Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 03/07/2016 - MINS 03 07 16 REG (Migrated from Optiview)I I I Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday , March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page I of 16 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 March 7, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding. INVOCATION Pastor Robert O'Hara, Boiling Springs Primitive Baptist Church of Christ -Milton, Georgia CALL TO ORDER Mayor Joe Lockwood called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present: Councilmember Thurman, Councilmember Kunz , Councilmember Lusk, Councilmember Hewitt, Councilmember Longoria, and Councilmember Mohrig. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Led by Mayor J oe Lockwood) APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA (Agenda Item No. 16-049) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve the Meeting Agenda with the following changes: • Add an Executi ve Session to discuss Personnel. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passe d unanimously (7-0). PUBLIC COMMEN T Judge Sterling Eaves, 1030 Kentucky Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30306 I am here tonight to let you know that I am running for Fulton County Superior Court. I came here to make you aware of that fact and to tell you and the great citizens of Milton that there is a non- Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 2of16 partisan election coming up on the 24" of May. I don't believe anybody in this group is up for re-I election but that will also make it very boring for the City of Milton. I do not think there are any referendums or anything . Judges are "down ballot." That means , please go to the end of the ballot and vote because the judges are there. This year , Fulton County has three judges that are retiring from the Superior Court. I am running for one of those positions. This is the week of qualification and to my knowledge nobody is opposed that is currently sitting. So , I just wanted to introduce myself, tell you that I live in the great city of Atlanta at 1030 Kentucky Avenue and we would love to have you come down there and bring your horses. Thank you. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of the February 8, 2016 City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 16-050) (Sudie Gordon , City Clerk) 2 . Approval of the February 17, 2016 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 16-051) (Sudie Gordon, City Clerk) 3. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Signature Research , Inc. for the Evaluation of Three Bridges at Providence Park. (Agenda Item No. 16-052) (Jim Cr egge, Parks & Recreation Direc tor) 4. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton and EcoFlo, Inc . for Milton 's Household Paint and Chemicals Collection Event (HPCC) on March 19 , 2016. (Agenda Item No. 16-053) (Teres a Stickels , Su s tainability Coo rdinator) 5. Approval of a Contract with eCivis , Inc . for a Two-Year Subscription to Web-Based Grants Management Software. (Agenda Item No. 16-054) (Stacey In g li s, Ass istant City Mana ger) 6. Approval of a Construction Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Prime Contractors , Inc. for Court Renovations. (Agenda Item No. 16-055) (Cart er Lu cas, As sis tant City Mana ger) 7. Approval of a Construction Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Blount I Construction Company , Inc. for Asphalt Reconstruction and Resurfacing. I (Agenda Item No. 16-056) (Cart er Lu cas, Ass istant C ity Mana ger) I I I Regular Meeting of the M ilton City Co uncil Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 3of16 8. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement be tween the City of Milton and Barge, Waggoner, Sumner & Cannon , Inc. for the Design of Hopewe ll Road at Re dd Road Turn Lanes. (Agenda Item No. 16-057) (Carter Lu cas, Ass istant C ity Mana ger) Motion and V ote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve all the Consent Agenda Items . Counci lmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7 -0). REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation Recognizing Boiling Springs Primitive Baptist Church of Chri st. (Pr es ented by Mayor J oe Lockw oo d) 2 . Proclamation Recognizing Sunshine on a Ranney Day Nonprofit. (Pr esent ed by Mayor J oe Lockw ood) 3. Proclamation Recognizing Georgia City-County Management Association 's 60th Anniversary. (Pr es ented by Mayor J oe Lockwo od) FIRST PRE SE N TATION 1. Consideration of ZM16-01 -Southeast Corner of Birmingham Road and Birmingham Highway Containing 22.30 Acres Currently Zone d MIX (Mixed Use) and AG -1 (Agricultural) by Oak Hall Companies , LLC to Modify Condition 2.a. to Revise the Site P lan to Delete Retail Buildings A long Birmingham Highway and Rep lace with Townhomes (RZ04 -0116 and ZM14 -06). (Agenda Item No. 16-058) (Kathlee n Fi eld, Co mmun ity Developm ent Dir ect or) Motion and V ote: Counci lmember Lusk moved to approve the Fi r st Presentation Agenda Item . Counci lmember Kunz seconded the mot ion. The motion passed unanimously (7 -0). P UBLIC H EARING (No n e) ZONING AGENDA (None) UNFINI SHED B U SIN E SS (None) Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 4of16 NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of a Resolution of the Mayor and Council of Milton, Georgia Regarding a Park and Green Space Bond . RESOLUTION NO. 16-03-368 (Agenda Item No. 16-059) (Ken Jarrard, City Attorney) Ken Jarrard, City Attorney This item is a resolution that I recommended that we adopt. The city council has expressed an interest in possibly going out for a general obligation debt that, of course , the voters would have to approve in the November election. In order to do that , there is a lot of work that has to go into a debt issue placement on a ballot. There is a critical path that we have to adhere to. There is a lot of fact finding to do. There is a lot of community involvement, analysis with respect to the use of proceeds, etc. So , I recommend that the council gives their formal seal of approval with respect to all the work that will have to go into this so that we have something in writing . This does not commit the city to anything , in fact , it is filled with opportunities for discretion and flexibility. It does say , however, that we want staff and the city attorney to begin working on all of the things I that need to be done before the November election. The result will be a General Obligation Bond I Issuance for purposes of park and green space acquisition improvements , etc. on the November ballot. The amount is no less than $25 million subject to voter approval. It would also entail a selection of bond council and I am requesting that we use Roger Murray of the firm Murray Barnes Finister LLP. He is an expert at debt issuance and I have used his services many times before. I am asking that he be ratified by the council and that we begin working with him with respect to this issue. Mr. Murray will only get paid if the bond is successful. Councilmember Kunz Just for clarification, the voter approval would have to be 50% plus one of whoever votes , correct? City Attorney Jarrard Correct. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-059. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). I I I I Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 5of16 2 . Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton and the Trust for Pub lic Land Regarding Conservation Finance Research. (Agenda Item No. 16-060) (Kathleen Johnson, Conservation Project Manager) K ath y John so n, Co nserva ti on Pr oj ect Ma nage r The purpose of this professional services agreement is to hire a consultant for the Trust for Public Land to perform conservation finance research for the city. This is related to the resolution that Mr. Jarrard just discussed. This research will consist of conducting a feasibility study to determine funding mechanisms including a bond and other funding options for conservation greenspace areas within Milton. In addition to the feasibility study , the consultant will conduct a professionally administered statistically valid public opinion survey which will test specific knowledge and language level of voter support for land conservation funding , purposes for the use of funds the voters find most compelling, support for bond issue of varying amounts and accountability me a sures that may be incorporated into the ballot measure. After those tasks are completed , the consultant will then make a presentation to the city on key research findings and poll results and recommend a conservation finance strategy for the city. Then, if the city decides to move forward with the bond and ballot measure , the consultant will advise on the crafting of the ballot language using the statutory parameters, provide examples of successful ballot questions, and will consult with our bond counsel as necessary. Councilm e mb er L usk If we are to approve this tonight , how does TPL (Trust for Public Land) fit in with our schedule that we have already established? Kathy John son As soon as the contracts are signed , if both parties agree , they will finish all of this work between 4 -6 weeks from the t ime that they start. So , it will correspond and go along the same timeline as the Planning Commission is taking public input for the criteria. I will be able to talk to them during that time when they are doing the polling and I can use some of their polling survey results. Hopefully, that will be before the Planning Commission is finished with their input and I can use that in conjunction with the Planning Commission. C ity Attorn ey J a rr a rd The contact in front of you tonight has a capped amount of $30 ,000 and also provides a termination clause with 30 days advance notice. The only difference between what was in your packet and the document that I handed out tonight , by the way if you adopt this tonight it will be the version that I handed out, is that there is a letter that TPL is asking for the city to provide technical advice and assistance . Mo tion and V ote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-060 . Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday , March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 6of16 3. Consideration of a Resolution of the Mayor and Council of Milton , Georgia Regarding Legislative Annexation. (Agenda Item No. 16-061) (Ken Jarrard, City Attorney) Ken Jarrard, City Attorney As the city is aware , we are part of the General Assembly and it can modify the contours of a city by taking action. In some respects, that has been requested . You should have a tax map in front of you tonight. On this map, you will see a large outlined and colored parcel numbered 12225. This parcel is in the City of Milton and there is a road , King Circle , which passes through the parcel. The property owner has requested to do some things to this property that are not allowed by the City of Milton. Therefore , the property owner has petitioned Roswell to request that this parcel be de-annexed from the City of Milton and become part of the City of Roswell . This would require General Assembly approval. The City of Roswell is asking the City of Milton if this is something you want to do . If not, then they will not take any further action. PUBLIC COMMENT Harvey Smith, 12225 King Circle, Milton, Georgia 30004 I appreciate the opportunity to make a presentation tonight. I have already spoken to most of you personally. I own the property in question. My original desire was to ask for a variance regarding the three-acre minimum lot size requirement next to an unpaved road. I had meetings and discussions with the former City Manager, Chris Lagerbloom , as well as with Carter Lucas , Assistant City Manager and the Mayor. Chris called me back after our last meeting and indicated that he wasn't sure that a variance could be granted. I am looking for the simplest way to achieve my goal for the property which is to have the option to sub-divide the property one day in the future. King Circle naturally sub-divides the property. The person that I bought the property from granted the right-of-way deed to Fulton County in 1964. So , there is a 60 by 900 foot right-of- way that was granted back then . It has been two separate parcels since 1964. I have been told by various zoning attorneys that it is almost an in-defensible case. I am not a litigious person but I am trying to use a common sense approach to being able to build a personal house on one side of the road rather than the other. The code makes it almost a taking of one part of the property. There is a 1.6 acre lot or 2.6 acre lot that I can't do anything with. So, I am just trying to remedy that the simplest way possible. It was just a suggestion to consider de-annexation since the property is on the border of the City of Roswell. One parcel touches the City of Roswell in two areas , the east side of the property touches two other parcels, so it is a prime candidate for de-annexation. If that is the simplest solution then I am all for that. If a variance could be granted , I would be happy to do that as well. Whichever solution is the simplest. I am just trying to accomplish my goal for the property with the least amount of trouble for everyone in volved. Tom Haire, 12180 King Circle, Milton, Georgia 30004 My wife , Kathy , and I own the property that is directl y behind Mr. Smith 's property. Before he bought the property , Mr. Smith knew that the road went right through it and he knew the I I I I I I Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 7of16 stipulations for the property in the City of Milton. Part of the reason that we put our house in Milton is for those types of restrictions . Kathy did a lot of work to get that part of our property in the City of Milton instead of Roswell. The last thing we want is to have Roswell property in the front of our property . We have about 50-70 feet adjacent to Mr. Smith's property and our driveway runs adjacent to that area. We are opposed to Mr. Smith 's request for his property to become part of the City of Roswel l. Scott Gronholm , 12200 Ki ng Circl e, M il ton , Geo rgia 3 000 4 I am proud to say that my propert y is on the most southern tip of Milton . Kathy was very instrumental in getting us into the City of Milton. One of the issues that I see with Mr. Smith's request to de -annex his property from the City of Milton , is that would put me on an island in the City of Roswell. So, I do not think that is right to do. I had hoped it would not have come to this point. We were hoping that the Smith 's would just build one personal house for their enjoyment and be happy with what they knew about the property limitations when they bought it. I was hesitant to come to this meeting tonight because I do not want to create an adversarial relationship with a future neighbor. However, I had looked at buying the property in question and connecting part of it to mine and selling off the other part of it but I was told that was not a possibility; that the property could not be sub-divided . So , I was worried that a developer would come in and build two houses and I'm afraid that is what Mr. Smith is requesting to do . Another concern I have is that Mr. Smith previously spoke with me about this situation and he indicated that the City of Roswell only requires one acre to be adjacent to a gravel road which would allow this property to be divided into three parcels. One new house and neighbor is fine with me but to allow potentially three more houses to be built on the gravel road is not conducive to our quality of life. If you live on a gravel road , you know that it creates dust and a mess , especially when it rains , and I do not want any more traffic coming up and down the road . I love