Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 09/07/2016 - MINS 09 07 16 REG (Migrated from Optiview)Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page I of26 Thi s summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to tran scribe 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 September 7, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding. INVOCATION Deacon Joe Pupo , St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Church, Alpharetta, 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 M ay or Jo e Lockwo od) APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA (Agenda Item No. 16-188) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve the Meeting Agenda. Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). PUBLIC COMMENT Margaret Lootens , 3515 Peacock Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Jack Lindon, 14810 East Bluff Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Jon McPhail , 10925 Pinehigh Drive, Milton, Georgia 30004 Regular Meeting of the Milton C ity Council Wednesday , September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 2 of26 CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of the May 16 , 2016 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 16-189) (S udie Gordon, City Clerk) 2. Approval of the June 6 , 2016 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 16-190) (Sudie Gordon, City Clerk) 3. Approval of the June 13, 2016 City Council Work Session Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 16-191) (S udie Gordon, City Clerk) 4. Approval of a Unified Agreement between the City of Milton and AT&T for Internet Services. (Agenda Item No. 16-192) (David Frizz ell, IT Manager) 5. Approval of a Construction Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Superior Arbor Management, Inc. for Tree Removal at Providence Park. (Agenda Item No. 16-193) (Carter Lucas, Assistant City Manager) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). REPORTS AND PRESENTATI ONS 1. Proclamation Recognizing Jackson Oli ver for His Community Service. (Presented by Mayor Joe Lockwood) 2. Presentation of World Trade Center artifact. (Presented by Sarah LaDart, Economic Development Manager) Re gular Meetin g o f the Milton C ity Co uncil Wedne sday, September 7 , 2 016 at 6 :00 pm Page 3 of2 6 FIRST PRESENT A TI ON 1. Consideration of an Ordinance of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton, Georgia, to Adopt Amendments to the Fiscal 2016 Budget for Each Fund of the City of Milton, Georgia , Amending the Amounts Shown in Each Budget as Expenditures , Amending the Several Items of Re v enue Anticipations , Prohibiting Expenditures to Ex ceed Appropriations , and Prohibiting Ex penditures to Ex ceed Actual Funding A v ailable. (Agenda Item No. 16-194) (Stacey Inglis, Assistant City Manager) 2. Consideration of an Ordinance of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton, Georgia, to Adopt the Fiscal 2017 Budget for Each Fund of the City of Milton, Georgia Appropriating the Amounts Shown In Each Budget as Expenditures , Adopting the Se veral Items of Rev enue Anticipations , Prohibiting Expenditures to Exceed Appropriations , and Prohibiting Expenditures to E x ceed Actual Funding Av ailable. (Agenda Item No. 16-195) (Presented under R ep orts and Presentat ions at A ugust 15, 20 16 Co un cil Meeting) (Stacey In g lis, Assis tant City Ma nager) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hew itt mov ed to approve the First Presentation Items. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). PUBLIC HEARING (No n e) ZONING AGENDA 1. Consideration ofRZlS-18-To Amend the AG-1 (Agricultural ) District, Chapter 64 , Article VI , Di v ision 2. ORDINANCE NO. 16-09-281 (Agenda Item No. 16-124) (Firs t Presentatio n at Jun e 6, 20 16 Regular City Co un c il Mee ting) (D iscussed at J une 13, 20 16 City Co uncil Wo rk S ession) (Deferred at July 11 , 20 16 Regular City Co uncil Mee tin g) (Discussed at August 8, 201 6 Special Call ed J oint Work Session PC/Elected Officials) (Ka thleen Field, Co mm un ity Developm ent D irector) Regular Meeting of the Milton C ity Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 4 of26 Kathleen Field, Community Development Director Thank you , Mr. Mayor and members of the city council. My comments tonight will be directed to all of these proposed text amendments, although, any action will require an individual vote on each of these amendments. By way of background, the rural viewshed required for single famil y residential uses currently resides in the Milton Rural Overlay District that covers the City with exception of parcels within the Deerfield and Crabapple Form Based Codes and the Birmingham Crossroads Overlay District and the Hwy 9 Overlay District. It was determined by the city attorney , however , that requirements for the rural viewshed should reside in individual single family residential zoning districts as proposed. The Mayor and City Council directed Staff to propose changes to the rural viewshed to assist in further preserving the viewsheds in the City. The following comments reflect the most recent two meetings that were held on July 11 , 2016 and August 8, 2016 . Side Corner Lots for three or fewer lots and Architectural Review: Staff deleted this verbiage regarding side corner lots , since any lot , no matter its position to the street or the orientation of the house would be required to meet the rural viewshed requirements if it abuts an exterior street. In the case of three or less lots , only the architectural review would be required per Section 64-416(k)(4). Primary and secondary viewsheds: The Mayor and City Council expressed the need to be more specific when these terms were used. Staff has included the words rural viewshed when the terms primary and secondary are mentioned. This addition has also been reflected in the definitions of the term rural viewshed. Protection and Enforcement of Rural Viewsheds : Mayor and City Council directed Staff to enhance the criteria used for the review of the rural viewshed. It was recommended that in lieu of just the City Arborist performing the review , a "Design Committee" be created which includes the City Arborist, Community Development Director, and the City Architect. An enhanced list of review criteria has been created to assist with these reviews . These changes have been reflected in the ordinance including a new definition for "Design Committee". The Mayo r and City Council also asked that the City Architect review the building elevations of all lots within the rural viewshed including a landscape plan in order to ensure that the rural viewshed be maintained . Staff notes that this would include all developments including individual lots not in a subdivision. Rural Milton Overlay -Single Family Type Uses - RZl 5-24 ; based on the changes within the zoning districts regarding the rural viewshed, there have been no further changes to the Rural Milton Overlay from the previous edits suggested by the City Council. Councilmember Longoria Kathy , obviously, one of the primary drivers here is that we are trying to not only protect what exists today but in some cases enhance. When I read the language, it talks about having the Design Committee approve the viewshed so if it meets the