three below therefore this condition is not required. Section 64-1141(3)(a) Reduce the 50 foot buffer and 10 foot improvement setback to a 10 foot landscape strip along Thompson Road and a minimum 40 foot buffer at the easterly to a 36 foot buffer on the westerly end along the south line of the property parallel to Thompson Road running from the corner of an existing driveway north 80 degrees 44 minutes 27 seconds west 190.43 feet to the westerly property line. This will be shown on the site plan in orange. That site plan will be forthcoming in a minute. Section 64-1141(3)(a) To delete the 50 foot buffer and 10 foot improvement setback along the southwest property line of the property running from Hopewell Road north 68 degrees 10 minutes 12 seconds west 89.69 feet and north 21 degrees 34 minutes 48 seconds west 35.46 feet to the northerly line of the existing driveway for outparcel two and north 60 degrees 44 minutes 57 seconds west 29.57 feet shown on the site plan below as green. Section 64-14-33(f)(1) To reduce the 25 foot setback for parking adjacent to residentially used property to 10 feet along the south property line. Staff notes that this zoning reference was taken from the C-1 Community Business District requirements. Currently, there is not a similar Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 5 of 25 requirement for the H District but this will be included in the conditions of zoning shown on the site plan below as green. Section 64-1145(6)(c) To allow onsite parking located to the front of the building or between the building and the public right-of-way being Hopewell Road. Section 64-1141(1)(a) Provide a minimum 10 foot landscape strip along all public streets shown on the site plan below as blue. These items listed above will be included in the recommended conditions. If you look at this plan here, all the colored areas really reflect what I just read in terms of buffers and landscape strips. We tried to visually show you what was being requested. Continuing on signage. The applicant has also requested to permit signage in keeping with the historical designation of the store building. These include projecting signage and wall sign logos as seen in the photographs of the letter of intent dated September 4, 2012. Before installation of any signage, the owner must first obtain a certificate of appropriateness until Article 18 of the Milton Zoning Ordinance. A condition of zoning will be included to reflect this request. Here is a picture showing the type of historic signing that they would like. And, you can see a logo along the side of the building, a historic logo as well as the sign in the front over the porch. Cooking requirements. The site plan submitted indicates a total of five parking spaces of which one is handicap accessible located in front of the building. The existing structure proposed for retail use is 1,179 square feet. Pursuant to section 64-1410 calculations, four spaces per 1000 square feet are required. Based on this calculation, a total of five spaces is required. Traffic study. A traffic study has been provided by the applicant. The traffic count was conducted on December 17, 2012. Based on this count, the maximum number of cars stacked on Thompson Road was six cars. This is an acceptable number of cars to meet the 300 foot or 95% view distance as required by Public Works. In addition, the revised site plan indicates a right in — right out only on Hopewell Road. The entrance driveway was widened for full access on Thompson Road. Environmental Site Analysis. The Environmental Site Analysis Report is sufficient and satisfies the requirement of section 64-2126. A field survey of the site was conducted by staff to verify areas addressed in the ESA report. The proposed site does not contain wetlands, flood plains, streams, steep slopes, or sensitive plant and animal species. As mentioned above, the building was designated historic on August 20, 2012. Staff also notes that in the past, the building has operated as a general store with gas pumps. According to the applicant, the tanks were removed prior to the purchase of the property. Public Involvement. The DRB meeting was held on October 1, 2012. The DRB expressed concern for parking in front of the building. They wanted the site distance checked. They supported signage of historic nature. And, there was unanimous support for making the building look historic. CZIM meeting was held on September 26, 2012. There were five members of the community in attendance. All the community members live close to the property and had concerns regarding Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 6 of 25 traffic, more intensive commercial use of the property over time, and commercial spot zoning. Staff has not received any correspondence regarding this development. Public Participation Meeting. The applicant hosted the meeting at their offices on Windward Parkway on October 25, 2012. There was one citizen in attendance. He expressed the following ,K�IiLK�iuilcli • Traffic control in the area due to the existing configuration of the intersection and the 45 mile per hour speed limit. • Drivers currently drive across the property to cut the corner. • And, also concern over the use of the property and impact on the area. In terms of standards of review, it has been determined that the proposed general store will be suitable in view of the use and development of adjacent and nearby property. The site fronts on two roads to the north and the east. To the south, a single family residence is located on the same parcel. The residential use property to the west is located approximately 300 feet from the subject property with a 50 foot undisturbed buffer adjacent to it. The proposal will not adversely affect existing use or usability of the adjacent properties as described above if approved with the recommended conditions. The subject site may not have a reasonable use as currently zoned AG -1 (Agricultural) based on the small size of the building and its location at the intersection of two streets. Based on the traffic counts provided by the applicant and review by the Public Works Department, staff does not anticipate a significant impact on existing streets, transportation facilities, utilities, or schools as proposed if the required site improvements listed in the recommended conditions are made to the site. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan Policy if developed with the recommended conditions: "We will expand the identification, documentation, and protection of historic, cultural, and archaeological resources in the city, and when possible encourage access by the public." Continuing on the Standards of Review: The proposed H (Historic) district structure will be utilized as a country store, and that type of use is not consistent with Agricultural, Equestrian, and Estate Residential. But the purpose of the H (Historic) district is intended to allow for a historic structure to be used, protected, renovated and preserved on its historic value to the community. It may allow a specific, previous use to continue in a structure where that use would be considered nonconforming as defined in the current City of Milton Zoning Ordinance. This designation will help preserve the rich traditions of history and culture evident in Milton's original settlement. Therefore, Staff supports the approval of this request to rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) to the H (Historic) district. The proposed use will not be environmentally adverse to the natural resources, environment and citizens of the City due to the required development regulations. Recommended Conditions: If the Mayor and City Council chooses to approve the petition, the specific conditions are: If this petition is approved by the Mayor and City Council, it should be H (Historic) District CONDITIONAL subject to the owner's agreement to the following enumerated conditions. Where these conditions conflict with the stipulations and offerings contained in the Letter of Intent, these conditions shall supersede unless specifically stipulated by the Mayor and City Council. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 7 of 25 To the owner's agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows: Country store and associated accessory uses on a .5240 acre including the existing 1,179 square foot structure and allowing only those uses that are specific to the previous historic use: catering, carryout and delivery, delicatessen, retail store or shop selling groceries, hardware, seed and feed, sundry items, homemade food, beverages, etc. Also permitted are seasonal items such as pumpkins, hay bales, pine straw, wreaths and Christmas trees so long as they are sold and displayed within the building or on the covered porch. The following uses shall be excluded; garage, automobile repair or automotive specialty shop, gas station, landscaping business or garden center, financial establishment, drive through, commercial amusements, liquor sales and package stores, motels, hotels, adult oriented entertainment businesses including adult bookstores, adult entertainment or adult entertainment establishments as defined in Article 3.3.3., check cashing stores, coin operated laundries, video arcades, pool halls, nail salons, beauty salons, barber shops, flea markets, second hand surplus retail shops, roadside vending, roadside produce stands or seasonal business, precious metal, sales, and billboards. To the owner's agreement to abide by the following: To the revised site plan received by the Community Development Department on January 9, 2013. Said site plan is site specific and must meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. All other applicable city ordinances and these conditions prior to the approval of a Land Disturbance Permit or Certificate of Occupancy. Unless otherwise noted herein, compliance with all conditions shall be in place prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Recommended Conditions continued. To the owner's agreement to abide by the following site development considerations: Provide a 10 -foot landscape strip along Thompson Road and a minimum 40 -foot buffer at the easterly end to a 36 -foot buffer on the westerly end along the south line of the Property (parallel to Thompson Road), running from the corner of an existing driveway North 80 degrees 44 minutes 27 seconds West 190.43 feet to the westerly property line. Provide a 10 foot landscape strip along the following property lines as described as North 68 degrees 10 minutes 12 seconds West 89.69 feet and North 21 degrees 34 minutes 48 seconds West 35.46 feet to the northerly line of an existing driveway for Outparcel 2 and North 60 degrees 44 minutes 57 seconds 29.57 feet. Provide a 10 foot setback for parking adjacent to residentially used property along the south property line. To allow onsite parking located to the front of a building or between a building and the public right-of-way (Hopewell Road). Provide a 10 foot landscape strip along the frontages of Hopewell Road and Thompson Road. To allow additional signage depicted in Exhibit "A": projecting sign on the front porch with store name; and wall signs on left and right sides of the building with vintage logos using colors associated with logos (e.g., Coca ColaTM logo sign). Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 8 of 25 All improvements to the site, structure and signs shall be reviewed and granted a Certificate of Appropriateness by the City of Milton Historic Preservation Commission. The proposed porch on the south side of the building as depicted on the revised site plan dated January 9, 2013 shall not be constructed. To the owner's agreement to abide by the following requirements, dedication, and improvements: Access to the site shall be subject to the approval of City of Milton Department of Public Works, prior to the issuance of a Business License, Land Disturbance Permit, Subdivision Plat or Certificate of Occupancy (whichever comes first). Entrance(s) shall conform to Chapter 48 Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places of the City of Milton Code of Ordinances, or be reconstructed to meet such criteria as required by the Department of Public Works. At a minimum the following shall apply: • Driveway(s) shall provide a minimum uninterrupted ingress/egress distance of 25 feet measured from the right-of-way line to the nearest edge of drive or parking space. • Driveway(s) site distance shall be certified by professional engineer. • If aL any such time in the future, tele Director of Public `�Y�orks determines that tllc tr afllc generated by the site exceeds the design criteria, he/she may require the owner to conduct a traffic study to determine if the development warrants any additional improvements at no cost to the city. If improvements are determined to be warranted, owner shall install those at no cost to the city. • Satisfy the site distance for the 45 mph speed limit. Dedicate at no cost to the City of Milton prior to the approval of a Business License, Land Disturbance Permit, Subdivision Plat or Certificate of Occupancy (whichever comes first), sufficient land as necessary to provide the following rights-of-way: • Provide at least 10.5 feet of right-of-way from the back of curb of all abutting road improvements and along the entire property frontage. • Provide right-of-way miter at intersection of Hopewell Road and Thompson Road. Conclusion: Although the proposed rezoning is inconsistent with Future Land Use Plan's recommendation of Agricultural, Equestrian, and Estate Residential, it is Staff's opinion that by rezoning it to H (Historic) it is consistent with the intent of the H (Historic) district to preserve the rich traditions of history and culture in Milton. In addition, Staff has included a set of Recommended Conditions that will ensure that the proposed general store will not have a negative impact on the surrounding community. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL CONDITIONAL of RZ12-15 to rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) to H (Historic) district. That is my presentation Mr. Mayor. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 9 of 25 Mayor Lockwood: Okay. Before we go any further in the public hearing, are there any questions right now for staff from council? Bill Lusk, Councilmember: Kathy, could you go over the site plan, the colored up site plan. One of the issues that came up was parking and the number of parking spaces. They are shown on the south side of the property. Is that a handicap space up in front of the front porch? Kathleen Field: Did you want the colored? Councilmember Lusk: Yes, the colored. Kathleen Field: And, your question is in regard to where the location of the handicap parking space is? Councilmember Lusk: Yes, is the handicap place in front of the porch? Kathleen Field: Yes, it looks to me like it is in the front. Councilmember Lusk: One of the questions that came up during the Planning Commission was the number of parking spaces that were provided here. And, the thought was that there was no room for any other parking particularly employee parking. The brown colored area there, which I believe is the septic reserve field, is that an area possibly for parking. Kathleen Field: I would certainly like the applicant to weigh in on this but to us it certainly looks like it is possible. We are looking at essentially a ten foot landscape or buffer strip around most of the parcel with the exception of that brownish orange area and we could just as easily extend rather than having it all be comprised of a buffer, we could indeed subtract out the buffer area and just put in two landscape strips along the north boundary line and along the south boundary line. Councilmember Lusk: Yea, that would make more sense. Kathleen Field: And, then put the remainder in the middle could be used for additional parking spaces. Councilmember Lusk: Good point. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 10 of 25 Lance Large, Councilmember: On the exhibit that the applicant submitted on September 4, 2012, is that no longer valid? Because that showed actually six parking spaces. I guess that was in the package here. Kathleen Field: The applicant did revise the site plan to widen the driveways and I think that they would probably be able to speak more in terms of what happened to that last parking space but I think the configuration of the driveway impacted that. Councilmember Large: Also, as far as on the septic area. It has always been my experience don't pave or put anything over a septic draining field so the use of that area and, even if you drive on it, it compacts the soil, could cause the septic drain field to fail as well so I don't know about actually using that area. Councilmember Lusk: That is a reserve area. Councilmember Large: Is that a reserve area? Okay. Kathleen Field: And, I think perhaps the applicant can better speak to that as well. Councilmember Lusk: I have received several comments and I have heard a lot of discussion on it too is the traffic situation on Thompson as it intersects with Hopewell. And, I understand the concern. I would hope, and I would propose, that in the near term hopefully we can as a city be addressing a roundabout at that intersection just to correct the offset in the Thompson Road as it intersects with Hopewell Road. Obviously, it is going to lower the speed limit and allow a lot easier ingress/egress to that establishment, Hopewell Road, and as Bell Memorial develops, I think we will probably see some more traffic there but I think having a roundabout there is going to improve the safety of those people using Bell Memorial in the future. I recommend to our City Manager and Council that we look at putting a roundabout there in the future. Mayor Lockwood: Okay. If that are all the questions we have now, I will open up the floor for those that are speaking in favor of this application. Deborah C. Anthony, 5780 Windward Parkway, Suite 300, Alpharetta, GA 30005 I am Deborah Anthony and I am here speaking on behalf of the applicant. My address is 5780 Windward Parkway, Suite 300, Alpharetta, Georgia 30005. We are very happy to be here tonight. This is an historic moment for us so we are very happy to present this to you tonight. What we are trying to do is to preserve this property in keeping with its historic designation to be a country store, I think similar to what you see when you drive around the North Georgia Mountains. It is a little bit of everything and not a lot of anything. So, what we are trying to do is to preserve the character of the building and at the same time what we would like to do in keeping with the conditions is to reduce the impact on the surrounding areas through the use of Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 11 of 25 buffers, landscaping, and screening, to comply with the Northwest Fulton Overlay. In fact, this is probably a model for the Northwest Fulton Overlay, and also to incorporate signage that is in keeping with the store. And, I think on the flipside we have an old picture of signage on the store and it is just part of the nostalgia of the store that we are trying to preserve. We have actually been spending quite a bit of time with Public Works and Mr. Chatham can go into more detail about that but we want to be aware of what is already there as far as the road and try to work with it as best that we can. And, the use of the property is not so large that in itself that it creates as big an impact as say as even the park does but by the same token we would like to do everything that we can to make the site safe. We would like to reserve the majority of our comments in order to address public comment so for the moment I will step aside and let them speak. Michael Martin, 1820 Highgrove Club Drive, Milton, Georgia 30004 I am Michael Martin and I live at 1820 Highgrove Club Drive in the WoodValley Subdivision. am a little surprised about the situation that presents itself here today. And, there is something I don't understand and I would like to ask one question before proceeding. Is this half of the property that is being considered and the other half of the property is not? Because I was under the understanding that the house next to the building being considered was part of the property and more of that long brown stretch was as well. Kathleen Field: The answer is that half of the property is being considered for rezoning. The other half, the residential property, is not being considered. Michael Martin: Thank you very much for explaining that. Well, first of all I think that is a mistake. I think that if this is going to be a historic property, I think the other house should be removed and I think the whole property should be used that way and it would create a much greater footprint and allow for more parking and more egress facility as well. I am concerned because I have a 17 year old daughter who drives and going through that intersection is one of the most difficult things I do on a daily basis. People come up the road from Birmingham at 55-60 miles an hour and you have two or three seconds to get across that intersection safely and that isn't enough time for an experienced driver much less an inexperienced teenager of which there are many in Milton and especially in that area. So, that is my chief concern. I support the development of the country store. So, that is why I am speaking on the support side, but I think more study needs to go into the intersection. Councilmember Lusk made a comment about a roundabout. I can see that being a worthy improvement. I'm not sure that I would choose a roundabout. I would choose an intersection with a light there but either of those things would be an improvement. But, I don't think this should go forward until the intersection issue is