living on a gravel road and that is one of the things that attracted me to Milton was the ability to live on a gravel road and have a rural way of life . Some of the questions I have are: What has changed since he bought the property that would allow for his request to be granted? And , what does Roswell allow that Milton does not allow? I would appreciate you answering these questions for me. May or L oc kw ood Ken , I would like to ask a question , legally , obviously , we have two issues here ; (1) the request for de -annexation which is not necessarily anything against the City of Milton but that the property owner could sub-divide the property based on the City of Roswell codes. So , the item that is before us tonight , for either approval or denial , is the request for de-annexation? We are not making a decision about sub-d ividing the property and whether or not that can be done. We are only making a decision on the applicant 's request to de-annex his property. Co uncilm e mb er T hurm an I spent a lot of time working with Kathy to try to get these areas into the City of Milton; many days and nights. And , I am having a hard time figuring out how allowing this de-annexation is in the best interest of the rest of the city; the other residents of Milton that we have a fiduciary responsibility to represent. I am not understanding how we could vote in favor of something that would not be in the best interest of all the other residents of Milton. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 8of16 Councilmember Lusk All we have is a tax map in front of us. I haven 't seen a map that defines the political boundaries in this area which leads to the question, if, in fact , this de-annexation passes , would it create an island for these other properties? We have talked about creating islands in the past, maybe Ken could comment on that process and procedure. It seems to me , we have prohibited it, if not discouraged , something like that in the past. City Attorney Jarrard Typically , where you see the discussion of these islands is in the context of the city annexing unincorporated islands which affects things like service delivery , etc. However, whether it has been policy is up to you. To the extent that the General Assembly decides to leave an island of an annexed property within the middle of another annexed property , we know from experience that the General Assembly can do that because they did it when they created Milton within the context of a park. My point is that there is state law that when cities annex there are obligations with respect to things that the city creates when it annexes . The General Assembly can do as it wants to; if it wants to do this it has every power to do it. However , it is my understanding that Roswell will not even move forward on this request if it is not something that Milton wants to do. Councilmember Lusk I When Milton was created , there were existing islands within the area so to my question ; is the I General Assembly in favor of creating new islands ? City Attorney Jarrard I do not know. Councilmember Lusk Since this represents , in my opinion, a re-zoning , was this advertised? Were the neighbors advised of this proposed action ? City Attorney Jarrard No , because your decision tonight will not have the effect of anything other than letting Roswell know that you are either in favor or denial of this request. After that decision is made, then it is in the hands of Roswell. However, your point is well taken in respect to the fact that there would be legislation that brings the property into the City of Roswell. If approved , the property would become part of Roswell 's zoning codes which would be a change of zoning in which case there would need to be some form of notice to the neighboring properties. At this time , however , none of those things have occurred . Councilmember Lusk If this action were to proceed and this parcel became subject to the ordinances and codes of the City of Roswell , what rights would the surrounding property owners that are in Milton have against the rezoning application ? I I I I Regular Meeting of the M ilton City Council Monday, March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 9of16 Ci ty Attorney Jarrard They would have the right to participate in whatever formal zoning action is taken , typically a pub li c hearing . I have seen limited success in these types of situations . Councilmemb e r Lu sk In p lacing this parcel in another jurisdiction, what are the issues surrounding surface on either side of this parcel such as maintenance of the road through the parcel. I see a responsi bility issue between the two jurisdictions . And , also service from fire and police , as they pass from Milton into Roswell and back into Milton again. City Attorney Jarrard Typically , with respect to right-of-way , when a new jurisdiction becomes annexed on both sides of the right -of-way, the typical rule is that the city that it was annexed into owns the right-of-way on bo th sides . With respect to public safety , you see a lot of those type of situations when there are properties that ab ut two cities . It is usuall y worked out through an MOU or IGA so that there are no lapses in service . Councilmember Longoria What kind of precedent does this