Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 06/15/2015 - MINS 06 15 15 REG (Migrated from Optiview)Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page I of31 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 June 15, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding. INVOCATION Tass Welch, Community Christ Church, Milton, Georgia CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pro Tern Karen Thurman called the meeting to order. ROLLCALL Councilmembers Present: Councilmember Lusk, Councilmember Longoria, and Councilmember Mohrig. Councilmembers Absent: Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Led by Mayor Pro Tem Kar en Thurman) APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA (Agenda Item No. 15-161) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to approve the Meeting Agenda. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood, Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval ofthe May 18 ,2015 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 15-162) (Sudie Gordon, City Clerk) 2. Approval of the June 1, 2015 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 15-163) (Sudie Gordon, City Clerk) -----~~~--------------------------------- Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00 pm Page 2 of 3 1 3. Approval of the Financial Statements for the Period Ending May , 2015. (Agenda Item No. 15-164) (Stacey In g lis , Assis tant City Man ager) 4. Approval of a Parks and Recreation Department Facility Use Agreement and Addendum between the City of Milton and NFL Youth Football League , Inc. (Agenda Item No. 15-165) (J im Cregge, Parks and Recrea tion Director) 5. Approval of a Parks and Recreation Department Facility Use Agreement and Addendum between the City of Milton and Hopewell Youth Association, Inc. (Agenda Item No. 15-166) (Jim Cr egge, Parks and Recreation Director) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk mo v ed to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously ( 4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood, Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS (No ne) FIRST PRESENTATION (No n e) PUBLIC HEARING (No ne) Zoning is transcribed verbatim ZONING AGENDA 1. Consideration ofRZ15-08-To Amend the "Equine Garment Fabrication Use Permit". ORDINANCE NO. 15-06-251 (Agenda Item No. 15-099) (Fir st Presentat io n at April 13 , 2 015 Regu lar City Co un cil Mee tin g) (Discussed at April 2 0, 2 015 City Coun cil Wo rk S ess ion) (Deferr ed at April 27, 2 015 City Co un cil R egular Mee tin g) (Kathlee n Field, Co mmunity Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director This is a text amendment that the Community Development Department recommends approval for. At its April27, 2015 , City Council Meeting, the Council approved the proposed definition of Equine Garment Fabrication pursuant to RZ 15-09 and allowed the use by "right" within the AG-1 district up to 2 ,000 square feet pursuant to RZ15-07 . Further, the City Council recommended that the use permit be Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6 :00pm Page 3 of31 deferred to the June 15 ,2015 City Council meeting to allow time for Staffto amend the use permit to remain in the zoning ordinance and to require a use permit when an Equine Garment Fabrication building exceeds 2,000 square feet. Therefore, Staff has amended the use permit to be consistent with the Council's proposal. Additionally, the proposed amendment was presented at the May 27 , 2015 Planning Commission meeting for their review. The Commission unanimously voted to recommend denial of the proposed amendment to the use permit. They ex pressed their concern that the proposed amendments would allow noxious uses such as tanneries and retail shops that sold unrelated items on the premises . The Planning Commission also stated that text amendments should not be initiated just for one or two situations . That is m y presentation and I am willing to answer any questions. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to approve Agenda Item No. 15-099. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood , Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. 2. Consideration ofRZlS-11-To Create the Arnold Mill Form Based Code , Chapter 64 of the City Code, Article XXI. (Agenda Item No. 15-154) (Dis cuss ed at Jun e 8, 2 015 Co uncil Work S ession) (First Presentation at Jun e 1, 2 015 City Co un cil Meeting) (Kathleen Field, Co mmunity Development Director) Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager Before we get to the presentation, Councilmember Thurman would like to make some comments on this item. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Thank you. This is a big issue for our City because it is actually setting the direction of an entire quarter of the area. Personally, I believe this is something that should be decided on by seven members of the Council rather than just the four of us that are here today . I also know that this was a split vote (4-3) with the Planning Commission with recommendations to incorporate several changes. I think the community should be allowed to hear the recommendations the Planning Commission has proposed , since it is different than what was originally discussed. I would like to receive the input of the rest of the Council to hear their thoughts on this before we have a full Staff presentation. We will have everyone who has signed up to speak, be able to speak , even if this is deferred to a later date allowing it to become a part of the record and be taken into consideration. Councilmember Longoria I agree with your assessment. I do not think there is anything pressing in terms of us voting on this today. I would agree it makes more since to present back to the community the changes offered by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Mohrig I agree with that too. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00pm Page 4 of31 Councilmember Lusk I am concerned with some of the inconsistencies and terminologies we have used with this overlay as opposed to previous overlays. I think we need to open up that discussion as well. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Unlike Crabapple and Deerfield, where we were putting form based code around existing development , this overlay is a plan for the entire quarter , which is very important for the City. Go ahead with your presentation knowing that it appears to be the will of the Council that we will probably be deferring it. Kathy Field Certainly, I understand. We do have Caleb Racicot , our consultant from TSW on this project, here with us tonight and who presented this to you at our workshop. There have been a few issues that have come up since that workshop that he wanted to address to provide further information. With that in mind , he has a very short presentation to address these issues and is available to answer any questions as well. Caleb Racicot Thank you, Kathy. Good evening Mayor Pro Tern and Council. I would like to talk about some of the changes that have been made based on some of the feedback we received at the work session so we can keep you apprised of what the major changes are. Also , I wanted to remind the public and the Council that this code , in my perspective, has really been a codification of the vision of the Arnold Mill Road Visioning Plan. We went in good faith and read through the plan line by line , and created a code that we feel adequately reflects the density , the land use and the character of development within that plan. With that it achieves many of the unique goals incorporated with the plan, such as: the presentation of open space and historical resources , the prevention of continuous commercial strip development on the corridor replacing it with concentration of development and compact walkable nodes , the avoidance of conventional pod subdivisions , and the avoidance of some higher density residential (townhomes , apartments, etc.). We really crafted this based on these specific policy goals using the template that was used in Crabapple and Deerfield. We were also very deliberate about making sure that all of these proposed code changes would tie back to current property rights and not down zone anyone. We did receive some comments from our work session last week and I wanted to point out what some of the changes were based on those feedbacks. The first dealt with concern from members of the Council that there is a provision in the code that says if you are zoned in a node (T3 or T4) you could have commercial uses at the front of your property. Initially that draft said the front was determined to be within 200 feet within centerline of corridor but there was concern that may be too restrictive. So the current version of the code (version three) actually increases that to 300 feet. That does expand the depth for which commercial uses may be provided. In addition, we thought it was important to clarify how the density of that commercial use was calculated. So within the density part of the code , we added a line stating that the commercial density was in essence based on overall property not just within the 250 feet , but that if you used all of your density for commercial use , you would have no additional density for residential. We wanted to make the same way of calculating density , which is the entire site , consistent throughout the form based code. One other thing I wanted to point out to Council is we received some comments from the public last week that there was a concern about the extension of Cox Road over to New Providence Road. After talking with Staff and thinking of the importance of that link in the transportation of this particular area, we felt from a planning perspective, it made sense for us to keep it in the plan. In addition, when we put that connection in the plan, we did make a dispensation for the property owners in that area and proposed to give them a T4 Open Development Permission, which is actually a mixed use development Re gular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 5 of31 category that would allow a higher density than any of the adjacent properties , as part of recognition of that important thorough faire. There were internal inconsistencies of the ordinance that were pointed out last week by Council that I would like to address. The first pertains to allowing side yard homes within the T3 zoning district. Side yard homes are essentially a house where one side of the home is built at the lot line , similar to what is allowed in Charleston and Savannah, and then the other side is setback. The comment made last week that this should be allowed in some of the lower density residential districts, particularly the T3. After looking at that and how big these homes are , we felt that something that urban and high density was inappropriate for T3. It is allowed in the T 4 and would be the best zone for that Charleston/Savannah character. And very closely related to that was the need for more flexibility and setbacks in the T3 district which is a single family district. The concern was if a project incorporates TDRs , they are allowed to build up to five units an acre , but the lot sizes of 70 feet wide and the side yards setbacks of 1 0 feet wide could make the realization of that somewhat challenging. We have incorporated the identical language from Crabapple into this particular code. That language allows properties that use TDRs to have shallower · side yard setbacks so that the property owners have more flexibility with the layout of the actual homes. This is important because when you go from a density of two units an acre, which is what T3 is without a TDR, to a density of five units an acre , which is what T3 is with TDR, the orientation of your houses change and the lot sizes change. You can actually achieve the fifteen units for the overall development or five units per acre but you have to tum the homes diagonal , place the homes ' long side adjacent to the street. This will give you a shallower lot but a gracious front yard setback. We felt in order to allow the transition from without TDRs to with TDRs and allowing those shallower side yard setbacks would be appropriate. So in a nutshell those are all the changes that are enclosed in the code before you. Are there any questions ? Mayor Pro Tern Thurman When was the last time you had a meeting with the community on the vision of the Arnold Mill Corridor? Caleb Racicot I will need to defer to Staff on that because they have been coordinating the community outreach efforts. Kathy Field It was May 2014. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman So , it has been a year since we have gone back to the community around the Arnold Mill area to discuss their vision for the area? Caleb Racicot That is correct. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Also you said , within 250 feet would be a T4 of the main area? Caleb Racicot Actually the way I crafted it, it remains zoned whatever the rest of the lot is zoned, but the only difference is that in accordance with the Visioning Plan, you can use the front of the property to create a Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6 :00pm Page 6 of31 mix of residential and commercial. The Visioning Plan talks in several parts about this mix of residential and commercial along the corridor, allowing you to convert your buildings at the front to an office or a small shop and not receive any additional density. Councilmember Lusk With all of the changes we have seen here in the last year, the community deserves to see this again . Mayor Pro Tern Thurman The map shows how this is reall y an open area for development and planning, where in Crabapple , we were filling in little undeveloped areas. This is very different. Don Hausfeld, 345 Cox Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Madam Mayor and members of Council , thank you again for allowing us the opportunity to speak on this issue. My remarks will be specifically for Danny Elkins ' and Chris Asbell's driving range. I will stick to the highpoints we would like to get across tonight. Danny and Chris have been working at the driving range for 20 years operating a commercial business. They have lights that are on all night , traffic ... , you have heard me say that all before. The point we are trying to make is this is not about density for us. The densities that were placed in the ordinance/code by Staff were fine with us. The Planning Commission when they went be yond our first request , which I will come to in a second, and went to the second and increased the density , has never been our plan. We have been talking about a project that is four units per acre on this since day one , two years ago. So five , six , seven makes no difference to us . I won 't spend any time today talking about things like side yards , setbacks , etc. because I see the clock ticking and we will have other opportunities to talk about those. This is really about fairness and equity. The rationale for determining what our T3 classification was the corridor , which is an important corridor. But in that corridor, if you look at the plan, there is an epicenter of that corridor. There is a circle that is drawn there with our property right in the center. The point we dispute is the rationale used to take the whole corridor and everybody that is AG-1 gets T3 or T2. Looking at our project specifically with an operating commercial development , we believe that T3 is appropriate ; however, the difference made in this code is we are limited to only two units per acre by right instead of three because it was AG-1. And I might add AG-1 was the category that North Fulton used because they were well in operation before Milton was formed . I have been in other communities before where the y use a general classification with a specific use , driving range. So it is really just the symbolism of that, but if you go look at them , they are an operating commercial business. Now the big difference here is that if you say there are two units instead ofthree it really undermines the value of the property to the point where Danny and Chris will not be able to do anything if the y have to buy two TDRs per acre . That costs in today's dollars is $1 ,015 ,000 in TDRs to get the four units per acre by buying 20 TDRs. The study that was presented to us in April 2015 states that it was going to cost $25 ,000-$35 ,000 to purchase a TDR. I asked Staff to send me a list of people that are interested in TDRs. We proceeded to call that list. On that list right now, only one person has applied. There are three TDRs that are available. Those TDRs are valued at excess of $50 ,000 . When we called the next person on the list , he said they had been thinking about it but how many TDRs do you need , I have 65 acres. We asked what the going rate would be so we could put pencil to paper and he replied it is going to be in excess of $50 ,000 , because to apply into the Land Preservation Trust costs $30 ,000 plus attorney fees. If we are required to purchase two TDRs per acre , it is a significant disadvantage and does not allow Danny or Chris to develop or sell their property. The y have not turned their back on the City of Milton. The y are aware to get four they will have to buy one TDR. The only facts we have today are what the actual people selling TDRs are telling us and that will be a commitment of $500 ,000 towards a TDR program which we are aware of that. Onl y thing we are asking , please , is to be fair to us and treat us rather than Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6 :00pm Page 7 of31 saying we only get two and they get three . It is a significant problem for those on a property for more than 20 years. Thank you for your time. John Mitnick, P.O.Box 135, McLean, Virginia 22101 I own the property at 12885 Arnold Mill Road. Madam Mayor Pro Tern and Council, thank you for the opportunity to address you on this important topic this evening. I would like to elaborate briefly on the requested edits that we made to the Form Based Code in the order in which the items appear in the code. The first one is the architectural styles. In this area, I will say only the following; when the draft Form Based Code came out in April, there were seven permitted architectural styles that were based on recognized classic American architectural styles in the code and they were there until May 20, 2015 at 8:00 p.m. when version two came out and suddenly five of them were deleted. They all were very important architectural kind of styles. I happen to have a mother who has a PhD in American Art and Architecture and is an expert on historic American Architectural styles and also historic preservation, Barbara Mitnick. In her opinion, those five styles were quite appropriate; they are obviously in use in the area and are appropriate for the area because they are in the Crabapple Form Based Code. I would be happy to have my mother submit a written opinion for the record. The next edit we asked for was the ability to use office uses on the upper floors (second and third stories). We are entitled to have three stories in our buildings. Right now the way the code is drafted , we can only practice office and commercial uses on the first floor, which leaves open the question what would we do with the second and third stories? It seems it would be imminently reasonable to allow office uses on those floors. If we do not use office uses there what should we do with those? With regard to density, I join in Mr. Hausfeld 's comments. There is a consensus in the community that our T4 open properties are commercial in nature now, even though they are zoned AG-1. The reason they are zoned AG-1 is because none of us , to my knowledge , has applied for rezoning because we were not ready to develop the properties. There is a consensus in the community reflected in the Visioning Study Report , reflected in this Form Based Code, which lists a host of commercial and office uses that are to be permitted in this area. There is a consensus that it is commercial by nature and character now. It is not fair as Mr. Hausfeld said to require us to purchase TDRs to achieve the same level of density by right that our T4 open counterparts in Crabapple have. It puts us at a competitive and comparative disadvantage to those people just a mile down the road. Frankly , it might well spell the death nail of any commercially viable development on our properties. So , I would ask that would be considered in this process. I would also note by the way, that the Planning Commission did vote for the changes that we requested. I want to make some final comments about the extension of Cox Road which would bisect my property, running right through the middle of it. I understand the rationale Mr. Racicot mentioned but I would also note that rational is absent from the Visioning Study Report and from the Form Based Code. In fact , there is no connection with affording us T4 open zoning on our property, which everyone recognizes should be commercial and running an extension of a road through the same time. He said there is a connection but, frankly I don't see it. There has been no traffic studies performed. We have no idea what the impact of the extension of Cox Road through to New Providence would do to the traffic. There has been no engineering done on the route that extension should take. Also, if you bisect the parcels on a very strange angle that the extension would take , then we preclude the ability of a developer to come in and map out perhaps a very large and impressive development on those properties because now there will be a road running right through the middle of the property. What I would ask is that we defer on that issue until someone comes in with a definitive site plan and tells us exactly what they would like to do with that property. I would ask that that extension be deleted for now because the work has not been done to justify it. Thank you. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00pm Page 8 of31 Councilmember Longoria Kathy , so how would we answer the citizen's questions about the road study and things of that nature? Kathy Field Well , Carter is probably better to answer that question , so I will let him start . Carter Lucas, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works I think at this stage any of those planning documents would move forward through some sort of engineering analysis. In this particular case , it would be through our CTP , which is currently getting ready to start this fiscal year. Any of these road type extensions or connections would be ones that we would highlight in our CTP and allow that process to go through the actual engineering evaluation of the credibility of those types of connections. Councilmember Longoria If we deferred any kind of decision related to extending Cox Road , what do you need to do to put together the information we would need? How much time would it take? Carter Lucas CTP is probably going to be done in about six months. Kathy Field Further background , in our Form Based Code in Crabapple we do show road connections. The idea being , if an actual development comes along , we would build in a place holder where that road would be and if indeed that road could be built. Councilmember Longoria So , Kathy regarding the density issue , what kind of challenge is created if we consider changing the zoning on those parcels? What is our motivation to make one side of the road T3 and the other side T4? Kathy Field Again , those are policy issues. I think Caleb tried to explain to you why there was a difference between the T3 and the T4. We originally had everything at T3 but then felt because we were putting in this roadway that would require some taking of the land for the road , so therefore , to make up for that we would add additional density. That was the reason. We actually started out at T3 for the entire intersection. But, again it is a policy issue in terms of the amount of density . As Caleb said , everything that is AG-1 we are up zoning; so it is just a matter of what that determination is in terms of what that up zoning should be. Councilmember Longoria In cases for mixed use where we have three story structures and we are stating that commercial exists on floor one , it is our idea that floors two and three would be residential. Is that correct? Kathy Field Correct , although there is an allowance for a warrant which would come through me to make a decision to allow for either office or commercial on floors two and three. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 9 of31 Caleb Racicot One other point that I think is incredibly important is that there has been a mis-statement both this week and last week. Section 1. 77 of the code talks about TDRs and there is not a one to one relationship between TDRs and housing units. You actually get 2 additional units per TDR. We did that as an incentive to encourage them. This is applied in Deerfield and Crabapple. So , this notion of going from two units an acre to four; you have to buy two TDRs is actually incorrect. You only have to purchase one. I wanted to point that out because it is a big difference. Councilmember Thurman What about the architectural styles that disappeared? Kathy Field That is a very good question. When Caleb originally put the first draft together we had not worked on the architectural styles with the city architect. So , Caleb put in all seven styles from Crabapple as a placeholder and from version one to version two we worked through with the city architect what we felt were appropriate styles for Arnold Mill which are not the same as Crabapple. Mainly because it is not historical but vernacular farmhouse type of architecture so we were trying to reflect that. Councilmember Lusk Was that discussed during our community meeting a year ago as far as what type of architectural styles were going to be allowed? Kathy Field Yes , and Michele , you can certainly join in too but the visioning study did have samples of architectural styles but we needed to document that in terms of the guidelines that we created. Michele Mcintosh-Ross Yes , the plans mentioned the vernacular style which is the old farmhouse style. Councilmember Lusk Was that the only style that was discussed a year ago? Michele Mcintosh-Ross The plan did not discuss architecture it just talked about what buildings should look like; farmhouse, vernacular style , is what was mentioned in the visioning study. Councilmember Mohrig So , the reduction from the seven styles down to only two styles; that was just something that just recently occurred? Kathy Field No , it was pre the Planning Commission review when we published the original draft, it was not in the original draft, but by the time the second draft came out, we had worked with the city architect to define more specifically what those architectural guidelines should be so it was fairly early on. Councilmember Mohrig A question to Carter going back to the road and the reason and the need for a road; was this anything we needed in looking at future plans and road improvements , was this even on our radar? ~------~------------------------------------------------------------------------ Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00pm Page 10 of31 Carter Lucas We have talked about those connections between 140 and New Providence in the past. It didn't necessarily move forward in the previous CTP but it is something that we do evaluate when these studies come up. Councilmember Mohrig Specifically, with Cox Road , the Cox Road extension was something that was being considered? Carter Lucas That has been considered in the past. The last CTP the connection was further north that they talked about but there has been some evaluation of that Cox Road extension in the past. Michele Mcintosh-Ross Carter, when I talked with Sara we talked about the application that went in for the Federal Funding study between Ranchette and Greene Road so that Cox Road intersection would be something that would be studied. The results of that, in terms of whether we get funding or not, we will not know until spring 2016, that is a little ways out there but it is on our radar as far as the studying of that corridor between Ranchette and Greene Roads. Councilmember Mohrig Were there potential road improvements that were being considered with Ranchette Road? Carter Lucas These were operational improvements along the whole 140 corridor. Councilmember Mohrig Because that is a connector between New Providence and ..... . Michele Mcintosh-Ross Correct and during the visioning study Ranchette residences were at some of our meetings and they would like an alternative to folks cutting through their road/neighborhood so that is why we considered extending Cox Road. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Are there any further questions? Councilmember Mohrig I guess going back to your earlier comments; I think it would be good if we can go back to the community so everybody gets a chance to digest it. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman I would like us to still look and see if there are other architectural styles that may work. It seems like there ought to be more than two ; there may not be seven, but there ought to be more than two. I would also like us to look at the possibility of office rather than residential only on the top two floors. I really think if this is going to be a commercial corridor we want to encourage office rather than discourage it. So, I do think we have some items that need to be discussed further and also have the community look at it further. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00 pm Page II of31 Councilmember Mohrig ---------- I think there is a gentleman, I know you closed the public hearing, but I think he is asking if he can add some additional comments. City Manager Lagerbloom I don't think we can. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman We can only if someone asks him a specific question. City Manager Lagerbloom I would like to make a comment to get us to where we have some direction so we can move forward with this. If I take us back to how this started, it started like a lot of good planning studies start which is with a visioning study which utilizes a lot of community input to then form a code that can develop the vision and then this code that goes through the planning commission who makes a recommendation and then it comes to the council ultimately for their policy guidance. So , it has been kind of an evolution of the process that we use that does include the public input; it includes it very early on. I do like the idea, if you want to do that, of taking it back to the community and soliciting feedback now that it has kind of worked its way to where the council could take action. We have discussed that there would be an opportunity to do that as early as the first or second week of July. I think that is critical because we are advertised in the zoning process here that we do need to defer if we are going to defer to date certain times so that we can perfect our advertising and that really what I would like to do and to offer is to bring back to the council an update of what comes out of that public meeting after we get it scheduled at the work session in July to then suggest that maybe you defer this one month until the July zoning agenda. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Would that be July 20th? City Manager Lagerbloom Those two dates would be the 6th is the first meeting; the 13th would be the work session, and the 20th you are correct, would be the council meeting. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Could we try to have that meeting along the corridor somewhere so that the people who are most affected by it ...... . City Manager Lagerbloom Yes , I think that is the most appropriate ; to have people have to come all the way over here , you don't get the audience you want. Councilmember Longoria Will that give us enough time, Chris? We've got to have the meetings , digest the feedback; we have to incorporate it into an updated document. City Manager Lagerbloom I am happy to move it up to August. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 12 of31 Councilmember Longoria I just don't want to put us in a position where we are going to be behind the eight ball in terms of getting it done. Does this have to go back in front of the Planning Commission? City Manager Lagerbloom No, the Planning Commission has turned it out with a recommendation and it was not a unanimous vote. It was a very split vote (4-3) but it has come out of the Planning Commission with a recommendation. If the council is directing us to take it back to the community, it would then come back to you all after that happens. I can look at August dates if you are comfortable, I guess you need to give me some sense of how urgent you think this topic is , if it is a 60 day urgency that is fine with us; if it is a 90 day urgency that is fine with us. Councilmember Longoria I want to get done the work that we set out to do but at the same time I don 't want to give that there has been given this kind of feedback received , I want to give everybody the opportunity to take a look and comment and make sure that we incorporate those comments appropriately and things like that. City Manager Lagerbloom Absolutely. Councilmember Longoria I am fine with July but it seems to me like we might be behind the eight ball there. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman We don't want to say July and then end up having to defer it again. City Manager Lagerbloom If the council is so inclined , then why don 't you defer it with the direction to conduct X number and tell me how many community meetings you would like to have happen and then defer it for an August 1Oth work session, council review and then an August 1 ih on the zoning agenda for action. Councilmember Mohrig That's good. Councilmember Lusk I think that makes sense given what we are seeing here tonight with the lack of full council here especially during this time of year with people who are on vacation I think it is only justified to extend it for 60 days. Let's give everybody an opportunity to weigh in on it. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman We need to get this right. Councilmember Longoria So, should we have more than one meeting then with the community to give people options so that they don 't miss out? Mayor Pro Tern Thurman I think it would be nice to have two community meetings. Re g ular Meeting of the Milton Ci ty Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00 pm Page 13 of31 Councilmember Longoria I agree . Mayor Pro Tern Thurman And , then bring it back to us at the August work session and then to finalize what the community has said and then the 17th. City Manager Lagerbloom Okay , yes , if somebod y would wrap that into a motion that would be great direction . Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria made a motion to defer RZ 15-11 to be reviewed at the August 1 0, 2015 City Council Work Session and to be considered at the August 17 , 2015 Regular City Council Meeting and to hold two community meetings prior to August 17 , 2015. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood , Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. 3. Consideration ofRZ15-12 -Kings Close with Approximately 525 Feet of Frontage on the West Side Located in the 2nd District, 2nd Section in Land Lots 396 and 397 by Five Oaks Development, Inc. to Rezone from AG-1 (Agricultural) to R-2A (Residential) to Develop 5 Single Family Residences on 6.431 Acres with Minimum One Acre Lots. ORDINANCE NO. 15-06-252 (Agenda Item No. 15-155) (Fir st Presentation at Jun e 1, 2 015 City Co un cil Mee tin g) (Kathleen Fie ld, Co mm unity Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director Yes , thank you Madam Mayor Pro Tern and the Council. The first slide here shows the parcel outlined in red on the aerial photo The current zoning is AG-1. The future land use map shows it as private residential which is a mistake , which I will mention in a moment. The site plan was submitted on March 27 , 2015. The subject site contains 6.431 acres and is developed with one single family residence as well as a new street called Kings Close. The street is bisected with the Forsyth County Line . It is currently zoned AG-1 (Agricultural) and is accessed through The Manor Golf and Country Club via Watsons Bend. The site IS located within the "Private Recreation" designation of the City of Milton 2030 Comprehensive Plan Map . The subject site was not land within the golf course and therefore , mislabeled on the Plan Map. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to R-2A (Residential) to develop 5 , minimum one acre lot single family residences at an overall density of . 777 units per acre. The existing home will be tom down to allow a new structure on lot 75. Based on the applicant 's site plan submitted to the Community Development Department on March 27 , 2015 , Staff offers the following considerations: ~------~----------feet in height t ~--------~~------ Minimum side yard as follows: Adjacent to interior line: 15 feet Adjacent to street: 30 feet Proposed Development None indicated 60 feet 15 feet 30 feet (There are no side yards adjacent to a street) ~----~~----------------------------------------------------------------. ·- Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 14 of31 Minimum rear yard -40 feet Minimum lot area-27 ,000 sq.ft . Minimum lot width shall be 120ft. Minimum lot frontage shall be 35 feet adjoining a street Minimum heated floor area shall be as follows: For two-story dwelling : 1,800 sq.ft. or 40 feet I Acre 120 feet 35 feet Per the letter of intent-4 ,000 sq.ft. Pursuant to Sec 64-2392 , the Zoning Ordinance requires sidewalks which shall be constructed in accordance with the Department of Public Works standard plan which requires sidewalks on at least one side of the street. Within the City Code , Chapter 50 , Subdivisions, it is required that sidewalks within residential subdivisions be a minimum of 5 feet in width with a minimum 2 foot beauty strip between the sidewalk and the curb. The site plan does not indicate the required sidewalks, but a condition is included to provide a sidewalk on at least one side of the street. The storm water for this site will be addressed with the lake on the southern portion of the property. Homes within this development will be required to meet the Rural Milton Overlay District development standards. This includes maximum lot coverage of25 percent where fronting on private streets. This is based on a recent amendment of the Overlay by the Mayor and City Council. Otherwise, it appears that the development meets the requirements of the Overlay. The proposed rezoning will be subject to the same specimen tree preservation and tree density coverage as the existing zoning development standards. It appears that the 42" water oak between lots 71 and 72 should be preserved . It appears that some of the trees on lot 75 will be removed to build a new house. In terms of the impact on the Fulton County school board , the estimated number of new students generated by this development will range 2-6. In terms ofthe financial modeling, the net fiscal impact of this development over a twenty year period will total approximately $12,776. The Community Zoning Information meeting was held on April27 , 2015. The applicant was present. The meeting was held at Milton City Hall and there was no one in attendance for the subject site. Staff received the report on May 18 ,2015. The applicant's Public Participation Meeting was held on May 13 , 2015 between 5:00pm and 8:00pm at the Brumbelow-Reese offices located on Hwy 9. There was one person in attendance at the meeting. He was representing The Manor HOA and concerned that this property is not part of the Manor covenants. The applicant's attorney and the HOA attorney are trying to work out this issue. The City of Milton Courtesy Review Board meeting was held on May 5, 2015 and their opinion was that there appears to be no other solution for the site. The proposed 5 lot single family residential subdivision developed at a density of .777 units per acre is consistent with the adjacent development to the north, west and south within the City of Milton and The Manor Golf and Country Club which is zoned AG-1 and developed with minimum one acres lots. To the east in Forsyth County, it is zoned R2R which requires a minimum lot size of22,000 square feet. Further to the east, it is Zoned MPD (Master Plan Development) at a density of 1.84 units per acre. It is Staffs opinion that the proposed use and density is suitable with adjacent properties within the City. Staff does not anticipate a significant impact on public services or utilities. Comments from the Fulton County Board of Education are included in the report as it relates to the estimated number of new students. It is Staffs opinion that the proposal will not cause a burden on transportation facilities if approved with the Recommended Conditions. The Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6 :00pm Page 15 of31 proposed use density is Single Family Residential at .777 units per acre which is consistent with the zoning. Although the Plan Map recommends Private Recreation, it is believed it should have been designated Low Density Residential based on the designation for The Manor. This property was not a part of the golf course itself. In addition, the R-2A zoning designation is acceptable within the Low Density Residential designation. The proposed development is consistent with the adjacent development for lot size and density , but the applicant requested the R-2A designation to allow smaller side setbacks to be consistent with the opposite side of the road within Forsyth County. It is consistent with the 2030 Future Land Use Plan. The proposed 5 lot single family subdivision is consistent with the City of Milton 's 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan and adjacent and nearby properties. Therefore , Staff recommends Approval Conditional of RZ 15-12. Recommended Conditions: To the owner's agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows: • Single family detached dwellings and accessory uses and structures. • No more than 5 total dwelling units at a maximum density of .777 units per acre, whichever is less , based on the total acreage zoned. To the owner's agreement to abide by the following: • To the site plan received by the Community Development Department on March 27, 2015. Said site plan is conceptual only 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. Unless otherwise noted herein, compliance with all conditions shall be in place prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. • All areas which are not part of an individual lot and held in common shall be maintained by a mandatory homeowners association, whose proposed documents of incorporation shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and approval prior to the recording of the first fmal plat. To the owner 's agreement to the following site development considerations: • Minimum one acre lots. • Minimum heated floor area per unit-4 ,000 square feet To the owner's agreement to abide by the following requirements, dedication, and improvements: • Provide 5 foot sidewalk with 2 foot beauty strip on at least one side of internal streets. • Dedicate, at no cost to the city, at least 10.5 feet of right-of-way from the back of curb of all abutting road improvements , along the entire property frontage, as well as allow the necessary construction easements while right-of-way is being improved. 1. Proposed right-of-way shall be located no closer than one foot behind the back of sidewalk. To the owner's agreement to abide by the following: • Prior to the application for a land Disturbance Permit, the developer/engineer shall submit to the Department of Community Development a storm water Concept Plan. • The stormwater management facilities shall utilize earthen embankments, where possible . Walled structures are not encouraged. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Counci l Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 16 of31 And , that is my presentation. I will be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Do we have any questions for staff? Councilmember Lusk You just mentioned the storm water issue. Is this lake that is on the site or adjacent to the site existing? Kathy Field Carter, can you address that? Carter Lucas It is. Councilmember Lusk And , I think it was stated earlier in the presentation that the lake would serve for stormwater detention. Is that right? Kathy Field (Nods her head y es) Councilmember Lusk Also , is this fi ve lot development totally separate from the Manor, correct? Kathy Field Yes. Councilmember Lusk So , they would have their own HOA ? Kathy Field Robyn , do you want to respond in a little more detail? Robyn MacDonald You would have to ask the applicant to see what the intent is to see whether it would be a part of the HOA or not. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Anymore questions of staff? Councilmember Longoria You made a comment early on , Kathy , about , and I want to make sure I interpreted this correctly, that the owners of the golf club and the developer were trying to get together to make some decisions but I think I took it from your statement that they couldn 't see eye to eye and have ceased discussions or did I take that wrong. Re gular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00 pm Page 17 of31 Kathy Field It came up at one of the community meetings and it is our understanding that they are working through that but, again, I think that is a question for the applicant to find out the status of that. We don 't really have that status report. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Anymore questions for staff? If not , let 's hear from those that are speaking in support ofRZ15-12. Scott Reece, 13685 Highway 9, Milton, Georgia 30004 Madame Mayor Pro Tern and members of council , I am Scott Reece with Brumbelow Reece and Associates doing business at 13685 Highway 9, Milton , Georgia 30004. I am here tonight representing Five Oaks Development and Mr. Lou Renow and his application to rezone the property. I think staff has done an excellent job detailing what we are proposing here. The reason we are here is that the size of the houses have outgrown the lots with the 25 foot setbacks in the AG zoning . This particular plan is the same development guide that was proposed with the original master plan of the Manor Golf and Country Club. This particular piece of property was Dr. King 's personal residence who he was the major land owner of the property that became the Manor. It is a particular case where the center of the road is the county-city di viding line. The property east of the road in the same development is in Forsyth County with an R2-A zoning classification that allows 15 foot side setbacks. So , in trying to maintain uniformity in this particular subdivision, we are asking for all the setbacks to be adjusted to maintain uniformity from one side of the street to the other. You will notice that on the northern most proposed lot , we have maintained a 25 foot setback where we would not cause any undo aesthetics to the only lots that adjoin this particular subdivision. Those two lots were also developed by the applicant at an earlier date on their frontage on Watsons Bend. We went down this road , we could have developed it AG-1 and asked for variances for the sides that backs , but in our meeting with staff, Robyn recommended that we go this route especially since the property in Forsyth County has these same setbacks. So , that is where we are. We are asking for no variances , we are in compliance with the 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, we are one acre lots , we have community sewer, everything works on our development plans we address sidewalks, they are on both sides of the street, there is just not enough room to show everything graphicall y and everything be clear on the re-zoning plat but we are in complete compliance with that. The development plans have been submitted. The existing lake is going to be the detention pond so we are in agreement with staff. So , if there are an y more questions I will be glad to answer those. The applicant's attorney is here if you have an y questions as far as HOA matters or legal matters that are above my pay grade , I ask that you ask those questions to him specifically where we both don 't go down a path we don 't want to go down. Thank you. Stuart Teague, 110 Samaritan Drive, Suite 109, Cumming, Georgia 30004 Madam Mayor Pro Tern and city council , my name is Stuart Teague. I am an attorney for Five Oaks Development. The issues with regard to the HOA and the golf course ; we are in discussions with them. We actually did not know of the golf course objection to the site plan until Friday when they sent a letter and copied us on it stating that the y were not in agreement with the area of the easement shown on three of the lots on the site plan . We actually met with the prior owner of the golf course about eighteen months ago and worked out the present location that was showed on the site plan, regardless , we don 't think there is an issue with that easement and how ultimately it will be shown on the site plan. That is an issue that would be resolved before the final plat is approved . It is really not an issue for zoning so we would believe that is not something that the city council would be concerned with at this point but we do intend to work it out. With regard to the issue of declaration of covenants and the HOA , we are in discussions with the HOA. I have sent a proposed agreement to include these lots within the Manor Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00pm Page 18 of31 community to the association's attorney. Plans currently are to have a board meeting with the HOA and go in and discuss these issues but that is what the plan is. Conceivably there might be a circumstance where these lots would come in under a different association but that is not really what my client wants to do. So , if you have any questions , I will be more than happy to address them but I believe that sums it up. I would like to put the constitutional objections on the record that if the re-zoning were to be denied it would be a violation of due process , equal protections, and the taking clauses of the state and federal constitutions. If you have any questions I can answer them. Dan Hewitson, 15951 Manor Club Drive, Milton, Georgia 30004 Good afternoon Madam Mayor Pro Tern and members of the council. I am Dan Hewitson, Vice President of Operations for Club Corp. We own and operate the Manor at 15951 Manor Club Drive , Milton, Georgia 30004. We are not opposed to the re-zoning per say , there is an existing easement which was granted to the golf course prior owner back in January 18 , 2002 , it is called the King Easement area. It is 1.32 acres. As council had indicated , we sent notice to them that we feel the proposed site plan that was submitted to the city council impedes upon that and we just want to ensure that if any development that is allowed or any re-zoning is considered that the protection that we have for that easement and proximity to the green on that hole is preserved. So, we have made council aware and we want to make sure those rights are protected. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman I have a question for staff. City Manager Lagerbloom Can we have Mr. Teague speak during his remaining time first? Stuart Teague I really don't have anything else to add. We are going to work out the easement issue to the satisfaction of the golf course. I personally met the prior owners out there and walked it with the developer and what they are proposing is not something that is going to be a material issue to the golf course and I believe we can work through that. Scott Reece I just want to make sure that everyone is sufficiently aware that when the final plat is produced that the correct golf course easement will be depicted. A re-zoning plat is not at the same level or exhibit that the final plat will come under. When this document/exhibit was generated , we were under the impression that an agreement with the prior owner was going forth with the proposed easement but be assured the final plat when it comes out of our office will reflect after a comprehensive title report the correct either amendment or existing golf course easement. Each lot will be developed on an individual site plan that will show the correct location of the house , the area of disturbance, and all easements of record will be shown on each individual plat. So , I just want to assure you that the rezoning per the case will not dictate where the area of disturbance or any interference with the golf course easement. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Staff and the city attorney can confirm that as the proper procedure that before any land disturbance permit is issued that the proper easement will be reflected. l j ~-------------------------------------------------------------- Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00pm Page 19 of31 City Attorney Jarrard Mayor Pro Tern, everything I heard from both sides made a lot of sense to me that number one, the zoning concept plan is just that, a concept plan, to the extend there are recorded easements those just are and whatever the council does will not be able to affect those to the extent that they want to go build homes , they will have to be mindful of any easements that may impact that. That is just the way it is. But, I don't think that should get in your way of your land use decision. Councilmember Lusk Further to that point, is there any need for us, if we were to approve this rezoning, to base it conditional upon finalizing that easement or is that something that is just between them? City Attorney Jarrard I think that is going to happen irrespective of what the council does but, no I do not think you need to do that as part of your official action , if any, this evening. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Do we have any other questions? City Manager Lagerbloom Procedurally , can we just ask the gentleman from the golf course if he has any additional comments to use up his time then we can close the public hearing and then ask questions? Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Do you have any additional comments? Dan Hewitson I do not. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Okay , we will go ahead and close the public hearing. Do we have any additional questions of staff or those speaking in favor or against? You said it was your intent that the houses that will be built will be consistent with what is currently in the Manor and that eventually will probably become part of the Manor. Councilmember Mohrig And, the land disturbance permit is going to force the easement actually to be finalized before the actual placement of the houses. Carter Lucas Actually , it will be the final plat. City Manager Lagerbloom And , the easements that exist are going to continue to exist. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Regardless of what we do ... Regular Meeting of the Milton C ity Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00 pm Page 20 of31 City Manager Lagerbloom Regardless of what you do with the land; you could approve the rezoning and the land could almost become non-buildable because of an existing easement or a found easement at a later date. That is not your problem. Councilmember Mohrig It is their issue and where the y place the houses. City Manager Lagerbloom Correct. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Are there any additional questions ? Is there any additional discussion? Is there a motion and a second? Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to appro ve Agenda Item No. 15-155 . Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously ( 4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood, Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. 4. Consideration ofU15-03NC15-02 -2780 Bethany Bend by Bob Dike to Request a Use Permit for a Day Care Facility (Sec . 64-1809) for After School Program and Summer Camp within an Existing Church and a Concurrent Variance to Allow a Non-opaque Fence for the Playground enclosure [Sec. 64-1809(b )(3)]. ORDINANCE NO. 15-06-253 (Agenda Item No. 15-156) (Fir st Presentation at J une I , 2 015 City Co uncil Meeting) (Kathleen Fi eld, Co mm un ity Developm ent Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director Thank you , Mayor Pro Tern and members of the Council. The parcel is shown in front of you in red. The current zoning is AG-1. The 2030 Future Land Use map proposes use for this area to be "Community Facilities". Site plan submitted on March 27 , 2015 . The subject site is zoned AG-1 (Agricultural) and developed with a 120 seat church on 7.1266 acres. The applicant 's letter of intent received on March 27 , 2015 explains their plans for the proposed after school and summer camp programs. The programs will be operated by Wonderland International Learning Center. Students attending the after school program will be drawn from local elementary schools ranging in age from 5 to 12. There may be some tutoring classes offered for students from middle school and high school. The maximum number of students in the after school or summer camp would be 60. The church building has approximately 5,000 square feet. The after school program will utilize three class rooms , a large society room and the 2,100 square foot sanctuary. A flat open grass area of approximately 11 ,500 square feet in the rear ofthe church will be used for outside activities. A 1,024 square foot area in the rear of the open area will be dedicated to a playground facility. The grassy area and the playground will be enclosed with a 6 foot high decorative black aluminum fence. The applicant is seeking a concurrent variance to replace the required opaque fence with an aluminum vertical rail type fence . Based on the applicant's re vised site plan and revised letter of intent submitted to the Community Development Department on March 27 , 2015 , Staff offers the following considerations: We have looked at the standards that would be required for this use and there is only one they do not meet and Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 21 of3l that is the one about the minimum six-foot-high opaque fence which they are requesting a variance for. The applicant meets the standards for a Day Care with the exception of the request to construct a non- opaque fence around the playground. VC15-02-To allow a non-opaque fence for the playground enclosure The applicant is proposing a non-opaque fence to surround the playground. A black metal vertical fence was proposed. At the Design Review meeting they asked if a four board horse fence could be installed. The applicant is open to that if it looks good at six feet as required by code. Staff has found that the state does not allow for chicken wire for fencing which is used for equestrian fencing. It is Staffs opinion that installing a non-opaque fence is consistent with the goal of the city to limit opaque fences and walls , Staff recommends APPROVAL CONDITIONAL of VC15-02. The proposed site plan meets the requirements of the Rural Milton Overlay District. There are no specimen trees impacted by the development of the playground or fenced in area on the site. Two emergency exits leading from different sides of the fence surrounding the playground, but not through the building maybe required. In addition, the interior will need to be reviewed for compliance for fire code based on the educational function of the use. Community Zoning Information Meeting On April 28 , 2015 the applicant was present at the Community Zoning Information Meeting held at the Milton City Hall. There was one member of the community in attendance at the meeting. The following issues were brought up at the meeting: • The proposed after school program would produce too much traffic in the area. • When the church was originally approved in 1997 , there was not supposed to be any additional uses. (Staff notes that this was not in the conditions of zoning from 1997.) • The kids on the playground will disturb the adjacent neighbors. City of Milton Design Review Board Meeting Courtesy Review -May 5, 2015 • No primary colors. • Install four board horse fences, unless alternative is required by code. Public Participation Plan and Report The applicant held the required Public Participation Meeting at the Morning Star Chapel at 8:00pm on May 18 ,2015. There was no one from the community or other interested parties at the meeting. Use Permit Considerations The proposed use within the existing church is located in the land use category "Community Facilities" on the City of Milton 2030 Comprehensive Plan Map. The proposed use permit for day care facility is permitted in the AG-1 (Agricultural) district when it is associated with a church and is consistent with the Community Facilities land use category. Compatibility with land uses and zoning districts in the vicinity of the property for which the use permit is proposed: It is Staffs opinion that the proposed After School Program and Summer Camp uses are compatible with the adjacent and nearby properties if approved with the recommended conditions. The proposed use 's effect on the traffic flow , vehicular and pedestrian, along adjoining streets is minimal based on the estimate afternoon left turns into the site are 7 for drop off and 7 for pick up during the peak periods for the use. In addition, the average daily trips on Bethany Bend are 8,800 per -----·---------------------------------------------- Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00pm Page 22 of31 day and meets the threshold for a left turn lane. The drop off and pick up times will occur outside of both the school peak hour and evening peak hour. The proposed site provides adequate open space on the site if approved with the recommended conditions. The site meets the required buffers and landscape strips at the time ofthe approval of the Use Permit for the church. Since that time , the City has adopted the Rural Milton Overlay that requires a 75 foot undisturbed buffer and 1 0 foot improvement setback if additional square footage was proposed. The applicant is only adding a fenced playground area but the site plan indicates compliance with the 75 foot undisturbed buffer and 10 foot improvement setbacks adjacent to single family residential. In addition , the existing configuration of the site and vegetation meets the requirements of the Rural Viewshed that requires buildings to be 60 feet from the road. The following hours are proposed as indicated in the applicant's letter of intent: Monday through Friday -2:30p.m. to 7:00pm School Holidays -8:00a.m. to 7:00p.m. Summer Camp -8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. It is Staffs opinion that the above mentioned hours of operation are reasonable for the proposed uses and will be included in the Recommended Conditions. The proposed use will access the site using the existing drive way which includes a right turn lane on Bethany Bend. Utilizing the International Traffic Engineers trip generation rates for a daycare center based on 60 students, there are an estimated 25 a.m. entering trips for drop off and 23 p.m. entering trips for pick up. The distribution for entering vehicles is projected to be 70% westbound and 30% eastbound . If approved with the Recommended Conditions , the proposed after school program and summer camp associated with a church are consistent with the City of Milton 2030 Future Land Use Plan and Policies. Therefore, Staff recommends UlS-03 and VClS-02 be APPROVED CONDITIONAL. Recommended Conditions: 1) To the owner's agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows : a) An after-school and summer camp within the existing building for no more than 60 students. b) The hours of operation shall be the following: 1. After School Program Monday through Friday-2:30p.m. to 7:00pm School Holidays-8:00a.m. to 7:00p.m. 11. Summer Camp: Monday -Friday 8:00 a.m. -6:30p.m. 2) To the owner's agreement to abide by the following: To the site plan received by the Community Development Department on March 27 , 2015. Said site plan is conceptual only. 3) To the owner's agreement to the following site development considerations: Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 23 of31 a) No primary colors shall be used for the playground equipment. b) To allow non-opaque fencing for the playground. (VC15-02) Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Are there any questions from Staff? City Manager Lagerbloom Kathy, can you confirm that site plan was submitted to Staff in March or May? Kathleen Field March 27 , 2015 Councilmember Lusk On the opaque fence , is it your recommendation to go with a six-foot-high opaque fence? Kathleen Field No , our recommendation is to allow for the requested variance which is to put in an aluminum non- opaque fence. Councilmember Lusk Is it six-foot-high? Kathleen Field It is a requirement it has to be six-foot-high because it is a playground. The DRB asked if it could be a horse fence but they would have to put wire in between it and that is not allowed. Therefore, they could not meet the conditions that the DRB requested so they would rather put in an aluminum fence and not an opaque fence. Robyn MacDonald, Zoning Manager It would be similar to a wrought iron fence but made out of aluminum. Councilmember Lusk Any planting been addressed on the opposite side of fence next to neighbors? Robyn MacDonald There already exists over a 50 foot buffer so there is no need for any additional planting, it is well vegetated as is. Councilmember Lusk Isn 't there a state license that is required to operate one of these also ? Robyn MacDonald Yes , there is. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Are there any more questions from Staff? If not , we will first hear from all of those speaking in support ofU15-03NC15-02. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00pm Page 24 of31 Bob Dike, 1694 Foresta Court, Brookhaven, Georgia 30341 I am a member of the church, Morning Star, I have been the guy designated to spearhead this through zoning. I have learned a lot about zoning in the last three months. We totally agree with the variance for the non-opaque fence because it is going to be more in tune with what the City of Milton has in terms of its architect. The playground is going to be way back of the church, so you will not even see the playground or the fence from the road. It will be similar to Kings Ridge fence around their playground but will probably be six feet tall. We are of course in agreement that any playground structure would have earth colors that would fit within the community too. Thank you. Councilmember Mohrig Does the ground drop off behind the church? Bob Dike The playground is below grade level if you are looking at it at from street level. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman I would like to see one change made and that is with the hours of operation. Fulton County seems to change start and end times so I think it should state earliest ending time of the closest public schools. Is that something we can adjust? Robyn MacDonald Do you want to say elementary school? Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Yes. Chris Lagerbloom I would like to make one further amendment that we are specifying Fulton County Schools. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Are there any other comments? Do we have a motion? Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria approved U15-03NC15-02 with the rev1s1on to the language to include that opening times on school days reflect Fulton County elementary school schedules and all other recommended conditions presented by staff. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood, Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consideration of an Ordinance of the City Council to Authorize Fulton County to Conduct Election. ORDINANCE NO. 15-06-250 (Agenda Item No. 15-157) (First Pres entation at Jun e 1, 2015 City Coun cil Mee ting) (Ken Jarrard, City Attorney) Regular Meeting of the Milton Ci ty Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00 pm Page 25 of 31 Ken Jarrard, City Attorney Madam Mayor Pro Tern and members of Council , I want to thank you this evening. You have the ordinance of the City Council to authorize Fulton County to conduct elections as well as a proposed Intergovernmental Agreement to address that issue. Council is aware , November 3 , 2015 there will be municipal elections for which is appropriated under Georgia codes to contract with the county, Fulton County, to conduct those elections. This is an Intergovernmental Agreement, much like what the city has had in place previously . It anticipates certain fees associated with that such as the General Election fee of roughly $52 ,000 with a General Run-OffElection Fee roughly of$48,000. There is also a truing up process that is anticipated in the Intergovernmental Agreement to make sure we are only responsible for the actual cost under the Intergovernmental Agreement. Mayor and Council , this is something you have done before, and after reviewing this , I am in full concurrence with it. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Do we have any questions ? Councilmember Lusk Is this a prepaid fee? Sudie Gordon, City Clerk Year to year , I have worked out with Fulton County that we would only pay the General Election, not the Special Election and that is prepaid. Ken Jarrard But there is a truing up on the backend. Sudie Gordon They hold it in a reserve account and what is not used is refunded back to us within 120 days after the election is certified, usuall y around February. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman If the election is cancelled as it was in previous years , we get the full amount refunded? Sudie Gordon Last year , it cost us $7 ,000 for registration and reproducing cards, due to redistricting. This year we could have some paper costs and staff costs associated with it, but majority would be refunded if cancelled. Mayor Pro Tern Thurman Do we have a motion? Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to approve Agenda Item No. 15-157. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously ( 4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood, Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. --------·---~ ------------------------------------......, Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6:00pm Page 26 of31 NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of an Inter-Agency Agreement between the City of Milton, Georgia and the Greater North Fulton Chamber of Commerce , Inc. d/b/a Progress Partners North Fulton Atlanta. (Agenda Item No. 15-167) (Sarah La Dart, Economic Development Manager) Sarah LaDart, Economic Development Manager Good evening. We had Bethany Usry, from Progress and Partners, come talk to you all at the beginning of the month. You have in front of you the agreement we discussed at the work session. Chris Lagerbloom There is not much of a presentation to make tonight, rather more of a follow-up from the work session. There is some concern that not all the cities in North Fulton are participating in this regional economic development tool. If we do continue to participate and pay for this agreement, I would like to see a different level of service than those who are not participating. Conceptually , it makes good sense because we are a part of the region and we do play off of each city's successes . From your perspective , do you want to continue this agreement next year at the cost of $25 ,000? Councilmember Longoria Do you know why the other cities are not participating? Chris Lagerbloom It is mostly the cities feel that their resources that are attributed to economic development are better spent in house than they would be spent in a more regional opportunity . If you go to Progress Partners website , you will see all the North Fulton cities listed , so they are getting the same level of exposure without the cost. I really do not have an answer for you. Pro Tern Mayor Thurman I agree, it is a great program but at the same time I would like to see us receive something more than the other cities that do not participate. This is our fourth year participating which means we have invested $100 ,000 that the other cities have not, so I would like to receive some benefit for that. Sara LaDart We are supposed to be a unified group of six cities and if only three cities (Alpharetta, Milton and Roswell) are paying for this agreement then you are not presenting to the public a unified North Fulton. We are working toward finding ways where Milton may receive benefits without it being an un-unified front. This is tricky and we are working on this. Councilmember Lusk Don 't we have another line item here for membership to the chamber? Chris Lagerbloom Correct. Councilmember Lusk Do these other five cities contribute to the membership to the chamber also? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00 pm Page 27 of31 Sara LaDart In 2012, they all were members. That is my best knowledge of that. Councilmember Lusk What is then the function ofthe Chamber of Commerce then? Ken Davis, 470 Whispering Lane, Alpharetta, Georgia Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce We are the catalyst for the economic development for North Fulton. We recognize the challenge that this Council has just stated in terms of making their spare and equitable contributions. We are working on that with you and the other cities. We try to be that umbrella organization that will represent all of North Fulton from economic development perspective , bringing in the real estate developers and attending conferences driving business to North Fulton. Councilmember Lusk So in membership to the Chamber, you have currently and for the last six years been representing all six cities , is that correct? Ken Davis Yes, that is correct. Councilmember Lusk I have a hard time understanding why we are paying an additional membership fee, when everyone who is in this program together through regular membership fees , are being represented by you no matter if they are paying this additional fee to Progress Partners? Ken Davis When Progress Partners was formed, it was formed specifically for the economic function and we designated the funds that were contributed to that separate from a membership so we could use those funds to be used for economic development and not the general operations ofthe Chamber. The membership fee goes to support operations and marketing the Chamber. Pro Tern Mayor Thurman Do we have any further questions? Olivia Ibrahim, 11605 Haynes Bridge Road, Alpharetta, Georgia 30022 I know that geographically that North Fulton consists of the six cities but moving forward based on comments from city council meetings, we are doing are best to represent only the cities that are contributing financially. For example, we are only including the logos from the cities that are contributing in the Atlanta Business Chronicle North Fulton Market Report ads. In our quarterly News Letter, we are only including information on the cities that are financially contributing. Pro Tern Mayor Thurman I think it should be all in or all out and not allow the cities to pick and choose what they want to pay for or what advertisement they want to be included. It should be all or nothing. Councilmember Lusk How are you all going to improve this situation to make it more equitable? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6 :00 pm Page 28 of31 Ken Davis That is an ongoing task and challenge, Bill. That is why we got the inter agency agreement to define for the cities and deliver specifics but it is an ongoing challenge . Chris Lagerbloom To create accountability, I would like to suggest Progress Partners provide reports to the city on their performance and activities in the contract. Councilmember Lusk I have not read the contract recently , but if we are going to have a report I would like something more specific than as general as it has been in the past. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria made a motion to approve Agenda Item No. 15-167 which includes quarterly reporting from Progress Partners to the City Council. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood , Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting . MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS STAFF REPORTS Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager The 90 day moratorium that is in place to not accept applications for land disturbance permits for certain residential development areas expires July 12 , 2015 . We will have one more opportunity at Council Meeting, July 6 , 2015 , to have Council act ifthey choose to extend or not this moratorium. What are your thoughts on this? Pro Tern Mayor Thurman It sounds like we should advertise it and discuss it at that July 6, 2015 meeting. Chris Lagerbloom Perfect. Thank you for that. Also just to bring to your attention about the signs of the Children 's Learning Adventure on Cogburn Road. I sent a letter to their corporate office outlining our concerns late last week. The sign that appears through the front window was a material omission in the design and review packet. At this point, the City strongly requests the company to return to the Design and Review Board and follow the DRB 's direction. We are starting there and trying to continue a community positive relationship with the company. We thought this was our best first step and just wanted to let you know that the letter has gone out. Department Updates 1. Fire Mark Stephens, Deputy Fire Chief • You have in front of you the monthly and year-to-date statistics , do you have any questions? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 ,2015 at 6 :00pm Page 29 of31 • I am proud to say we got our final numbers back from the Muscular Dystrophy Association on our 2015 Boot Drive and we officially raised $74,149 which is $2000 increase over last year's total. We are very proud ofthat and want to thank the motorists , the citizens of Milton and the visitors that travel our roadways for their generosity, as well as , the efforts of the long days and hard work of the firefighters put in pounding the streets. • Our technical large animal rescue team saved a 1500lb. bull from a well in south Fulton County. We tried coaching over the phone but were not successful. We were already gathered for our annual training with Cherokee County off ofi-575 so we headed from there to go rescue the animal , making the local and CNN news. • Matt Marietta was selected to participate in the research project for the International Association of Fire Chiefs , FSTAR. This is a national committee put together with leaders in the fire service. We are very proud that our Fire Marshall, Matt Marietta, was selected. • With help from the police department we met with Jim Cregge and conducted a tactical survey of Providence Park identifying hazards , learning the topography and mapping the area, so we are more prepared if there is an issue. 2. Finance Stacey Inglis, Assistant City Manager • The New Business Module is currently in place and running very smoothly. The Finance staff is very pleased with it. • Tax Sale was scheduled for June 2 , 2015 but was cancelled because the property taxes were paid or there was some additional work needed to be done due to properties being too large. • Two of our staff members went to the county and had a meeting about the tax digest. We did receive the preliminary consolidated tax digest. The numbers are up from last year. County wide assessments are up a greater amount than in the past, so they anticipate more appeals this year. Not sure what this means for the City of Milton but they did not specify where the increase carne from. • Finance team is also working with Tyler Technologies on property tax module for the current version of financial software we are in. We will be able to give input and help make the software better for the City of Milton. 3. Information Technology David Frizzell, IT Manger • We are seeing an uptrend in the number of tickets. We had 111 last month as opposed to 96 the month before. People are using the help desk more now. • We did not have any outages except for normal maintenances. • We are moving forward with upgrades as we move to cloud deployment. Councilmember Longoria In terms of the VC3 engagement, have they taken over the management of all our applications we identified for them or are we in that process? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15,2015 at 6:00pm Page 30 of31 David Frizzell From the day we signed the contract in October, we began interim support which means they support everything we have in place. We are still in the process of getting their circuit cut over, with final test and cut over scheduled for Tuesday. We are taking a gradual approach instead of a full cutover. Councilmember Longoria Is this a dedicated circuit to their facility? David Frizzell Yes it is. We have five circuits for phones and there will be an additional circuit that just handles traffic between here and their data center. They will also have a public access for people who want to work from home. 4. Innovation & Engagement Jason Wright, Director of Innovation & Engagement • It looks like our web page view numbers went through the floor but that is mostly from us switching to the new web site. • The web site has been up for a month and everyone has been contributing to keep it all working smoothly. We are still catching a few little things here and there and I appreciate everyone's help with that. • I have moved on to virtualizing some of our processes with GovOffice, our online ticket payment provider. We have a test site built and are testing our processes . • Meritage System through SafeBuilt will still handle our heavier processed items. We have a meeting on the 25th. Meritage does not have the scope of what we are looking to do in the community, as of yet, so we are going to work with them on building such a system. 5. Human Resources Sam Trager, Director of Human Resources • The numbers have stayed the same as most months. • We did have one termination. Tom Gillam took a job as Director of Parks and Recs for the City of Canton. • We did have one lost time accident. We had a police officer injured on the job during on-training exercise. He is going to be out six weeks , returning to light duty near July 1, 2015. He is recovering and on the mend. • Started the process of updating all of our class specs internally. Working with the departments making sure they are up to date. • Our insurance provider met with us today and looked at all our property appraisals and insuring our buildings for the correct amounts. • Later this week, I have a meeting to kick off our health insurance renewal with our benefit broker. Chris Lagerbloom One other thing we are looking at is moving our court from this facility to the Alpharetta/Crabapple Government facility. We are just starting these discussions to see if they would have space for us. I will be back to the Council with a report/recommendation if it looks like it is moving forward. ---------------------- Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, June 15 , 2015 at 6:00 pm Page 31 of31 ADJOURNMENT (Agenda Item No. 15-168) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 8:34 p.m. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously ( 4-0). Mayor Joe Lockwood, Councilmember Kunz and Councilmember Hewitt were absent from the meeting. Date Approved: July 6, 2015 Sudie AM Gordon, City Clerk