clarified further so that everybody has a feeling of safety with this particular project and I would urge the council to hold this property and go back and study what is actually going to happen with that intersection before they approve the continuance of this project. Also, I believe there was something in the beginning that said that the council had the power to change some of the conditions so I think you have more power than you think you have in this particular case. I think you can really move things around a little bit, increase the property footprint for this project, make sure of the site distance. We have a fire station just down the road there and that should be considered the ingress and egress of a fire station and emergencies. I want to say that I support the project but I think each of you has to take the intersection into account with this project and the whole impact and the Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 12 of 25 additional property that I do not understand why they are not including that in the thing if they really want a nice project and I think that should be considered. Thank you. Joan Borzilleri, 540 Kings County Court, Milton, GA 30004 asked that her name be read into the record as opposed. David Chatham, 1865 Bethany Way, Milton, GA 30004 My name is David Chatham. I live at 1865 Bethany Way and I represent the applicant. One comment I do want to make about the line of site, on Hopewell. We have revised the site plan, which I think we have passed out to you tonight, we have reversed the parking and moved the curb cut to the very extreme south end of the property line to create a little more distance on the line of site, but even with that, we are a little short, about 25 feet short of the perfect regulations that are required; otherwise, we meet the line of site going the other directions. I just wanted to mention that. We have reversed that since, I think, the plan that was shown on the screen. Thanks. Mayor Lockwood: Thank you. I will close the public hearing and open up to any questions or comments from council or any motions moving forward. Karen Thurman, Councilmember: I do have one question of staff. One of your conditions said food preparation is prohibited. I thought preparation of food is kind of a historic thing that has been happening for many years. So, why is preparation of food prohibited on the site? I guess I don't understand exactly what that means and why it is prohibited. Clearly, I can understand why automotive repair and specialty and all of that is prohibited but preparing food is something that has been happening for a long time. Kathleen Field: I guess it comes down to the degree of preparing the food in the sense that, you know, we did not want it to get into a restaurant type use. But, of course, if you had a sandwich counter, you know, or something like that. I guess it is all to degree but it is something we discussed with the Planning Commission as well and they really felt that they really wanted to stay away from that and keep more of a general store and have prepared sandwiches that could be brought in to be sold but not do it there on the site. Councilmember Thuriiiaii: Well, I have a question for the applicant then. Historically, were sandwiches made, prepared, and served at that store? Because I think the whole purpose of this ordinance was to make sure we kept the uses similar to what they were at the time the property was built so I want to make sure that is what we are doing here and if sandwiches used to be prepared there and served then that would fit in, if they didn't then it wouldn't. David Chatham: This was my uncle Bill and Aunt Margaret's Hardeman Store and they did have fresh meats and fresh cheeses and bread and they did make sandwiches on site. They would also sometimes have sausage and biscuits, you know, things like that. It was a general country store. It had a little bit Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 13 of 25 of everything so I've eaten there myself as a little boy. The food prep was done on site and I think we have to, probably, according to your ordinance include delicatessen because that is the way you are able to do food prep. I think we were under the impression that you did include it in the reading tonight even though it was not read that way previously unless I misunderstood. That is why we didn't say anything about it earlier. You might want to clarify that for us. Mayor Lockwood: I would agree that if it is a country store typically you would have somebody in the back making sandwiches or homemade meatloaf, that kind of stuff. However, I know there are modern health department rules to abide by. But, I do believe it did include delicatessen. Kathleen Field: Yes, it does include that. It states catering, carryout and delicatessen, homemade food. Mayor Lockwood: Does that clarify it for you Councilmember Thurman? Councilmember Thurman: So, that is okay. So where it says food preparation, it almost looks like to me we have a conflict of what we are applying for and what we are saying is not allowed. So, is food preparation allowed because it states, "the following uses shall be excluded" and food preparation if the first one. Kathleen Field: The Planning Commission said that, but I am looking at our recommended conditions and it states "the following uses shall be excluded: garage, automobile repair or automotive specialty shop, gas station." Councilmember Thurman: Okay, our copy says food preparation but yours does not say food preparation. Kathleen Field: Okay, Robyn could you please explain the difference. Robyn MacDonald, Principal Planner: Staff had our recommendation which originally did include those uses of delicatessen, food preparation based on the letter of intent by the applicant. We went to the Planning Commission and we stated in the front of the report what the Planning Commission voted on and they voted that part of their conditions were if you go to page two, uses be the same as the prior use but does not include delicatessen, catering, carryout and no food preparation on the premises so I apologize for the confusion but staff would actually prefer it to be more consistent with the historic use but we reflected the conditions in the staff report to show what the Planning Commission had recommended so that is the difference so it is up to you to decide what you... Councilmember Thurman: Whether to leave the food preparation in or out... Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 14 of 25 Robyn MacDonald: Yes, and I think they kind of struggled with it too, I mean, they were discussing what was carry out and you carry everything out of a store so... Matt Kunz, Councilmember: Yea, one of the discussions on the Planning Commission as well was that they were worried about the sewage capacity primarily with food prep on that property and so a continuous stream of food prep was the issue, so again, like Kathy was saying, I think the degree was the question. We didn't really specify what that degree was. Mayor Lockwood: To clarify, that would be a Health Department issue wouldn't it? As far as the actual food and the menu. Kathleen Field: Yea, you would have to have the grease trap and all that stuff would be inspected by the health department. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, they would make the call on that versus us trying to decide what can and can't be. Kathleen Field: That's right and there was a discussion at the Planning Commission about food preparation, should that be in or out and what type of carry out delicatessen, whatever it is for. Bill Lusk: Let me be clear on this. Are you recommending to go along with the Planning Commission's recommendations or not? Kathy Field: Robyn, go ahead. Robyn MacDonald: I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question? Councilmember Lusk: Clarify this, are you recommending, is it one of your recommendations to go along with the Planning Commission's recommendation to exclude carry out? Robyn MacDonald: I believe originally we wanted to be consistent with the applicant's request which was in the presentation and that's why it was inconsistent. Mayor Lockwood: Do you mind just pulling that slide again from the presentation on what was recommended and allowed and what was not? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 15 of 25 Kathleen Field: You will see in there we recommend catering, carryout and delivery, and delicatessen. Councilmember Thurman: So, that is different than what we have on our stuff because what we have is the Planning Commission stuff. Kathleen Field: We updated it and took out the food preparation but there is a little inconsistency in here, then again, they wanted to stay away from the restaurant so they felt that the food preparation was moving you, again, that's that degree here, moving you toward a full-fledged restaurant. Mayor Lockwood: In reading this, to me, this would carry out the intent of what we all agree a country store would do or have, would you agree? Kathleen Field: Yes Mayor Lockwood: The only question I had on it earlier was Christmas Trees. It is allowed to have Christmas Trees but then it stipulated that they had to be on the porch or inside, you know, my picture of a country store or a little corner market, you are going to have Christmas Trees outside if you are going to have Christmas Trees so is that something, there is a reason for that obviously, I want to respect having things stored outside but is that something that staff would go along with to make an exception for a seasonal type of sale item. They could put that in the grass area or the septic areas. Kathleen Field: I certainly think we could look at that on a case-by-case basis. You certainly don't want it to spill over the whole site as tight as the site is. This is something through a permitting process that we could look at on a seasonal basis. Robyn MacDonald: We do have an administrative use permit for seasonal sales so if he wanted to sale some trees he could come in. It is an administrative permit just for a limited time during holiday season. Councilmember Lusk: That is an allowable use in AG -1. Robyn MacDonald: Correct. Councilmember Thurman: I assume most of the parking is going to be impervious. Is it going to be paved, non -paved or what is the parking going to be? It's all paved it is there are they going to be paving any Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 16 of 25 additional other than the roads because I know we are trying to get away from paving everywhere. David Chatham: There is already enough paving there to accomplish the parking we are showing on the site plan. Councilmember Thurman: And the buffers, are we making them replant stuff in the landscape strips or is it. What you don't want is something that looks real formal in a country store landscape strip so is it going to be natural buffers or is it? Is there something that has to be put back in there? Robyn MacDonald: Are you referring to the western portion of the buffer or just the landscape strips? Councilmember Thurman: Both the landscape strips and the buffer. What you don't want is for it to be something that looks real structured. Robyn MacDonald: The arborist can work with them. There are certain species and types of plantings that are required but he can make it so it is not so structured. Councilmember Thurman: So something that would have been there a hundred years ago. Not something like Leland Cyprus lining the sides. Kathleen Field: The landscaping plan would be part of the review by the HPC in order for them to get their certificate of appropriateness. So, again we would go back to a historic type of setting in terms of the landscaping. Joe Longoria, Councilmember: On page 20, in the owner's agreement, there was a stipulation on Item H under Section 3. The proposed porch on the south side of the building as depicted on January 91h will not be constructed. Was that a requirement of ours or was that something that the applicant reviewed and decided they didn't need? I'm trying to understand if that was a restriction that we placed that the applicant agreed to because in my mind, porches, outside porches sort of make the site look more like a country store so I was just wondering. Councilmember Lusk: Is that a porch or a handicap ramp? Robyn MacDonald: It's a porch. Basically, I can address that issue. This structure had been designated as a historic structure earlier last year and a part of designating a historic structure you cannot add to it so that porch does not exist right now as well as at the time it was designated and we asked the applicant to take it off and they didn't take it off so we just went ahead and put a condition to make it clear Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 17 of 25 that no addition can be put on to the building based on the historic structure status of the building. Councilmember Longoria: Okay. Councilmember Matt Kunz: I've got a couple of questions. Historically, in our city's past, I mean, this thing has been paid for a long, long time and I'm just curious when we did the land use plan, why we designated it AG -1 to begin with. I wasn't here during that discussion. I'm not sure if that was something that was just missed or if that was, you know, a discussion that happened. I just don't know the background on that, if anybody had any comments on that. If is paid now and it was always paid, why did we designate it AG -1 to begin with? I'm just kind of curious. Did we ever discuss it? Kathleen Field: I'm going to let Robyn answer that. She has the institutional memory. Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager: At the time this was done, this H zoning designation did not exist. Councilmember Kunz: Right, so it was basically forced into that from that standpoint. Okay. As a city, what is our liability? And, here's why I ask this. I drive down that road all the time and that Thompson Road intersection is awful and it needs to be fixed and there's a lot of things I look at from a liability standpoint and I am just wondering from a city's standpoint if there is an accident on Thompson Road and it is very possible that there can be because of the current speed limit, because of the hill as you are coming south on Hopewell, people can't see people trying to turn right on Thompson Road. It is a crazy, crazy intersection and I don't know from a timing perspective that doing this now is the right thing to do, does that make sense, from a safety perspective and I am curious from a city liability if we do this, what is our liability if there is an accident, if we push something through when the speed limit conditions aren't necessarily safe for 17 year olds, for example. Kathleen Field: If I may, Sara is here from the Public Works Department, the Public Works Department has reviewed this plan to make sure it is consistent with all of the requirements for traffic, speed, access and whatnot so, if you would like, I can have Sara address these issues. Sara Leaders, Transportation Engineer/Planner: So, one of the first things we do is look back to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan that was done in September 2009, that is when it was completed. And, this particular intersection actually wasn't identified as an improvement in the CTP but since that time, we are currently working through a scoping for the Bell Park Development and as part of that in the scope we have included the evaluation of the Hopewell Thompson intersection so that is going to be looked at in the very near future. It wasn't originally identified in the CTP so that is where we are with that intersection. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 18 of 25 Councilmember Kunz: So, timeframe wise, and maybe Mr. Chatham you can talk about this as well, if you were to have approval on this, at what point will it be operational compared to when we have a functioning traffic intersection. I don't know the answer to that. What do you think? David Chatham: Let me mention now that the asphalt, if you have noticed, just sort of goes out into the street with no ... we are actually going to be improving that corner by putting in curb and gutter and putting in curb cuts, if you will, with right-in/right-outs so we should actually improve the safety of the intersection. You've only got five parking spaces so you're not talking about... it's only 1100 feet so it's not a big building so you're not going to have a lot of people in there more than likely. So, I think we actually just by doing those improvements on the corner with the curb and gutter and the curb cuts actually will help it even now. I wouldn't want to be obligated to wait until the city improves the intersection. I've waited for six years to even get to tonight so I would like to go forward if I could. Mayor Lockwood: I would just like tot since every body else has had a chance to talk, you know, 1 am concerned about the intersection, we have heard that from some comments and all, you know, scientific wise or engineering wise if this is the case but I could almost see having something living and breathing there, some activity, would almost slow traffic down a little bit if they come flying over there if they know there's a store there and they see it and all that, you know. I think temporarily, or in the short term, the only thing we can do is maybe have our police department patrol that area more consistently to get people in the habit of slowing down at that intersection. And, again, long term I'm hoping we can do something with it but, you know, I would just like to say as a citizen and someone who has lived here, I guess I'm a newcomer, but I have lived there about 24 years or so, when I first moved to what is now Milton, I enjoyed, there were a few country stores, I'll never forget we had to go up and introduce myself and they would say, oh yea, you bought the old so and so property and I need a new lawnmower and they said okay we will order you one and a week later my wife said they dropped off a lawnmower and they said come pay them when you get a chance or if you needed something, I can see this as, you know, folks from the park or people who live around or people who are going by stopping by and picking up a jug of milk or sandwich or whatever, you know, long term, I think that could help traffic because they don't have to go further in Milton so, you know, also I think people there have been concerned about spot zoning and commercial zoning, I think if we limit it to this use and with this designation that shouldn't be a problem and if Milton wants to be, you know, rural and equestrian feel and old time and I think there's nothing better than a country store with friendly people so I'm in favor of this application. My only concern is traffic and if we can long term address it and short term possibly, you know, Chris if you can have our police department take a look at it, again, if this were to pass, either way we have heard the concerns that we need to have a little more traffic calming out there, physically, so with that, unless anybody has a specific question... Councilmember Thurman: I just want to ask the City Attorney one thing. I just want to make sure that everyone does understand that because this is a specific H zoning and is not a commercial zoning, it will not set a precedent for any of the other properties around there unless they too qualify for the H zoning. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 19 of 25 Ken Jarrard, City Attorney: That is correct. They have to independently meet our historic requirements. This will set no precedence otherwise. Councilmember Lusk: And further to that point, once this zoning classification is granted there is no possible way of reversing it to another zoning classification. City Attorney Jarrard: Is that a question? Councilmember Lusk: Yes. City Attorney Jarrard: I don't know that that is entirely accurate. I think that a future council would retain their legislative discretion to zoning in the future so... Mayor Lockwood: That could be the case anywhere... City Attorney Jarrard: Yea, there is nothing special about the H zoning that makes that that would be the case with any zoning. City Manager Lagerbloom: Can I just say one thing for the record since we are in the middle of a zoning case? I just want to clarify that we have had some strong comments made tonight regarding the safety aspect of this intersection and whether or not it is a safe place or whether or not any liability attaches to the city as a product of making some of those comments, I just want to say and have on the record, that yes, we can think some of those things, that is the council's job to evaluate some of those things, but we haven't looked at any independent traffic data in making those conclusions tonight. So, I just want to make sure that those aren't perceived as being comments based upon actual traffic study in data by traffic engineers. It's great to think those things, I probably think them too, I just don't think the record tonight should be affected tonight with us taking ownership of a dangerous intersection that we may or may not be in the process of studying. Councilmember Kunz: Are you saying that we have not done a traffic study on this? City Manager Lagerbloom: No, it has been studied but it was studied under the transportation plan, CTP. It didn't rise to the level of priority that we have distributed our resources to at this point so we figured out what the priorities have been and that is where we have thrown our resources and this one just didn't rise to that level. Now, I give it to you all day long, it is an off -center intersection and I have to travel through it when I go to Bell Memorial Park and it is not fun. I just don't want us to inadvertently attach a level of responsibility