set for other landowners who are on the fringe of the city limits of Milton who may change ownership and the new owner decides they would rather be part of Roswell ? Ci ty A ttorn ey Jarrard You really do not see this issue too much in regard to land use. I have not seen many cases like this . However, if you approve this tonight you might very well see another request like this in the future. Councilmember Longoria It seems like we could work through this iss ue internally and not through a de -annexation process . Councilmember Kunz I agree with Joe Longoria . We need to look at the situation and see what we can do versus ero ding the boundaries of the city. Councilmember Hewitt Are there other options we can look at ? Ci ty Attorn ey Jarrard The City of Milton codes and ordinances are prohibiting the property owner from doing something he wou ld like to do with the property. The option of a variance did not seem to work after consulting with staff but the council has the ability to loosen up a code or ordinance . In this case , maybe a text amendment wo uld be a more appropriate course of ac tion. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday , March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 10of16 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to deny Agenda Item No. 16-061 and requested that staff consider a creative solution to legislative annexation. Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion . All councilmembers denied the agenda item and the motion passed unanimously for denial (7-0). 4. Consideration of Possible Ratification of a Settlement Agreement Between the City of Milton and T-Mobile to Resolve Litigation and Otherwise Authorize the Erection of a Telecommunications Tower at 14495 Hopewell Road. (Agenda Item No. 16-062) (Ken Jarr ard, City Attorn ey) Ken Jarrard, City Attorney I I bring this agenda item to you tonight as required by the Open Meetings Act as well as the City of Milton policy . It is a request for ratification of a proposed settlement agreement that is the product of mediation that was mandated by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The case has some longevity to it. This is the product of three telecommunication applications that were brought to us by T-Mobile several years ago. Kelly Hundley is the attorney who has represented the city throughout the entire process and he is here tonight to give his final remarks regarding this very I long process of litigation. Kelly Hundley, Esq., Kelly Michael Hundley, LLC, Two Ravinia Drive, Suite 500, Atlanta, Georgia 30346 As Ken stated, this item started back in 2010. It started with three cell tower applications; two of which were denied out right by the Mayor and Council , one was conditionally approved. That resulted in litigation that has now been through a mediation process and in the course of all of this , one of those towers was abandoned by T-Mobile and the tower that was conditionally approved , T-Mobile agreed to build it as you had requested and approved back in 2010. That left one tower in question located at 14495 Hopewell Road . The matter was fought vigorously through the district court and the district court concluded that T-Mobile had a right to the cell tower permit that it had requested for a 150 foot tall cell tower accompanied by a four foot lightning rod and a 50 ' by 50' fenced equipment compound. It was going to be your typical looking cell tower; not the camouflaged/tree looking tower. It was really going to stand out which is one of the main reasons why we fought so hard against it. In the mediation that was mandated by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals , we had a proposal that was presented to us after some discussion with T-Mobile. I want to preface what is going to be my recommendation to accept it; the notion that convincing a Court of Appeals to reverse a district court one time is a difficult proposition; convincing the court to do it two times in the same case is an even more difficult proposition. If you look at the landscape of the law as it applies to the appeal , there is every reason to believe that the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals would simply agree with the District Court that T-Mobile is entitled to its cell tower I permit. The product of the mediation was the settlement agreement that you have that would essentially authorize the erection of a cell tower at that location , however , it will be camouflaged I I I Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday , March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 11 of 16 as an artificial tree known as a monopine. It would not be as audacious looking as what had orig inally been proposed that mitigates to some extent the visual impact it would have. The main reason I recommend approval of the settlement agreement is this primary reason. If you loose on appeal , the city wou ld get the 150 foot tower that was originally proposed ; not a monopine . Even if we won on appeal , the likelihood is still that at some point in the not too distant future , they city would end up with a cell tower at that location. Even if T-Mobile were to lose the case on appeal, it would undoubtedly come back to the city and pursue another cell tower permit. That