standards set forth then there is nothing that the developer is required to do but if a viewshed does not exist, then the Design Committee can say that certain requirements have to be met. Is that correct? Regular Meeting of the Milton Ci ty Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 5 of26 Kathy Field Yes , that is correct. And , these would be done on a case by case basis by the Design Committee to ensure the council 's requests have been met which is to enhance the rural viewshed. So , that in some cases we may have to create a rural viewshed ifthere isn 't one there ; if there is a pasture, we may want to honor the pasture look. In other cases , we may leave it alone or maybe what is there is good but it needs some more understory so we would enhance it. Again , we would look at it based on our skill le vels as a planner, an arborist , and an architect , to ensure the intent of the establishment of a rural viewshed is put in place. Councilmember Longoria So , rather than leaving this to chance , rather than leaving the decision in the hands of the developer , because sometimes they would do an appropriate job and other times they wouldn 't, the Design Committee has the responsibility of ensuring that all the rural viewsheds throughout the city meet our development standards. So , that after all is said and done and we are driving down the road and we see something that doesn 't measure up to our standards or something that is beautiful and represents everything we envisioned, then we have the Design Committee to thank for that. Is that correct ? Kathy Field Yes , that is correct. Councilmember Longoria So , the city is dictating what will take place in terms of rural viewshed . Kathy Field That is correct. Councilmember Lusk What I gather from all of these text amendments , it seems like even though we have some of the most premier staff members on the Design Committee , there still seems to be a large element of subjectivity in determining what will be going into the setbacks. On the positive side , we are talking about maybe enhancements . Possibly on the opposite side of the coin , we may be confronted with an issue that might require a variance of some sort and I can 't name anything specifically . Maybe it is a minor setback of some sort. Rather than going through the regular Board of Zoning Appeals , for instance , would you consider minor variances within your purview as a member of the Design Committee ? Kathy Field The way it is structured is that there is reall y no encroachment; the only encroachment is within the last 20 feet that would be allowed. That would be for a septic system with a variance. The first 40 feet along the street does not allow for any variances unless the Fulton County Health Department determined that a septic system needed to be put in that area because of the failure of the other septic systems on the property . We tried to very closel y control what encroachments , if any, and under what conditions they would be allowed so that we couldn 't have the ability to Regular Meeting of the Milton Ci ty Council Wednesday, September 7, 2 016 at 6 :00 pm Page 6 of 2 6 entertain an encroachment for a barn or whatever. That is something that came through discussions with our public hearings with the planning commission and moved forward. They felt that we needed to very tightly control variances , if an y, would be allowed . Councilmember Lusk You mentioned a barn. From what I have read in here , I think some agricultural type of facilities would be allowed in that. Kathy Field I think we are referring more to a pastoral type of use ; a very passive pasture as opposed to a structure . We really did not allow for any structure or encroachments . Councilmember Lusk But, there would be some that would be grandfathered into that. Kathy Field If they are there , certainly they would be grandfathered in . But, there would be no new v ariances allowed , for instance , other than the ones I have mentioned. Councilmember Thurman I think in a perfect world , the v iewshed that is there would be our preferred viewshed and that little enhancement would need to be done to it. But, understanding the fact that anywhere our trail plan causes for disturbance of that v iewshed, I think we have to find a way to make sure that was does happen there is what is best for the city as a whole . I support this committee to make the recommendations , especially in those areas , to enhance what is there rather than leaving it up to one person or leaving it up to something more arbitrary . I think that the three of them will get it down fairl y quickly as to what is and is not appropriate. And , I think they have heard from enough of us on a regular basis that they understand what it is that we want to achieve. Councilmember Longoria Kathy , in previous discussions about this , we had some at length discussions related to the difference between a setback and an undisturbed buffer. And the language that we have in front of us today, there are two setbacks , one is the primary setback which is 40 feet and the other is a secondary setback which is 20 feet and you have outlined when and how those setbacks can be disturbed. Kathy Field And , we also call them rural viewshed setbacks so as not to get confused with the buffers as a zoning definition . So , we tried to make that very clear . Councilmember Longoria The primary setback is the first one you would look through and the secondary setback is the one that is right behind that. So , basically, there is 60 feet of setback that is described here. But, the current language , we talk about it being an undisturbed buffer. I think I am okay with the Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 7 of26 difference , understanding that the only thing that is going to be allowed to happen in either of these areas are things that the Design Committee describes. Kathy Field Correct. Councilmember Longoria So, am I thinking about it correctly? Kathy Field Yes, and just to give you a little background why we viewed away from those words, undisturbed buffer, is because in some instances , we wanted to disturb the buffer by putting in more shrubs or trees. Councilmember Longoria I remember that. Kathy Field So , that was not a correct word to use and so we tried to come up with some criteria for what we were looking for but we really wanted to address this on a case by case basis to really provide the look you were looking for with the opportunity to do that. Councilmember Longoria So , given the language that is in there , do you think you can be successful , the city can be successful in preventing any of the unintended side effects that we have experienced recently . Are you confident that this language gives the city the control that it needs to ensure that we can manage this moving forward. Kathy Field Yes, as best as we can anticipate through a series of public hearings as I mentioned with the planning commission and moving forward here and our conversations . We have tried to address it in a way that tightens it up , gives you criteria by which we are going to use in order to carry this out. But, I believe it does. If we find there is a loophole, then we can always bring it back and make corrections . But, I believe at this point that we have really thought about this and we have come up with something that can be successful. Councilmember Longoria At our last work session, we had a citizen get up and he brought some great visual aids and there were circumferences and diameters of trees and how those trees fell into the specific elements of our tree ordinance. And , he was trying to make a point about what can happen if we don 't control this appropriately. He gave some examples of where we lost certain trees of different sizes in these specific setbacks . So, the language the way you have written it down also protects that because you have to approve whatever is going to take place within those buffers. Right? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 8 of26 Kathy Field Yes , because we are going to fence the buffer off so the developer knows not to disturb that area. Obviously, if there are any trees that are diseased or something but other than that, our intention is not to take anything down but to enhance it if necessary or to leave it as natural as possible. Councilmember Longoria My point is that you are in control so the developer will not be able to go in the middle of the night, take down the trees that he wants , because this is an area that he can't build in anyway. Kathy Field That is correct. It is fenced off identified area that he will not be able to enter. It is just like a tree save area, you can't get into a tree save area. But, we are looking to change our tree ordinance as well so the trees that are not in the rural viewshed will be protected. That is coming next. Councilmember Longoria Is there any reason for us to hold up on this in favor of getting through the tree ordinance? Kathy Field No , I don 't think so. Councilmember Lusk I have some other issues in the bodies of each one of these if we want to get into that. The one section that travels through each one of these; Section P5 , and it relates to the orange tree fence. It is page 3 of7 in the middle of the page. I am on RZ-19. This may be kind of picky, but it reads as if the orange tree save fence is to remain there indefinitely and I suggest that there be language inserted there that states that the orange tree save fence shall survive the construction process and removed after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy . Councilmember Hewitt We received an email from a resident earlier today that was talking about the fence and that it shall be approved by the city arborist, I just wanted to clarify that the city arborist is just going to approve that it is at the 60 feet mark; just approving where it is supposed to be. Kathy Field Yes , he will go out there and he will measure it as he will the tree save fences but he will be in the field and he will be the one in charge of doing that. Councilmember Hewitt And, the only movement would be further back not further in. Kathy Field Right. It has to be at least 60 feet; we have to maintain that 60 feet. That is the intent of that fence. Regular Meeting o f th e Milton C ity Council Wednesday, September 7, 2 016 at 6 :00 pm Page 9 of 26 Councilmember Mohrig One thing I noticed that we do not have in there is that in the event we have enhancements , I will say setbacks because we are not saying buffers anymore , enhancements in the setbacks , do we have anything in the language about maintaining the buffer area or replacing anything if the enhancements die ? So, people have planted things and the y don 't maintain them so as part of the enhancements , it dies , and nobody comes back to take care of it because they have done their planting , do we need to put something in there ? Kathy Field Carter , maybe you can assist on this but I believe that we can ask for a bond for a year at least to make sure that any plantings such as these are maintained and are guaranteed for at least a year which is the normal time for that. Carter Lucas It could be covered under our ordinary maintenance bond. It would include a number of other things on the development site. Councilmember Mohrig And , I guess the concern there would be not just a year from when they do the enhancements but a year after they do complete build out of that subdivision, if it is a subdivision that we are doing the setback on, possibly a two to three year, depending on the economic cycle . Carter Lucas Yes , that becomes much more difficult because you just don 't know how fast those subdi visions are going to be built out. That could be one year , two years , or ten years after the final plat is appro ved. Kathy Field I belie ve that one year is the industry standard for installation of a year and guaranteeing it and all our parks have that similar type of guarantee ; a year-long guarantee. Councilmember Hewitt Some go 18 months. Councilmember Lusk I am on page 8of13 and article 3(a)(i) starts out, "when performing a design review of the primary rural viewshed and the secondary rural viewshed setbacks , the design committee shall address the following: evaluation of the current state of both the primary and secondary rural vie w shed setbacks." What does the current state in vol ve? You previousl y put some words in there following that ; "evaluation of current state of vegetation" but you struck through the word "vegetation." Would it be more clear if you left the word "vegetation?" Robyn MacDonald, Zoning Manager We were tryin g to be a little more general because not every viewshed has an y vegetation. Ob viousl y, you might have some grass but when you think of trees and shrubs and such so we just Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 10 of26 didn't want to be so inclusive. So , we just want to make an evaluation of each situation and whether it is a pasture or forest or some combination of both. The intent is just to have a baseline to figure out where are we now and how do we want to address it. Councilmember Lusk I understand what your intent is , I just question the use of the word "state ." Kathy Field If I might suggest an amendment to something along the lines of, "evaluation of current state ... "including vegetation" of both the primary and secondary rural viewsheds. Councilmember Lusk In the last text amendment, it refers to a retaining wall in that section of the code and it is my understanding that they are going to include any criteria related to retaining walls in chapter 17 , division 3. I am just concerned that we include definitions or descriptions of retaining walls in this one section that there might be a conflict with the new retaining wall section that is being considered . Robyn MacDonald I think until such time that we have that new retaining wall , we can keep this , because then we won 't address it. If somebody comes in tomorrow , we wouldn 't have the new text amendment to address retaining walls because that is going to come in a couple of months. Councilmember Lusk So , we can address it when we develop the new code ? Robyn MacDonald Yes. Councilmember Lusk Good plan. Councilmember Hewitt Getting back to the encroachment in the primary and secondary ; so the only way you can get into the secondary is per the drain field for new construction and the only way you can get into the primary is if you had an existing house that was built and the current drain field was failing and it was going