or acceptance to an intersection with problems if we Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 20 of 25 haven't really evaluated the independent data to meet those conclusions. I just want that to be a part of the record if this were to ever be challenged. Councilmember Kunz: Do we evaluate any data of what would happen, if there was an obvious, there's only five parking spaces, so it probably wouldn't be too much but it's just my thought again is the speed of which someone tries to pull out of that country store as people are flying up by it is hard enough just to turn right on Thompson and I look at it, I guess with my last comments, I think it is a great opportunity to have a country store there, I really do. I think that it is not going to be a commercial aspect, how are you going to make money on it, I don't know, honestly, I've looked at it every way there is, you know, if we do a roundabout there, it will be perfect, if we do a roundabout near his property, you know, I think he is going to get a higher profit from it if the city has to buy it because of the situation we put on it so where we put that roundabout is going to be important as well and we haven't even discussed that. I just think we are putting the cart before the horse here. I think this is going to pass tonight. I may not vote for this just because we are being a little too premature in my mind and it is nothing against the applicant because I appreciate what he is trying to do but I think from a priority perspective I have a hard time getting around what I perceive to be safety and I just don't know that I can do that based on what I know about that intersection and what it feels like to go through it. Councilmember Lusk: I would like to address that as an engineer. I think what is shown on this site plan is an improvement to this intersection by establishing curb and gutter around the Hopewell side and the Thompson Road side by showing a right -in and right -out onto Hopewell Road. That is tremendously better more safe than what the situation is at this point in time. It is not perfect. I think that whole intersection needs to be addressed and I would hope down the road that in the near term we can start studying that but these curbs and gutters are going to prohibit cut through traffic going across the front of the building and making left hand turns out onto Hopewell Road so, in my professional opinion, I think this is a vast improvement to this intersection. Lance Large, Councilmember: I would like to echo what Councilmember Lusk just said and also I believe with Bell Park this intersection will be looked at with the Bell Park improvements. With the development of Bell Park and the property right along Hopewell Road, I would believe that this store will have a lot of pedestrian traffic coming to it. All I'm saying, and again that can be looked at as the park development, is that there will be more traffic than just car traffic. This is a complementary use to go along with the park and as far as the intersection, there is a lot to look at in terms of, you know, the offset is to the north so I believe any intersection improvements would have to be pushed northward not to the south which would have less impact on this property. Councilmember Longoria: The traffic is a concern but, you know, we've got experience in Milton where the traffic issues, you know, have not been as drastic as what we initially suspected based on studies and things like that. I'm not trying to minimize the concern but just as an example the gas station that went in at the corner of Bethany Bend and Highway 9, we had a lot of concerns about the traffic there that it was going to cause some additional problems and what we have seen since that gas station has gone in is that the traffic has not been impacted in a dramatic way. I take those things very seriously but I also know that to second what Bill and Lance had to say is that those things have Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 21 of 25 a way of sorting themselves out and I think that in this particular case it is actually an improvement. Mayor Lockwood: The only thing I would add is that I do think with this revised site plan versus the existing conditions right now, in my opinion, it would be safer because people can't just cut through. Also, to Chris's point, we need to make sure that we need to separate the two issues. If this is approved, that does not necessarily mean that we are making this intersection a more unsafe intersection and all of our intersections, obviously, can be unsafe. Any time there are two cars going, you know, it can be unsafe. And, as Chris said, this one, just by statistics, is not ranked up high. We need to keep looking at it and things will change and we will take that as a priority but we need to be careful that we are not saying that if this zoning passes we made an intersection more unsafe. Again, my personal opinion is once you have something here people will look around and possibly go a little slower but that is just a personal opinion. Councilmember Kunz: I have one last question. Is there a liability to the applicant that if he does the intersection improvements and they don't work? I am just curious. I don't know the answer to that. City Attorney Jarrard: Is there liability to the applicant? Again, you are asking questions that contain a million variables ....... it would depend upon the nature of the accident, what caused it, assuming that the intersection was done improperly and you are probably getting to the point that you are needing some answer. All I can tell you for purposes of tonight's meeting is that if you want to exercise your right to legislative discretion to approve this zoning, you don't need to worry about potential liability to the City of Milton. I can say that comfortably. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve Agenda Item No. 13-032 with Staff's Recommendations with the exception of deleting section 3(f) which states: • Shall be in compliance with the City of Milton Sign Ordinance (Chapter 64 of the City Ordinance) for all future signage. And replacing with the following section 3(f): • To allow additional signage depicted in Exhibit "A": projecting sign on the front porch with store name; and wall signs on left and right sides of the building with vintage logos using colors associated with logos (e.g., Coca ColaTM logo sign). In addition, changes were made to section 1(a) as follows: • Catering, carryout and delivery, delicatessen were added as allowable uses. • Food preparation was deleted as an exclusion. • Seasonal business was deleted as an exclusion. The following represents the final agreed upon version of section 1(a): Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 22 of 25 • To the owner's agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows: Cnt„tntry etnra and accnriated ar.rPcgnry nn a ,5240 acre including the existing 1,179 square foot structure and allowing only those uses that are specific to the previous historic use: catering, carryout and delivery, delicatessen, retail store or shop selling groceries, hardware, seed and feed, sundry items, homemade food, beverages. Also permitted are seasonal items such as pumpkins, hay bales, pine straw, wreaths and Christmas trees so long as they are sold and displayed within the building or on the covered porch. The following uses shall be excluded; garage, automobile repair or automotive specialty shop, gas station, landscaping business or garden center, financial establishment, drive through, commercial amusements, liquor sales and package stores, motels, hotels, adult oriented entertainment businesses including adult bookstores, adult entertainment or adult entertainment establishments as defined in Article 3.3.3., check cashing stores, coin operated laundries, video arcades, pool halls, nail salons, beauty salons, barber shops, flea markets, second hand surplus retail shops, roadside vending, roadside produce stands, precious metal sales, and billboards. Cn'�uaviimember Thurman seconded the mot.on. The mot.on gassed (5-1). Cn,,:nc.lmember u,;,n� opposed. Councilmember Hewitt was absent. t Encs of verbatim transcription UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW BUSINESS Consideration to Accept an Application for the Abandonment of a Portion of Black Oak Road. (Agenda Item No. 13-043) (Carter Lucas, Public Works Director) Sara Leaders, Transportation Engineer/Planner: This is requesting the initial approval for an application that we received for abandonment. This is just acknowledging that we have received the application and if you would like to make any comments regarding the application. The decision tonight is to accept the application for further processing or reject it. Acceptance is not approval of the application or the abandonment at this point. Black Oak Road is a dead-end gravel road. It is the last intersection on Hopewell Road before the county line. The existing conditions are a 60 foot right-of-way that is approximately 1,750 feet long. Their request is to abandon the last 1,000 feet of the right-of-way. The right-of-way and access to all of the existing homes will remain as part of the abandonment. There are currently two owners that front the piece that is being requested to be abandoned. The owners are Hopewell Holdings that are in contract with a developer to sell to the Manor Golf. and Country Club. Both have provided letters of consent at this time. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 23 of 25 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Kunz moved to approve Agenda Item No. 13-043. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent. 2. Consideration of a Resolution Supporting Local Legislation by the Georgia House of Representatives and Senate Amending and Clarifying the City of Milton Charter. RESOLUTION NO. 13-02-249 (Agenda Item No. 13-044) (Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager) Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager: This is legislation that we will, if approved, deliver to our local delegation asking them to make the changes that the state is required to make to our charter. There are certain things that the Charter Commission recommended that can be handled by home rule and doesn't require the state to act. However, there are five issues in particular that do require the state to act. This resolution asks them to take that action. The first item deals with redistricting as it pertains to the 2010 census. The existing districts are out of line as far as population count is concerned. It is the desire to consolidate the six districts into three districts with two councilmembers representing each district. Reelection would be staggered so you would not have both councilmembers from one district up for reelection at the same time. The second item is to clarify what is intended in the charter for mayoral veto authority. The ability to overturn a veto with a simple majority vote is the same action that is required to grant a veto so that essentially makes the veto power non-existent. The third item relates to the millage rate cap language which has been determined to be ambiguous. If a court had to interpret the language, it would be difficult to seek clarification on exactly what the language means. Also, it would affect the city's budget and not the city's ability to seek bonds in the future. The fourth item deals with the term limits of the mayor and council. Out of 500 cities in the state, only two cities had a simple two term limit. And, less than 25 cities in the state had term limits at all. This resolution is requesting to change the two term limit to a three term limit. The fifth and final item is to seek clarification on the appointment of the position of Mayor Pro Tem. So that everyone on the council can have the opportunity to hold the position of Mayor Pro Tem, we are recommending that the position be a one year commitment instead of the current four year commitment. This position will be voted on by the council at the first meeting of each year in January. If you are in support of this resolution, I will deliver it to the capitol tomorrow. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 24 of 25 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to approve Agenda Item No. 13-044. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent. Thefollowing Agenda Item was added by Motion and Vote under Approval of Agenda. 3. A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Milton in Opposition to House Bill 176 (Limitation of Municipal Zoning Authority for Cell Towers). RESOLUTION NO. 13-02-250 (Agenda Item No. 13-044) (Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager) Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager: There has been some controversy over this bill, House Bill 176, that was recently introduced in the House of Representatives. Thic bill if nnnrnved, would take away Inca! municipalities to regulate through their zoning code the site placement and restrictions regarding cell towers. In other words, remove our ability to regulate cell towers in Milton. The bill seeks to have the state regulate cell towers instead of local governments. If approved, this resolution will send the message that we want to retain local control over cell towers. Councilmember Thurman: I know the GMA is in opposition of this bill as well. Mayor Lockwood: It is good to have control over cell towers on a local level instead of a state level. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve Agenda Item No. 13-044. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS STAFF REPORTS Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, February 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm Page 25 of 25 EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to go into Executive Session to discuss current litigation at 7:50 p.m. Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent. RECONVENE Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to reconvene the Regular Meeting at 7:57 p.m. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Hewitt and Councilmember Longoria were absent. ADJOURNMENT (Agenda Item No. 13-045) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 7:58 p.m. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Hewitt and Councilmember Longoria were absent. After no further discussion the Regular Council Meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m. Date Approved: March 4, 2013. X52--�74 k Sudie AM Gordon, City Clerk Joe Lockwo Mayor No Text