permit request would adhere to your current ordinance which allows an even taller and larger tower at that location. I do no t know for certain that they would pursue another cell tower permit, but it is certainly something that would be available for them to do . It pains me to say that this is one of those rare occasions where we are having to pick between the lesser of two evils. In this situation, win or lose, the city is likely to end up with another cell tower. Approving this settlement agreement tonight , g ives you some measure of control over what type of tower is going to be erected at that site. As opposed to hoping in the future if the city wins , T-Mobile would decide they don't need a cell tower or they decide to build something other than what would be permissible under your current cell tower ordinance which would allow a 195 foot tower as opposed to a 150 foo t tower. So, for all those reasons , I am recommending tonight that you vote to approve this cell tower agreement and bring this matter to a conclusion. M otion a nd V ote : Councilmember Kunz moved to approve Agenda Item No . 16-062. Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). 5. Consideration of a Memorandum of Understanding between Crown Castle NG East, Inc. and the City of Milton, Georgia Related to Small Cell Technology . (Agenda Item No. 16-063) (Ken J arrard, City Att orn ey) K en Jarrard, C ity A ttorn ey This item began in a 2014 resolution , in fact , that resolution is in your agenda packet tonight. It is a resolution by the City of Milton that authorized the utilization of the city 's right of way pursuant to state law with respect to Crown Castle NG East, Inc. State law anticipates that these entities, telecommunication providers , have the right to petition a request for the use of our right-of-way; and they pursued this allowance in 2014. Now, they want to install small cell technology improvements within the city's right of ways . In your packet is a co lor photograph which shows you what these type of installations look like. At the present time , there are 22 permits that have been tendered for small cell technology installation . Also , in your packet, is a map which will show you the general areas that these will be installed . Some of these installations will be on existing utility poles and some will be installed on new poles that will be erected. After discussions wi th Crown Castle, we wanted to bring this issue back in front of council as an MOU and reminder of what had already been approved in 2014 . In addition , for purposes of transparency, we wanted Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 12of16 to put this information in front of you again so you can see the map and general locations , you can see what the permits look like , as well as a photograph of what the utilities will look like once they are installed . As you can see , they are fairly benign ; they are not significant looking installations. We have put together an MOU which ratifies the approval you made in 2014 and reconfirms the application that we approved with Crown Castle. Also , on the first page in paragraph two , it approves the permits.· I know this is not the council 's normal procedure to approve right-of-way encroachment permits , however, I am pointing this out to you in the context of transparency. On the second page , Crown Castle is doing what they have to do which is to pay all the "due compensation' to the city that is required for the use of the city 's infrastructure. Due compensation means the amount no more than 3% of the actual occurring local service revenues received by the company for its retail and end-user customers. Crown Castle is also agreeing to repair, maintain, and relocate these improvements as set forth in our ordinance and per state law. In addition , number seven (7) states that, "no further requirement or precedent for Council approval for telecommunications facilities or support structures shall be established by this MOU." In other words , I will not be bringing you additional permits as they may be received by the city. This is the understanding that it will be an on-going process with the city and Crown Castle. Councilmember Thurman We know that we will receive fees and the percentage is 3%, how was that determined , which customers? I Helen Smith, Crown Castle Legal Representative I It is based on state statue and is 3% and Crown Castle has to provide quarterly reports to the state and is based on end-user numbers . It is based on a carrier that co-locates with Crown Castle and I do not have an estimate as of now for you . Councilmember Thurman If two carriers ending up co-locating on these poles , then it would be more revenue ? Helen Smith Correct. Mayor Lockwood We have this map with 22 poles . These poles do not look that obtrusive. Is the benefit of having these small microcells is to keep from having a large cell tower? Helen Smith Yes it is for that area. The small cell is not a substitute for the larger tower but does serve a more densely populated area very well. Councilmember Kunz If a car hits one of these cells , does that effect the service for all of them? Darryl Forster, Crown Castle These are micro cells, so if one does go down it would not affect the others. I I Regular Meeting of the M ilton City Council Monday, March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 13of16 Councilmember Lu sk We see that the microce ll is attac hed to an existing pole . Is there any difference with this compared to one of your new poles? Darryl Forster Sometimes they may contain two microcells but you will only be able to see just the one microcell because the other is attached to the back of the pole. Councilmember Lusk We co ll ect a franchise fee for use of utilities in our right of way , will we al so co ll ect th at in addi tion to the 3% fee? Ken Jarrard No the 3% fee is the total collected . Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16 -063. Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously (7 -0). I M A YOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS I STAFF REPORT S Councilmember Lu sk I look forward to the day we can see the small cell technology replace the 150 foot and 190 foot towe r s. Department U pdates 1. Police 2 . Public Works 3. Parks and R ecreation 4 . Community Development 5 . Economic Developm ent S te v e Krokoff, Interim City Manage r Staff is going to embark on strategic planning based on what we did on our retreat. We are going to follow through with the mission, core val ues and core goals that were established for us by the Counci l. We are go ing to drill down to each individual departments to make sure we de liver on that. We will be working on this for the next six to e ight weeks and possibly with a consultant as well. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 14of16 Steve Krokoff, Police Chief We had our first true meeting of the Police Force Program. We have officially 21 explorers with three or four more that are trying to get into the organization. I believe we have the largest chapter in Georgia. This is a very excited group that is energized . We are just finishing up some odds and ends and then they will be off and running. We had the honor to work for Sunshine on a Ranney Day. We helped with demolition along with the Fire Department. The room had a hockey theme and Jack loved the reveal. Carter Lucas, Assistant City Manager Northwest connector road over in Crabapple has begun staking and alignment of utility coordination. We will be working towards getting and official schedule tomorrow. The Crabapple Sidewalk project which is taking sidewalks from the main intersection down to Charlotte Road is working on finishing up title work for the ten driveway easements that we need to acquire. Once title work is complete we will be able to start the right of way easement acquisition, followed by release to construction. Hoping for construction this summer. The roundabout at Hopewell and Birmingham Road has a new completion of September. July -August it should be operational but utility coordination has pushed the completion out to September. We just kicked off the design of Redd Road and Hopewell intersection improvements , where we are adding left turn lanes to help improve operations at that intersection. The Bethany Bend and Highway 9 intersection is with the district signal office now and we anticipate construction of that over the summer. This goes along with the right of way acquisition for the main Highway 9 Widening project which is scheduled to begin this October, with construction 2019 and completion 2021. We have completed our initial CTP and will have update in the next several weeks. We had over 1300 responses on our survey. On the transportation forefront , the North Fulton CTP is currently looking over four submittals and we are looking forward to getting that started as well. We just had the Greenway Concept Plan approved by GDOT , which is our first step looking for Feds to do additional funding . The Deerfield/Webb improvements came in over budget when we bid that out individually so we rolled that into the main paving contract and saved $31 ,000 in doing so . Blount will be taking care of the work. Councilmember Lusk What is the status of the sidewalk from Charlotte to Danbury? Carter Lucas Alpharetta is still working on potential funding for that project. We have a design in hand but they are looking for a funding source for that. Jim Cregge, Director of Parks and Recreation Working with our program providers , we have created a schedule at Bell Memorial Park that maximizes our weekend utilization of the two artificial turf fields. We have both boys and girls lacrosse playing their games on the weekend at Bell Memorial Park. This is finally giving Girls I I I I I I Regular Meeting of the M ilton City Council Monday, March 7 , 2016 a t 6:00 pm Page 15of16 Lacrosse access to the park which is what we were trying to do all along. We have four different fields going simultaneously this weekend which was very exciting . Baseball will have opening day on Saturday March 19 . Baseball numbers are very strong in our age groups 4 -10 but the U 12 and U 15 groups are small. We were unable to field a rec level team in U 12. We returned their money and assisted them in finding places to play in the area. Hopefully in time we can restart this program. The 15 year old program is small but it has been like that for years and are able to function. The project at Northwestern Middle School to install the roll up security grille is