to be condemned unless it could only perk in that area. So , a new construction that wouldn 't perk in the secondary but perks in the primary wouldn 't be allowed. Kathy Field Right. The idea is to stay of there . So , this is really for houses in the future or after they are built and there is a problem. How can you solve that problem? You can solve it by putting some of your septic system in the secondary with a variance , and only in the primary setback with a letter from the Health Department saying that is the only place it could go. Regular Meetin g of th e Milton C ity Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 11 of26 Councilmember Hewitt So , the initial would have to fail before you could retrofit into the primary. Kathy Field Yes , this is the last resort. Councilmember Hewitt Not that a new construction could be allowed in the primary . Kathy Field Correct. Mayor Lockwood I will now open it up for public comment. The follo w ing indiv iduals s ubmitted a public comment card: Tim Becker, 15625 Canterbury Chase , Milton , Georgia 30004 Laura Bentley , 2500 Bethany Church Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Julie Zahner Bailey, 255 Hickory Flat Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Jennifer Pino , 175 Oakhurst Leaf Drive , Milton, Georgia 30004 Councilmember Thurman All of these now require much more notification to the community regarding when a development is going to take place . Will the plans for the rural viewshed for the proposed de velopment be available prior to the community meeting so input from the community can be recei ved regarding their thoughts on any enhancements to our rural viewshed? Kathy Field Yes , we can ensure that the timing will allow the rural viewshed landscape plans be available for the community to review during the public informational meeting. Councilmember Thurman I think that is important. Mayor Lockwood The other thing I think is important is minimum standards , which was mentioned, but also , I w ant to address when we talked about existing vegetation and undisturbed buffers , there are also unintended consequences too which is part of the reason that is not in there . We have areas that are just kudzu or grown up with scrub brush where it could be a pastoral setting; agricultural , etc. We just need to be careful that w e monitor w hat is in the best interest and the best look because there are going to be problems either way . If you have it totall y undisturbed or if you do allow it to be disturbed there may be situations that don 't work out. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 12 of26 Councilmember Longoria I was an advocate originally of, if it says undisturbed , that means undisturbed. I think the challenge is that it makes some sense to allow for engineering of the viewshed. And , the minute you say in some cases you need to allow it , then it can 't be undisturbed anymore, and so that is really the reason I agree that the current language makes the most sense. Primarily , because what we are saying is that the city has ultimate authority here in terms of what gets approved. So , the design committee are the ones who set the standard. And , I have faith that the city can get their act together and figure that piece out from the start of this. So , if that weren 't the case and we were leaving this in the hands of the developer , I think it would be wise to go that route. But, since it is our decision , I like it. Councilmember Mohrig Kathy , is there a reason we took out paragraph three in its entirety. But, it seems like that did speak to a lot of what we are trying to accomplish. Kathy Field I'm not sure where paragraph three is . Councilmember Thurman It is where it says , "utilize existing vegetation when possible." That is the real phrase that people are concerned about being removed. Kathy Field And , that is not inconsistent with what we would be doing. So , if you feel more comfortable putting that in. Councilmember Mohrig We have seen what happens if we are not specific so the more specific we are , especially if we are going enhancements, we are better off actuall y being specific and putting details in there instead of just making assumptions . Kathy Field Sure. Councilmember Hewitt Kathy , what do you envision the committee doing? Do you envision the committee setting the standards or working with the developer? I would like to see the three of you saying to the developer , "here is what we want" versus saying , "tell us what you want and we will see if we will like it." Kathy Field I think the former not the latter. I think we have a vision in terms of what the council is looking for. And , we are able to regulate what that is and so I always feel that having a plan and going in and showing the developer what the expectations are makes a lot more sense. Because , there are Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 13 of26 different agendas going on and different bottom lines going on etc. so we have to protect the citizens in terms of what they are looking for. That is what we represent. Councilmember Hewitt So, you see it not as a negation with the developer. Basically, you are drawing the plan and saying here is what we want. Kathy Field Yes, but clearly ifthere is an extenuating circumstance we are going to listen. However, it is really something that we need to be in the driver 's seat. Councilmember Mohrig As far as when you mentioned minimums , aren 't we better off determining ahead of time what our minimum is; what we are expecting, things that we want to see, an idea versus, I know that you are going to look at each area one by one , but do we have a vision where we can say this is the minimums, is there a way to spell that out. Councilmember Longoria I have thought about this and the biggest challenge that we have in the viewshed in general is that it is not one size fits all. Every single instance is going to be unique. Every instance is going to be some opportunity to accentuate one thing or diminish something else. I think the challenge is really going to be that no two pieces are going to be the same. Now, we might get lucky and there is this stretch of land that is going to wind up being two or three developments and the reality is that we would want some continuity there but even in a short span of road there are enough future changes. I still think this is going to be a one off exercise for each thing. That is why I would say it is going to be tough to develop a standard because the standard is going to have to anticipate 3,000 unique instances . Mayor Lockwood I believe you need to come up with a general expectation what would probably fit 80% of the time and then work it from there on exceptions , etc . Councilmember Longoria One last question, did we think about maybe including somebody else on the committee? I know it is difficult and we don 't want to necessaril y create this mechanism that is slow, etc. We have a certain responsibility to be able to respond quickly to our citizens both to those who are concerned and those that are trying to develop something. So , did we think about including folks outside the city staff as part of this decision ? Kathy Field Actually, we did not. We started as a staff function that we would be doing as part of the pre- construction process where we would brief the developer in terms of expectations and what we are looking for. Which is done sort of internally by staff. So , I guess , no, we did not think outside the box in that sense. We just looked internally to do that. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 14 of26 Councilmember Lusk I would support keeping it a minimal staff just for expediency sake. I think anybody applying for a land disturbance permit should anticipate a reasonable amount of review time . I pose that position from the industry I come from. Councilmember Kunz First of all , I think the Design Review Committee is better but I think there is not enough citizen involvement. I would like to see if there is a way we could have more of that and would be advantageous. Longoria is correct that you would have multiple viewsheds in the front ; however , if we had the process where people in the community would see it and be able to choose one in relation to another , but, it might slow the process down a little bit but I would be in favor of that. The other thought I had was regarding the rural viewshed enhancements and as much as we might have if there was an undisturbed buffer, if there was to be any type of enhancement, I think it would behoove us as a council to make it clear what direction we should want if there was an enhancement. And, I would make the proposal that it would be something equestrian, whatever that is , if we were to do it at all. If we decided to cut an undisturbed buffer and it was not equestrian, then I think that goes in the direction , it might be good and it might not be , but it would lack some kind of direction or at least an expectation by residents for what we are trying to do. If we give a direction in that regard , I think that would help. I think about the setbacks as well and appreciate the work on the planning commission on this . I sometimes think we might be looking at setbacks and buffers a little bit of the wrong way and seeing that we are looking at things outside instead of inside out. But, this is relatively new and I don 't want to spring this on you guys and this kind of makes me a little bit uncomfortable to open this tonight because I had a resident that gave me a property from a subdivision in Ashev ille , North Carolina called Drover 's Row Preserve . And , they had a great idea that they actually look at not disturbing anything and they looked at everything within 20 feet of the building footprint first and allowed that to be by the discretion of the developer and anything outside that would have to be looked at by the design review board. That makes sense because then you have more of an undisturbed buffer and it would fit more into the tree ordinance that we are looking at. So, if we looked at something like that, I think that would make sense but I think that a resident brought this up to me recentl y and I like that idea. Six in one hand ; half a dozen in the other could be the case . This project, as it is though , Kathy , in your estimation, is there any , we had some residents that came up with pictures of horses , as an idea on this . Not any AG-1 subdivision has captured or preserved a rural pasture since we have been in place . In your estimation on this development, what is your percentage of belief that we might actuall y get some kind of equestrian aspect , not just a four board fence , but actual animals on a piece of property with this zoning . Kathy Field It really all depends on the marketplace and what a developer is proposing. If they meet all of our regulations our duty is to respond and make sure all of those are being met including any rural viewshed requirements that may be approved . Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 15 of26 Councilmember Kunz Which my expectation is going to be close to zero with this based on current markets and I have no problem saying that. That is the concern I have with this as well. I think what we have here is great for smaller properties but larger pastoral issues I have a problem with. How much land , by the way , large pastures, do we have left? I have to ask that question before we go on. Kathy Field Not off the top of my head could I answer that question for you. We have done some GIS analysis and we have those maps available but I would have to go and research that for you. City Manager Krokoff We haven't gone and added up all the plots but I think that we all have the maps of what the potentially developable areas are based on Fulton County estimations. Obviously , we are looking to redo those to make sure we are on, we have a general idea, but we do not have the aggregate number of that. Councilmember Kunz I would like to know the amount because we have obviously had a lot of development going on , at least in my area recently , I just want to understand that. And, is there any way any of these properties can include additional trails with this ordinance . Other than in the front of the property , is there any way we can have trails or anything like that with this? Kathy Field No. Councilmember Kunz I think it is good because I don 't see any chance of any taking happening here , as far as I can tell , unless we do something with the rural viewshed , so I am okay with that. So, those are just my initial thoughts and my concerns. Councilmember Mohrig We talked about some changes and additions. Are we incorporating that into the motion? Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-124 with the following changes : • Change the language from "City Arborist" to "Design Committee" Re g ular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Pa ge 16 of 26 • Add language after the sentence in paragraph (3) that states , "The views may contain natural vegetation as well as equestrian related structures and uses." Add the following sentence: "It is the intent to utilize the existing vegetation when possible as well as provide additional native plantings to enhance the existing viewshed when needed." • Councilmember Lusk also requested to add to the Motion the following language to paragraph (3)(ai) to read as follows: "Evaluation of current state of site including vegetation , both the primary and secondary rural viewshed setbacks." • Councilmember Lusk also requested to add to the Motion the following language to the end of paragraph (5) to read as follows : "Tree safe fence shall be removed upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each lot." Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion . The motion passed unanimously (7-0). 2 . Consideration of RZlS-19-To Amend the R-1 (Single Family Residential) District, Chapter 64 , Article VI , Division 3. ORDINANCE NO. 16-09-282 (Agenda Item No. 16-125) (Fir s t Presentation at Jun e 6, 201 6 Regular City Cou ncil Mee tin g) (Discuss ed at Jun e 13 , 2016 City Co uncil Work S ess ion (D eferred at July 11 , 2016 Regular City Co un c il Mee t ing) (Discussed at A ugus t 8, 2016 Sp ec ial Called J o int Work Sess ion PC/Elected Officials) (Kathlee n Field, Co mmunity Developm ent Direc tor) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director This is the same language that was in the previous agenda item that you have reviewed and approved. Th e follo w ing individuals submitted a public comment card: Julie Zahner Bailey, 255 Hickory Flat Road , Milton , Georgia 30004 Laura Rencher, 1060 Birmingham Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Councilmember Hewitt When does the bond come into effect ? Is that in these ordinances? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 17 of26 Carter Lucas The standard maintenance bond comes into effect under the subdivision ordinance and it would generally be in effect for a year following the final plat. And, it is normally for roads and landscaping and performance bonds if we need them but we can certainly include bond language on the landscaping and the viewshed if we need to. It is more the start time of the bond that becomes an issue rather than the end time of the bond. So, as long as we have a defined point that it starts which would be the time of the final plat approval, then we could do a one year or 18 month bond. Councilmember Thurman Would that be part of this ordinance or part of the subdivision ordinance? Carter Lucas The current bond language is in the subdivision ordinance so if we wanted to keep all the bond language together in one location then that woul d be the place to put it. Councilmember Thurman I think it would make sense to have it all together. Councilmember Hewitt We heard about enforcement and I know we are looking at stepping that up. Is there any update on that? City Manager Krokoff We have met on that and we are waiting on approval of the 201 7 budget to implement those enhancements. Councilmember Mohrig So, you are saying it should be in the subdivision ordinance not in this portion then we need to make a point of bringing that back and looking at it. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-125 to include the same changes as stated in the motion for Agenda Item No. 16-124. Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7 -0). Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 18 of 26 3. Consideration ofRZlS-20 -To Amend the R-2 (Single Family Residential) District, Chapter 64 , Article VI , Division 4 . ORDINANCE NO. 16-09-283 (Agenda Item No. 16-126) (First Presentation at Jun e 6, 201 6 R egular City Co uncil Mee ting) (Dis cus s ed at Jun e 13 , 2016 City Co un cil Wo rk S ess ion) (Deferr ed at July 11 , 2016 Regular City Co un cil Mee ting) (Discuss ed at Aug us t 8, 2016 Sp ec ial Called J o int Work S es s ion PC/Elect ed Officials) (Kathlee n Field, Co mmunity Development Direc tor) Kathleen Field, Community D evelopment Director The same language and comments appl y to this one as the previous ones. The following individuals submitted a public comm ent card: Julie Zahner Bailey , 255 Hickory Flat Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-126 to include the same changes as stated in the motion for Agenda Item No. 16-124 . Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). 4. Consideration ofRZlS-21 -To Amend the R-2A (Single Family Residential) District, Chapter 64 , Article VI , Division 5. ORDINANCE N0.16-09-284 (Agenda Item No. 16-127) (First Pres entation at Jun e 6, 2016 R egular City Coun cil M ee tin g) (Discuss ed at Jun e 13 , 2016 Ci ty Co un cil Work S es s ion) (Deferred at July 11 , 2016 Regu lar City Co un cil Mee t ing) (Discussed at A ug ust 8, 2016 Sp ecial Called J o int Work Sess ion PC/Elected Officials) (Kathlee n Fi eld, Co mmunity Dev elopm ent Director) Kathleen Field, Community Dev elopment Director The same language and comments apply to this one as the previous ones. The follo w ing individuals s ubmitted a public comment card: Julie Zahner Bailey , 255 Hickory Flat Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Re g ular Meetin g of the Milton Ci ty Council Wedne sday, September 7 , 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 19 of26 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt mo v ed to approve Agenda Item No. 16-1 2 7 to include the same changes as stated in the motion for Agenda Item No. 16-124. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0 ). 5. Consideration ofRZlS-23 -To amend the CUP (Community Unit Plan) District, Chapter 64 , Article VI , Div ision 23. ORDINANCE NO. 16-09-285 (Agenda Item No. 16-128) (Firs t Presentati on at J une 6, 20 16 Regular City Cou n cil Mee ting) (Discussed at J un e 13, 20 16 City Co un cil Wor k S ess ion) (D eferred at July 11 , 20 16 R egular City Co un cil M eeting) (Discussed at A ug us t 8, 2016 Sp ecial Called J oin t Wo rk Sessio n PC/Elected Officials) (Kathleen Fie ld, Co mmun ity Developm ent Direc tor) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director The same language and comments appl y to this one as the previous ones. The follo w ing individuals s ubmitted a public comment card: Julie Zahner Bailey, 255 Hickory Flat Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Councilmember Thurman I understand that sometimes people hav e tried to misuse the CUP but there are times that it works very well. I live in a CUP zoning right now that is on a minimum of two acre lot s so not all CUP 's are equal. Sometimes the y can actually be v ery beneficial. I think we need to be careful that we are not getting rid of something that can be a good tool for the city to use if it is used properly. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-128 to include the same changes as stated in the motion for Agenda Item No. 16-124. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimousl y (7-0). Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2 016 at 6 :00 pm Page 20 of 2 6 6. Consideration of RZlS-24 -To Amend the Rural Milton Overlay for Single Family Type Uses (Sec. 64-1141). ORDINANCE NO. 16-09-286 (Agenda Item No. 16-129) (First Presentation at Jun e 6, 20 I 6 R egular City Council Meeting) (Discussed at Jun e I 3, 2016 City Cou nc il Work Session) (Deferr ed at July I I , 2016 Regu lar C ity Cou n cil Meeting) (Dis cus sed at August 8, 20 I 6 Sp ecial Ca lled Joint Work Session PC/Elected Officials) (Kat hleen Fi eld, Co mmunity Development D irector) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director We have re viewed this in the past and we are deleting the reference to rural viewshed out of the rural Milton Overlay District and we are adding two minor changes . One is pertaining to retaining walls and the other pertaining to stormwater facilities. Those are the only changes to this ordinance. The following individuals s ubmitted a public co mmen t card: Julie Zahner Bailey, 255 Hickory Flat Road , Milton , Georgia 30004 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No . 16-129 . Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). UNFINISHED BUSINESS I. Consideration of an Ordinance of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton, Georgia, to Establish the Ad Valorem Tax Rate of the City of Milton for Fiscal Year 2016 ; and for Other Purposes. ORDINANCE NO. 16-09-280 (Agenda Item No. 16-179) (Firs t Pr esentation at August I 5, 20 I 6 Regular City Council Meeting) (P ublic Hearing Held at August I 5, 20 16 R egular City Cou ncil Meeting) (Stacey In glis, Assistant C ity Manager) Stacey Inglis, Assistant City Manager We are proposing a millage rate of 4. 731 mills and this is the same millage rate that we have had since the incorporation of the city. The tax digest for 2016 is showing taxable assessments for real personal property at $2 ,2 71 , 909 ,971.00 net of exemptions. This represents an increase of 5.8 % over the 2015 digest due to assessments on newl y improved properties. Motor vehicles assessed by use in 2016 are $55 ,613 ,700 .00 and have decreased by 31% since 2015 . This is a result of House Bill 3 86 which was phasing out motor vehicle taxes or the birthday tax and replacing it with title ad valorem tax. The fiscal impact would be that the 2016 budget anticipates a collection of Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7 , 2016 at 6:00 pm Page 21 of26 almost $9.5 million or 89% of the levied taxes. We le vy taxes at $10.7 million with the tax digest that is currently proposed. Historically, we experienced a collection rate of90-94%. So , we should get more than we anticipate for billing out taxes this year than we put in the budget for. I heard back from Fulton County today and they have gotten the tax digest approved by the Department of Re venue and we should be receiving the tax files by the end of next week. So, we should be billing before September 30th which is exactly what we need for 2016 billing. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-179. Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7 -0 ). 2. Consideration of the Use of Community Septic. (Agenda Item No. 16-196) (Steven Krokoff, City Manager) Mayor Lockwood About a month ago or six weeks ago , Steve , you were out of town , but I asked staff to bring this up again so we could get a direction mo ving forward. I feel like we need to make a decision moving forward. Most people know where my position is on this but one way or another we need to discuss this topic and give our staff direction. This is not a vote on community septic for approval or denial but we need to ask our staff to create a text amendment or whatever we need to either allow community septic or not. Then it will be on an agenda in Frist Presentation then come before us for a vote. The following individuals submitted a public comment card: Tim Becker, 15625 Canterbury Chase, Milton, Georgia 30004 Julie Zahner Bailey, 255 Hickory Flat Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Lauren Holmes, 13900 Hagood Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Laura Bentley, 2500 Bethany Church Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Herschel Beker, 1200 Lackey Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Jennifer Pino , 175 Oakhurst Leaf Drive, Milton, Georgia 30004 Councilmember Longoria The biggest issue is that community septic is available by right for landowners. The first thing we need to do is say that it is not available by right. The second thing we need to do is allow it for commercial parcels . While we support a band on it from a residential point of view, I think that the restrictions around it from a residential point of view should be at a higher standard than for commercial use. Councilmember Lusk I propose that we direct staff to proceed with formalization and further study of that section of our development code to tighten up the language, make references to our state EPE regulations regarding decentralized waste water treatment systems. There are two general categories of waste Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday , September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 22 of26 water infrastructure . There is centralized and decentralized. A centralized structure consists of a central waste treatment plant which is served by sewers; a collection system. The other category is a decentralized system which includes individual septic tanks and community waste treatment systems. We have three facilities here in Milton; Summit Hill Elementary School, Birmingham Falls Elementary School, and Birmingham Crossroads. They all comply with the state requirements. Failures on all three of those are almost nil. And, I have documents here from the Fulton County Board of Education which memorializes their record of performance. Just as Karen brought up previously regarding preserving the CUP designation, I think we need to preserve this community waste treatment as part of our development code . Those are tools in our toolbox. There are uses for them and don 't think any of us can sit here and predict the need for them or the use for them 2 years, 5 years, 10 years down the road. Starting to dismantle our development code, chapter by chapter, is a road going down a slippery slope. I think we would be remiss in our duty up here to start to minimize the t ools that we have in developing . And, I question whether or not the vast majority of citizens in this city oppose it. I would venture to say that the vast majority are probably the overwhelming majority of the people in this city don't even understand what a decentralized waste treatment system is and the value of it and the potential uses of it. We have a diminishing amount of developable land out there. There are uses for a decentralized system and where they come into play and where there are shallow rock formations, shallow ground water situations and other situations that design professionals deal with on a daily basis. We have a 200 acre park in the northern part of the city. We haven't even begun to discuss the uses of that 200 acres. The Birmingham Crossroads is ripe for development and there is already a treatment plant there that not only serves the commercial aspect of that area but is also capable of handling a residential part of it on the south side of the area which has already been permitted. I would suggest that our staff start expanding this chapter of our development code. We need to take a long range view of what we are trying to accomplish. Councilmember Thurman Community septic , when used properly , can be a great tool but there is also a lot of room for misuse of it if it is not used properly. I think our current ordinance is too broad and it needs to be strengthened but I do not want to toss out the entire community septic. There are certain situations that it can be used and Birmingham Park may be one of those . It can be a benefit to the city to allow community septic. It could be used in a density neutral manner but we need to make sure we are not liable as a city for it. Councilmember Kunz I have studied community septic in South Fulton, Forsyth and here in Milton. The only place that I can tell they have had problems with it is in Forsyth. We haven't had any problems with the ones in Milton. Community septic can achieve conservation ofland through development. Technology has changed and we need to look to the future. AG-1 was great in the 1920's but things have changed and we need to recognize that. People have learned how to maximize their land so we need the tools and technology to achieve our objectives. We need to direct staff to find a way , if we are going to allow community septic , to establish the parameters that need to be put in place to achieve our objective of conservation development in the city . Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 23 of26 Councilmember Hewitt My concern is the city 's exposure to liability. I don 't want the city to have to pay for something that may fail. There is no guarantee these types of systems will fail; but they can, and I don 't want the city to have to be liable. Do we have the expertise and the resources? What will it take from the city to regulate these systems? Carter Lucas Yes , it would take someone from staff and we would probably contract those services out. Councilmember Hewitt Ken, how are we guaranteed not to be liable for these types of systems? City Attorney Jarrard I would do my best to ensure the city is protected in every way possible. Once council gives direction for staff to proceed then there are various avenues that can be taken. Councilmember Mohrig I agree that we need to enhance the wording of community septic to protect the city. My biggest concern is the financial liability to taxpayers. Mayor Lockwood I agree that community septic can work, however , what is the benefit to allowing community septic? If we want to keep larger lots in Milton by maintaining the one acre minimum that is required for septic then the only benefit I see to community septic is to allow smaller lots. I agree with keeping equestrian areas in Milton, however, I don't think that community septic is going to help preserve equestrian areas. The majority of the citizens that I talk to are more concerned with the number of homes that are being built in Milton and all the additional cars that are on our roads. I agree that community septic would be useful for schools or parks but we do not need to use it for residential purposes. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-196. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7 -0 ). Regular Meeting of the Milton C ity Council Wednesday , September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 24 of26 NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of a Construction Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Acom Tree Care , Inc . for Tree Removal at Broadwell Pavilion. (Agenda Item No. 16-197) (Carter Lu cas, Assistant City Manager) Carter Lucas, Assistant City Manager There are two trees on the back side of the Broadwell Pavilion that need to be removed. We received several opinions from different arborists who all agree that the trees are not in good condition and should be removed. We are bringing to you tonight an agreement to have the trees removed. However, we have been in communication with a company that can re-purpose any potential wood from these trees to use at some possible city structures in the future. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to approve Agenda Item No. 16-197 . Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). 2. Consideration of a Construction Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Bayne Development Group, LLC for the Construction of a Fire Training Facility. (Agenda Item No. 16-198) (R obert Edgar, Fir e Chief) Robert Edgar, Fire Chief A fire training facility will be able to train our firefighters with a live fire and real life conditions. The number of fire structure calls that we receive is very low so it is very important that we can train in these types of environments. Our firefighters and the community are at risk if we are not given the opportunity to practice fire-fighting skills . The ISO and NFPA requires all firefighters to have at least 240 hours of training each year. Live fire training is a part of that training. This fire training facility will have the ability to create smoke and heat. The location of this facility will be at the edge of Birmingham Park on Old Bullpen Road across the street from fire station 43 . Th e following individuals submitted a Public Comment card: Julie Zahner Bailey , 255 Hickory Flat Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Tim Becker, 15625 Canterbury Chase , Milton, Georgia 30004 Laura Bentley, 2500 Bethany Church Road, Milton , Georgia 30004 Motion and Vote: Councilm ember Lusk moved to approve Agenda Item No . 16-198 . Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6 :00 pm Page 25 of26 3. Consideration of a Resolution of the City of Milton , Georgia Enacting an Emergency Moratorium to Bar for 30 Days the Acceptance of Applications for Zonings and Development Permit Approvals, Including Approval of Final Plats, Pursuant to Chapter 64 or Chapter 50 of the Code of the City of Milton, Georgia for Property Adjacent to an Unpaved or Gravel Road and also for those AG-1 Properties Having Frontage Along a Gravel Road with a Paved Extension. RESOLUTION NO. 16-09-382 (Agenda Item No. 16-199) (Ken Jarrard, City Attorney) Ken Jarrard, City Attorney This is a moratorium barring the acceptance of applications for zonings and development permit approvals for property adjacent to an unpaved or gravel road. The city council is concerned that there may exist in the city AG-1 zoned properties adjacent to roads that are primarily gravel but with a small amount of paved extension that may derive the unintended allowance of one acre minimum lot size development when a three acre minimum lot size was intended. The zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance may need to be modified to clarify what constitutes a paved road for purposes of subdivisions. The following individuals submitted a Public Comment card: Tim Becker, 15625 Canterbury Chase, Milton, Georgia 30004 Herschel Beker, 1200 Lackey Road, Milton , Georgia 30004 Daniel Fernandez, 14855 Wood Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Roy Blackwell , 1365 Nix Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Julie Zahner Bailey , 255 Hickory Flat Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Laura Bentley , 2500 Bethany Church Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Jennifer Pino , 175 Oakhurst Leaf Drive , Milton, Georgia 30004 Brooke Hunter, 14680 Wood Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Marilyn Weaver, 14480 Wood Road, Milton, Georgia 30004 Allison Lewis , 15535 Wood Road , Milton, Georgia 30004 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve Agenda Item No . 16-199. Councilmember Mohrig seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). 4. Consideration of a Resolution of the Milton City Council to Enhance the Five GMA Ethics Principles for Certification to be a Georgia Certified City of Ethics. (Agenda Item No. 16-200) (Ke n Jarrard, City Attorney) Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council Wednesday, September 7, 2 016 at 6:00 pm Page 26 of 26 Ken Jarrard, City Attorney This is a resolution that would be applied as policy to the city council as well as an y boards , commissions , or committees. This is regarding the use of electronic communication de vices during a city meeting as defined under the open meeting law. Th e follo w ing individuals s ubmitted a Public Comment card: Tim Becker, 15625 Canterbury Chase , Milton, Georgia 30004 Jennifer Pino , 175 Oakhurst Leaf Drive , Milton, Georgia 30004 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to DENY Agenda Item No . 16-200 . Mayor Lockwood seconded the motion. The motion passed (4-3). Councilmembers Kunz , Lusk , and Mohrig were in opposition. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS STAFF REPORTS ADJOURNMENT (Agenda Item No. 16-201) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Mohrig moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 11 :00 p.m. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0). Date Approved: November 21 , 2016