completed. Now during the week days , all athletes and guests will have access to the middle school bathrooms instead of the porta pottys . Parks and Rec department is going to be working with police with supporting Explorers teambuilding exercise of a softball game at Bell Memorial Park. During the two weekends of Spring Break , the City will be hosting its first ever Cricket Tournament. Councilmemb e r Kunz When will the bridge be open at Bell Memorial Park? Cart e r L ucas Hopefully within the next two weeks. Ka th y F ield , Dire ct or of Co m muni ty D eve lop me nt We have several proj ects in play at the moment. We are doing our five year update to the Comp Plan. We are hosting a community Open House tomorrow and inviting citizens to come and discuss the five ye ar Comp Plan . We have finished the draft for the R&P of the downtown Crabapple area. It will be posted on March 16th. We held a stakeholders meeting for the downtown Crabapple area and the next meeting will be after spring break in April. In terms of rezoning, the parcel at 745 Ebenezer Road; the applicant is Brightwater Homes , has been deferred by the Planning Commission to their March 23rd meeting. You will hear a zoning modification regarding the parcel at the southeast comer of Birmingham Highway and Birmingham Road at your next meeting on March 21 st to request the deletion of required retail buildings. In addition , there are a series of text amendments that are currently on hold until the April meeting . The Planning Commission has put them on hold because the y would like for changes to be made in Chapter 48 which is our Streets and Sidewalks section of our ordinances. They would like for those changes to be reviewed concurrently with the text amendments regarding the enhanced rural view sheds. Sa rah LaDart, E conomi c D eve lopm ent Ma nager Fulton County has decided to merge the Fulton County Economic Development Department with the Development Authority of Fulton County and Al Nash will oversee the entire operation. Also , on Thursday, I will go to Austin, Texas for the South by Southwest. I will be meeting with the Austin Chamber of Commerce and visit their innovation center. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday , March 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 16of16 EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion and Vote: Councilmember Kunz moved to go into Executive Session to discuss personnel at 7 :48 p.m. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). RECONVENE Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to reconvene the Regular Meeting at 7:59 p.m. Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7 -0 ). ADJOURNMENT (Agenda Item No. 16-048) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 8:00 p.m. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). Date Approved: March 21 , 2016 Sudie AM Gordon , City Clerk JoeLockw~ I I I I I I STATE OF GEORGIA COU TY OF FULTON CITY OF MIL TON ) ) ) ) ) AFFIDAVIT RE: CLOSURE OF OPEN MEETINGS Personally appeared before the undersigned officer , duly authorized under the laws of the State of Georgia to administer oaths , JOE LOCKWOOD , who in hi s capacity as Mayor and the person presiding over a Council meeting of the CITY OF MIL TO , and after being first dul y sworn , certifies under oath and states to the best of hi s knowledge and belief the following: At a Regularly Scheduled City Council Meetin g held on March 7, 2016 , at 6:00 PM the Council voted to go into closed session and exclude the public from all or a portion of its meeting. The legal exceptions applicable to the exempt matters addressed durin g such closed meeting are as follows : [Check or initial as appropriate] I. __ discussion or voting to authorize negotiations to purchase , dispose of, or lease property ; authorizing the ordering of an appraisal related to the acquisition or disposal of real estate ; entering into contract to purchase , to dispose of, or lease property subject to approval in a subsequent public vote ; or entering into an option to purchase , dispose of, or lease real estate subject to approval in a subsequent public vote pursuant to O .C.G.A , 50-14-3(b)(l)(B-E); 2. _X_ discussing or deliberating upon the appointment , employment, compensation , hiring , disciplinary action or dismissal , or periodic evaluation or rating of a public officer or employee or interviewing applicants for the executive head of the city with the vote on any such matter coming in public pursuant to O .C .G.A . 50-14-3(b)(2); 3. __ attorney/client privilege in order to consult and meet with legal counsel pertaining to pending or potential litigation , settlement, claims , administrative proceedings or other judicial actions brought or to be brought by or against the agency or any officer or employee or in which the agency or any officer or employee may be directly involved , pursuant to O .C.G.A . 50-14-2(1 ). 4. other (explanation): I certify that the subject matter of the closed meeting or th e closed portion of the meeting was devoted to matters of official business or polic y, with the exceptions provided by law as set forth above. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me MAYOR JOE ~ this 7th da y of March , 2016 . Notary Public My Commission Expires: