HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Comment Card CC - 05/09/2016 - Public Comment Cards 05 02 16PUBLIC COMMENT CARD (Please print & till in completelv)
Instructions:
1. Complete this card in its entirety (DO NOT leave anyth ing blank )
2. Give the card to the City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS .
3. When your name is called , approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address.
Please complete the following information:
·~
~would like to make a General Comment that does NOT pertain to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Today 's Date)
O I would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . **(P lease indicate Agenda Item No. below)**
Agenda Item No. :
Zoning Case No. :
TODAY'S DATE: 6--2---/ k
NAME: La,,~ tb { fh?d'
ADDRESS:_l-=Z '-"-7ti) __ '"""-',~=---=.+~~-11-~------
/Yk ~
PHONE: _;_;_a_~_~ __ J_-a_tt:_0 _r ________ _
Please check ALL that apply:
D I am in SUPPORT of this Agenda Item
D I am in OPPOSITION of th is Agenda Item
of[J am a Milton resident
o I am a Milton business owner
o I am a local lobbyist duly registered with the State Ethics Commission
o I am a paid representative of either the support or opposition
o I am affiliated with a Group or Neighborhood Name of Group/Neighborhood __________ _
~ I want to speak about th is Agenda Item
o I DO NOT want to speak but I would like the following comments read into the record :
(Please use the back of this card for additional writing space .)
**Please read the following RULES regard ing Publ ic Comment:
• Public Comment is allowed on an Agenda Item or a General Public Comment can be made about something that is not
on the Agenda .
• NO Public Comment is allowed regarding Consent Agenda Items or First Presentation Items .
• All General Publ ic Comments are allowed a total of five minutes.
• ALL Public Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten minutes. This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group.
• ALL Public Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOTAL of ten minutes . This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group.
If you have made any campaign contributions to a Councilmember aggregating $250.00 or more, please
check "yes" or "no" : DYes D No.
When you have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
PUBLIC COMMENT CARD (Please print & fill in completely)
Instructions:
1. Com plete thi s card in it s entire ty (DO NOT leave anythin g blan k)
2 . Give the card to t he City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS .
3. When your name is called, approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address.
Please complete the following information:
L ou Id like to make a General Comment that does NOT pertain to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Today's Dat e)
.J I would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zon ing Case. **(Please indicate Agenda Item No. below)**
Agenda Item No.: G e...IAC... v
Zoning Case No.: GQ. f'o... t
TODAY'S DATE: OS -C'"2, __, 2 / 6
NAME: -{ !
0 ~ 8-e..c_,_, _..-JC..v
ADDRESS: l ~ b 2 ~ Co \l""\.-h<Z-b
fvL f {~\" 1 b A o'f
Please check ALL that apply:
0 I am in SUPPORT of this Agenda Item
0 J,,am in OPPOSITION of this Agenda Item
W I am a Milton resident
0 I am a Milton business owner
D I am a local lobbyist duly registered with the State Eth ics Commission
0 I am a pa id representat ive of e ither the support or opposition
D I am affiliated w ith a Group or Neighborhood*** Name of Group/Neighborhood ***(complete attached form)
***You are required to fill out the attached Affidavit before speaking on behalf of the group you are representing .
L1 I want to speak about this Agenda Item
D I DO NOT wan t to speak but I would like the following comments read into the record :
(Please use the back of this card for additional writing space .)
**Please read the following RULES regarding Public Comment:
• Public Comment is allowed on an Agenda Item or a General Publ ic Comment can be made about something that is not
on the Agenda .
• NO Publ ic Comment is allowed regarding Consent Agenda Items or F irst Presentation Items.
• All General Public Comments are allowed a total of five minutes .
• ALL Public Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOTAL of ten m inutes . Th is means that ALL
people who wish to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group .
• ALL Publ ic Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOTAL of ten minutes . This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group.
i;-~-~~-h~~~--~~ci~-~-~;-~~~-~~i:<~~-~;;~~-~;~~-~~-;~-~--c~~~~~i~~~b~-;-~~~;~~~~~~~--$2;0~00-~;-~-~~~.--~~~~~~
check "yes" or "no" : Dves [Q'N~.'
When you have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
. -:J) &1~~~
PUBLIC COMMENT CARD (Please print & fill in completely)
Instructions:
1. Complete th is card in its ent irety (DO NOT leave anyth ing blank )
2 . Give the card to the City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS .
3. When your name is called , approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address .
Please complete the following information:
4 would like to make a General Comment that does NOT perta in to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Today's Date)
0 I would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . **(Pl ease indica te Agenda Item No. below)**
Agenda Item No. : ______ _
Zoning Case No. : ------,.---
TODAY'S DATE: --=5'~/'"-J.~//_(}J ___ _
NAME :_>"""""'"'S:-"'-c _o --+tlt __ /___,___) _-Vr_l!L _____ _
ADDRESS:~l-"'-'2-=-~-'-0_..........H---=lj~tl \l_f\_____;_H __;_q ...;._/ I ___ _
k o J-w-t, 1\ } G ,/1 3 DO
PHONE: __ /_'J_'O_~_~_'l _~_ .... _lO_O_~_D_· ____ _
Please check ALL that apply:
o I am in SUPPORT of this Agenda Item
D I am in OPPOSITION of th is Agenda Item
o I am a Milton resident
0 I am a Milton bus iness owner
D I am a local lobby ist duly reg istered w ith the State Eth ics Comm iss ion
D I am a paid representative of either the support or opposition
o I am affiliated with a Group or Neighborhood Name of Group/Ne ighborhood
O I want to speak about th is Agenda Item
o I DO NOT want to speak but I would like the follow ing comments read into the record :
(Plea se use the back of this card for additional writin g spa ce.)
**Please read the follow ing RULES regard ing Publ ic Comment:
----------~
• Pub li c Comment is a ll owed on an Agenda Item or a General Pub li c Comment can be made about someth ing that is no t
on the Agenda.
• NO Publ ic Comment is a ll owed regard ing Consent Agenda Items o r Fi rst Presentation Items .
• A ll Genera l Publ ic Comments are allowed a total of five minutes.
• ALL Pub lic Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are a ll owed a TOT AL of ten m inutes . Th is means that ALL
peop le who wis h to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group.
• ALL Public Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten m inutes . Th is means that AL L
people who w ish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group.
If you have made any campaign contributions to a Councilmember aggregating $250.00 or more, please
check "yes" or "no" : D Yes D No .
When you have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
. f r-'i..r~-J)l_ A~ •.YJ~"'D~ ~ ~.,Arfl·~ri
PUBLIC COMMEfT CARD (Please ~11 i~i~pletely) \
Instructions:
1. Comp lete this card in its entirety (DO NOT leave anyth in g blank )
2. Give the card to the City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS .
3 . When your name is called, approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address.
Please complete the following information:
_o }would l!ke to make a General Comment that doe.s NOT pe~_:iin to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Today 's Date)
16 1 would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Pl ease indicate Agenda It em No. below)**
Agenda Item No. :_~/~_--_/_O_'iJ __ (j)
Zoning Case No . : ______ _
TODAY'SDATE: 5'-J~6· ----"-----------
NAME: ;;(e jy DOG'l;V D
ADDRESS: /L./1(7 ~ &;e~e;f ;(cl
/11L 71) r-'
PHONE: -~-v_l/_-_5_7_2_-_7_0_~_2 ______ _
Pl~se check ALL that apply:
V I am in SUPPORT of this Agenda Item
LJ J am in OPPOSITION of this Agenda Item
~I am a Milton resident
0 I am a Mil ton business owner
D I am a local lobbyist duly registered with the State Eth ics Commiss ion
0 I am a paid representative of eit her the support or oppos ition
0 I am affil iated with a Group or Neighborhood*** Name of Group/Neighborhood ***(complete attached form)
• / ***You are required to fill out the attached Affidavit before speaking on behalf of the group you are representing .
r;r I want to speak about this Agenda Item
0 I DO NOT want to speak but I would like the following comments read into the record :
(Please use the back of this card for additional writing space.)
**Please read the following RULES regard ing Public Commen t:
• Publ ic Comment is allowed on an Agenda Item or a General Publ ic Comment can be made about something that is not
on the Agenda .
• NO Publ ic Comment is allowed regarding Consent Agenda Items or First Presentation Items.
• All General Publ ic Comments are allowed a total of five minutes .
• ALL Publ ic Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOTAL of ten minutes . This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group .
• ALL Public Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten minutes . This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group.
If you have made any camp~gp contributions to a Councilmember aggregating $250.00 or more, please
check "yes" or "no" : D Yes !B'No.
When you have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
~ l~/lOq
PUBLIC COMMENT CARD (Please print & fill in completely)
Instructions:
1. Complete th is ca rd in its ent irety (DO NOT leave anything blank)
2. Give the ca rd to the City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS .
3. When your name is called , approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address .
Please complete the following information:
''1--
O I wou ld like to make a General Comment that does NOT pertain to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Today 's Date)
O I would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . **(Please indicate Agenda It em N o. below)**
Agenda Item No. : l It::>-lPe,
Zoning Case No. : ______ _
TODAY'S DATE:----------
NAME:_-J_o...;...;;..,C-_.:;_\c _L=.>...W\J~~DY'\ ............. _______ _
ADDRESS:~~~~-~-~-M-__ ~_c\_; __ _
~D4
Please check ALL that apply :
~ am in SUPPORT of th is Agenda Item
0 I am in OPPOSITION of th is Agenda Item
V I am a Milton res ident
o I am a Milton bus iness owner
O I am a local lobby ist du ly reg istered w ith the State Eth ics Comm iss ion
o I am a paid representat ive of either the support or opposition
o I am affiliated w ith a Group or Neighborhood Na me of Group/Ne ighborhood __________ _
~I want to speak about th is Agenda Item
O I DO NOT want to speak but I would like the following comments read into the record :
(Please use the back of th is card for additiona l writing space.)
**Please read the following RULES regard ing Public Comment:
• Pub li c Comment is all owed on an Agenda Item or a Genera l Public Comment can be made about someth ing that is no t
on the Agenda .
• NO Pub li c Comment is allowed regard ing Consent Agenda Items or First Presentation Items.
• All General Publ ic Comments are a ll owed a total of five minutes.
• ALL Pub lic Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are a ll owed a TOTAL of ten m inutes . Th is means that ALL
peop le who w ish to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group.
• ALL Publ ic Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten minutes . Th is means that ALL
peop le who w ish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group.
If you have made any campaign contributions to a Councilmember aggregating $250.00 or more, please
check "yes" or "no" : Oves 0 No.
When you have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
Instructions:
1 Complete th is card in its entirety (DO NOT leave anyt hing blank )
2. Give the card to the City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS.
3. When your name is called, approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address.
Please complete the following information:
o I would like to make a General Comment that does NOT pertain to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Today 's Date)
!:1f would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . **(Please indica te Agenda Item No. belo w)**
Agenda Item No. : f 6 -f b ""\.-.
Zoning Case No. : ---r------
TODAY'S DATE: >/2 -~,-----------
NAME: )},,., of') f-;c,.r. "1.>c>"' 1ol<CA t 0 N
ADDRESS: ~ ijt:J/-c Pr<..,t,'~ (),..,~ .... .,[, lW
Please check ALL that apply:
o I am in SUPPORT of this Agenda Item ~ am in OPPOSITION of this Agenda Item
o I am a Milton resident
o I am a Milton business owner
~m a local lobbyist duly registered with the State Ethics Commission
o I am a paid representative of either the support or oppos ition
o I am affiliated with a Group or Neighborhood Name of Group/Neighborhood __________ _
o I want to speak about this Agenda Item
o I DO NOT want to speak but I would like the following comments read into the record :
(Please use the back of this card for additional writing space.)
**Please read the following RULES regarding Public Comment:
• Public Comment is allowed on an Agenda Item or a General Public Comment can be made about something that is not
on the Agenda .
• NO Public Comment is allowed regarding Consent Agenda Items or First Presentation Items .
• All General Public Comments are allowed a total of five minutes .
• ALL Public Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOTAL of ten minutes. This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group.
• ALL Public Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten m inutes. Th is means that ALL
people who wish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group.
If you have made any campaiaJYtontributions to a Councilmember aggregating $250.00 or more, please
check "yes" or "no" : DYes B'No.
When you .have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
MIITCYN ~
ESTABLISHED 2006
AFFIDAVIT FOR REPRESENTATIVE OF
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCATION, ORGANIZATION, OR GROUP AFFILIATION -----I, J At"'? J loA .. '"'lrv-, do hereby warrant and represent that I am a member of
the e C)1;..,q,I fcJ,, Q.s _,"\I c.., V'O'-Y'\.. and in that capacity have been duly authorized
by this organization to speak on behalf of the organization before the City Counci~,]/.!11!$> C8nn:aissioB, er the
-B-8Etf'd of-:6on.ii:lg Al'f'e~h of the City of Milton with respect to Zoning Petition(s~Jl..-/ ~?.--,
--------' .
This )__ day of _/}1_~--+-----' 20 / b
Si
TO BE COMPLETED BY NOTARY PUBLIC ONLY:
State of Geor~a :}-
County of ~r-7, ~ ....... _ /
Onthis Z,~ dayof ___ ~ __________ ,20 /ft,
_____________________ personally appeared before me .
~o is personally known to me .
__ Whose identity I proved on the basis of __________ _
__ Whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of ______ ~ a credible witness.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this -1d..__ day of ~fhtf~-------' ~/Y .
otaryPublic: lli7A./ ~ /
My Commission Expires : l ( 2 t ,,(?
(SEAL)
This form is to be filed in the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, City of Milton, 13000 Deerfield Parkway,
Suite 107 AIB Milton, Georgia 30004.
PROMOTING BALANCED
AND RESPONSIBLE GROWTH
PRE uENT & ._Eu
Michael E. Paris
BOAR (i~['IRECT''K>
Scott W. Condra, Chairman
Andy Macke, Vice Chairman
Steven J. Labovitz, Secretary
Scott Selig, Treasurer
Marian Adeimy
W. Kerry Armstrong
David Barker
Bryan Batson
Brandon L. Beach
Jeremy Becker
Josh Belinfante
John Bonanno
Tad Braswell
J. Christopher Brown
Rick Brownlow
Wendy S. Butler
Chuck Button
Daniel Buyers
Chris Coan
Dean Collins
David W. Connell
Paul Corley
Delores Crowell
Laurel David
Randy L. Dellinger
G. Douglas Dillard
Chris S. Doughtie
Lee C. Duncan
Jim Durrett
Albert G. Edwards
Terry Fox
Rob Garcia
Heath Garrett
Clark S. Gore
Ann Miller Hanlon
Stephen K. Hill
Douglas R. Hooker
Doug P. Jenkins
Dr. Daniel J. Kaufman
Tad Le1thead
David Leonard
Lawrence E. Liebross
Tim Lowe
Ryan Marshall
Wayne H. Mason
Sean Mclendon
M. Scott Meadows
Paul Michael
John Moore
Paul F Morris
Emory Morsberger
Alv1 n P. Nash
Gerald L. Pouncey, Jr.
Scott Prigge
Harold Rehe1s
S. Brent Reid
Harry G. Rice
Sally Riker
Malaika Rivers
Charles Roach, Jr
John F. Robbins
Rob Ross
Bill Russell
H. Jerome Russell
Daniel H. Sherman
Arnie Silverman
Chr1st1e Sims
Ellen W. Smith
Woody Snell
Michael L Sullivan
Robert J. Svedberg
Helen Preston Tapp
David Welch
Doris Willmer
Jay C. Wolverton, Jr.
Louis D. Young, Jr.
H. Mason Zimmerman
May 2 , 2016
Milton City Council
13000 Deerfield Parkway
Milton , Ga. 30004
Re : Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Increase
Members of the Milton City Council ,
COUNCIL
for QUALITY
GROWTH
The Council for Quality Growth is a not-for-profit trade association
comprised of a diverse membership of developers , contractors, engineers ,
architects , planners , law firms and bankers with a vested interest in quality
growth and development in the Region and City of Milton . As the City
Council considers an increase in the City's parks and recreations impact
fees, the Council would like to offer comments and suggestions on the
proposed fees .
The Council understands that impact fees are a viable and effective way
for local governments to fund the expansion of government services
needed as a community grows and , in principle , the Council and its
members recognize and support the City's efforts . However we ask that the
proposed increased fees be implemented in a way that does not create an
un-mitigatable impact on projects and overall economic development , both
residential and commercial , for the City 's long-term economic viability .
The proposed fee increase is based on the Ross+ Associates Impact Fee
Report , which specifically states that the numbers presented are intended
to "establish a ceiling," where the impact fees calculated are the Maximum
Allowable fees by State law, not recommendations for reasonable fees
based on development trends in the North Fulton Region .
GA State law allows for the reduction of one "Public Facility Category"
impact fees (i.e . Parks and Recreation}, without having to decrease the
other categories' fees . Therefore , continuing the reduction of the proposed
Parks and Recreation fees would not hinder the City's ability to collect fees
for the Public Safety and Transportation components of the Capital
Improvements Element.
According to the proposed Capital Improvements Element , Impact Fees
are expected to pay for 306 acres of new park land , 45 acres and 38 miles
of new trails, and 1 , 138 acres of conservation easements , as well as
numerous public facilities . However, Impact Fee revenue CANNOT be
used to fund the maintenance, operations or replacement of deteriorated
facilities . How will the upkeep of these new public parks, trails and facilities
be managed and funded?
5901-C Peachtree Dunwoody Road, Suite 500 I Atlanta, Georgia 30328 I councilforqualitygrowth.org I 770.813 3370
Ross + Associates reported a substantial existing Level of Service shortfall for parks , trails and
recreational facilities in the City. While only the "new growth demand" is used to calculate the impact
fees , existing residents will use and benefit from the parks built with impact fee revenue without having
paid impact fees themselves .
The Council for Quality Growth is concerned that the adoption of increased parks and recreation fee ,
which is an increase from the current $3, 100 to almost $6 ,300 per dwelling unit , required per new family
in Milton , where existing residents have never paid such high fees, may place a disproportionate cost
burden of parks and infrastructure improvements on new residents . Additionally , at the previous City
Council Meeting where the parks and recreation impact fee was discussed last fall , City Council members
expressed concern over obligating the City to allocate the required funding to match impact fee revenue
for the park improvements described in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan .
At $7 ,700 , Milton would have the highest combined residential Impact Fees in North Fulton and
approaching the highest fees in the Atlanta Metro Region . Please see the attached regional Impact Fees
Comparison Chart for your reference on Milton 's fees versus surrounding cities and counties .
The Council recommends continuing a reduced Parks and Recreation Impact Fee that will allow the City
to generate funding for park improvements, but does not place a disproportionate cost burden on
residential developers and new residents .
The Council and its members look forward to continuing to work with you to adopt a fee schedule that is
based on a clear need to fund new parks and recreation facilities and improvements needed as new
developments are constructed . Please do not hesitate to call on us whenever we may be of service to
you in this and any other matter. Thank you for your dedicated service .
Sincerely,
Michael E. Paris
President & CEO
Council for Quality Growth
James Touchton
Director, Policy & Government Affairs
Council for Quality Growth
Attachment: Regional Impact Fee Schedule Comparison Table
COUNC I L
for QUALITY
IMPACT FEES: REGIONAL COMPARISON
GROWTH
City
Forsyth County
(Adopte d4/07 /2016)
Milton
(Adopted 10/5/15)
Alph aretta
(Ad opted 9/28/15)
Sandy Springs
(2008)
Roswell
(2015)
Cherokee
County
{2013)
Parks and Rec Fee :
SF Res : $1015 per dwelling unit
MF Res : $645 per dwel l ing un it
Pa r ks and Re c Fee:
SF Re s: $3 ,107.55 per dwelling
unit
Apartm e nt: $3,107 .55 per
dwell ing unit
Condo/TH : $3 ,107.55 pe r
dwelling unit
(Only 50 % of maximum collected )
Park s and Re c Fe e :
SF Re s: $5 ,157 per dwelling unit
MF Res: $5 ,157 per dwelling unit
Comm . (<lOOK sq .ft .): $94 per
1,000 sq .ft.
Office : $267 per 1,000 sq .ft .
Parks and Rec Fee : $165 .00 per
dwell i ng unit.
Par ks and Re c Fee:
Res up to 1,500 sq .ft .: $318 to
$424 per dwelling
Res 1,501 t o 2,500 sq .ft .: $501 to
$559
Res 2,501 t o 4,000 sq .ft .: $607 to
$682
Res 4,001 sq .ft . or more : $713
Parks and Rec Fee: $283 .74 per
dwelling unit.
Impact Fees
Public Safety(+ Library) Fee:
SF Res : $658 per dwelling unit
MF Res : $418 per dwelling unit
Comm .: $532 per 1,000 sq . ft
Office : $227 per 1,000 sq .ft.
Public Safety Fee :
SF Res : $638 .43 per dwell i ng unit
Apartment : $638.43 per dwelling unit
Condo/TH : $638 .43 pe r dwel ling unit
Comm .: ranges from $100 to $750 per
1,000 sq.ft. depending on retail clas s
Pub lic Safety Fe e:
SF Res : $138 per dwe ll i ng unit
MF Re s: $138 per dwelling unit
Comm . (<lOOK sq .ft .): $251 per1,000
sq .ft .
• Office: $205 per 1,000 sq .ft.
Pub lic Saf ety Fee:
Res : $165 .00 per dwelling unit.
Comm .: $433 .00 per 1,000 sq .ft .
Office : $168.00 per 1,000 sq.ft.
Publi c Safety Fee:
Res up to 1,500 sq .ft.: $521 t o $695 per
dwelling
Res 1,501 to 2,500 sq .ft .: $821 to $916
Re s 2,501 to 4,0 00 sq .ft .: $995 to $1 ,117
Re s 4,001 sq .ft . or more: $1 ,169
Comm .: $260 per 1,000 sq .ft .
Office : $320 per 1,000 sq .ft .
Publi c Safety (+ Library) Fee:
SF Res : $799 .22 pe r dwelling unit
MF Re s: $799 .22 per dwelling unit
Comm .: range s from $50 to $500 per
1,000 sq .ft. depending on re t ail cl ass
Hall County Fl at fee collected fo r all i mpr oveme nt catego ri es :
SF Resident ial : $1 ,242 per dwel ling un it
M F Re side ntia l : $1 ,242 per dwel li ng u nit
Commercial : Range s from $21 to $564 per 1,000 sq .ft.
Neighboring Communities with No Impact Fees :
• Dawson County
• Gwinnett County
• DeKalb County
• City of Johns Creek
• City of Suwanee
• City of Duluth
Transpo rtati on Fee :
SF Res : $1 ,968 per dwelling unit
MF Re s: $1 ,247 per dwelling un it
Co mm.: $0 .
Office : $0 .
Transportati on Fee :
SF Re s: $646 .98 per dwel lin g unit
Apartment : $646 .98 per dwell i ng un it
Condo/TH : $646 .98 per dwell i ng unit
Comm .: ranges from $2400 to $8700 pe r
1,000 sq .ft . depending on retai l clas s
Transpo rtatio n Fee :
SF Re s: $881 pe r dwelli ng un it
MF Res : $881 per dwell i ng unit
Comm. (<lOOK sq.ft .): $1,156 per 1,000
sq .ft .
Office (<lOOK sq .ft .): $267 pe r 1,000
sq .ft .
Transportati o n Fee :
SF Res : $1316.45 per dwelling unit
Apartment : $924.40 per dwe ll i ng unit
Condo/TH : $806.10 per dwel li ng unit
Comm .: ranges from $2 k to $40K per
1,000 sq .ft. depe nd ing on retail clas s
Transportation Fee :
Res u p to 1,500 sq .ft .: $964 to $1 ,285 pe r
dwelling
Res 1,501 to 2,500 sq .ft.: $1 ,514 to
$1,690
Res 2,501 to 4,000 sq .ft .: $1 ,8 35 to
$2 ,064
Res 4,001 sq .ft . or more : $2 ,159
Comm .: $2 ,718 per 1,000 sq .ft .
Tran sportati on Fe e :
SF Res : $59 per dwellin g un it
MF Res : $41 per dwelling un it
Comm.: ranges from $25 to $2100 pe r
1,000 sq .ft. depending on reta i l cl ass
**Only 10% of maximum al lowable roads
impact fee is collected
.;;...P....;;U;;..;;B~L.;;...IC;;......;~·~"*'..-1¥;..;.;tr;..;.;w~=N..;.T..;.....C;;..A;....;.;.R..-D~ (Ptease print & fi ll in completely)
Instructions:
1. Complete this card in its entirety (DO NOT leave anything blank)
2. Gi ve t he card to t he City Clerk BEFORE THE COUNCIL MEETING BEGINS.
3. When your name is called , approach the podium and speak directly into the microphone and state your name and address.
Please complete the following information:
D I would like to make a General Comment that does NOT pertain to an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . (Skip to Toda y's Date)
J I would like to speak about an Agenda Item or Zoning Case . **(Plea se indicate Agenda Item No. below)**
Agenda Item No. :
Zoning Case No. : -------
TODAY'S DATE: Co -)_ -~
NAME:_D~{j:.-"_~_6 _~_\_\_, J _______ _
ADDRESS:~ l £\ s \-\d~~c\ ~fk= G \,--
:f o~~ Cr-e.eJL <a A
PHONE: L\o L\ ~ 1 is · oLf 1w
Please check ALL that apply:
D I am in SUPPORT of this Agenda Item
/(..I am in OPPOSITION of this Agenda Item
D I am a Milton resident
D I am a Milton bus iness owner
"5(1 am a local lobbyist duly registered with the State Ethics Commission
D I am a paid representative of either the support or opposition
D I am affiliated with a Group or Neighborhood*** Name of Group/Neighborhood ***(complete attached form)
***You are required to fill out the attached Affidavit before speaking on behalf of the group you are representing.
D I want to speak about this Agenda Item
0 I DO NOT want to speak but I would like the following comments read into the record :
(Please use the back of this card for additional writing space .)
**Please read the following RULES regarding Publ ic Comment:
• Publ ic Comment is allowed on an Agenda Item or a General Publ ic Comment can be made about someth ing that is not
on the Agenda .
• NO Public Comment is allowed regarding Consen t Agenda Items or First Presentation Items .
• All General Publ ic Comments are allowed a total of five minutes .
• ALL Publ ic Comments in SUPPORT of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten m in utes . This means that ALL
people who wish to speak in SUPPORT have a total of ten minutes as a group .
• ALL Public Comments in OPPOSITION of an Agenda Item are allowed a TOT AL of ten m inutes . This means that ALL
people who w ish to speak in OPPOSITION have a total of ten minutes as a group .
If you have made any campaign contributions to a Councilmember aggregating $250.00 or more, please
check "yes" or "no" : DYes ~No .
When you have completed this card, please give it to the CITY CLERK before the meeting begins.
Please see the CITY CLERK if you have any questions regarding this Public Comment Card.
. )'
AFFIDAVIT FOR REPRESENTATIVE OF
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCATION, ORGANIZATION, OR GROUP AFFILIATION
I, Ua--'/: c\ E.' \ ~ 5 , do hereby warrant and represent that I am a member of
the G r~..lV M\""°"" 'fl~ Qu ~lde.t"'" A,-.sA' and in that capacity have been duly authorized
by this organization to speak on behalf of the organization before the City Council, P-liumiSft Commissiou, 0r the
;goa.rd sf Zoning l'rfl13eals of the City of Milton with respect to Zoning Petition(s) # / fL , Jo Z... ,
,20J$_
Signature
TO BE COMPLETED BY NOTARY PUBLIC ONLY:
State of Geo~,,,/
County of~~~~'t:!l~--
On this Z !'Ji__. da y of~~----------' 20 / {,
_____________________ personally appeared before me.
~Who is personall y known to me.
__ Whose identity I proved on the basis of __________ _
This form is to be filed in the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, City of Milton, 13000 Deerfield Parkway,
Suite 10 7 A/B Milton, Georgia 30004.
\
JOED. WIDTLEY
1250 Birmingham Road
Alpharetta, GA 30004
joedwhitley@yahoo.com
770-331-9262
By Hand Delivery and Email
Mayor Joe Lockwood
Council Member Matt Kunz
Council Member Burt Hewitt
Council Member Joe Longoria
Council Member Bill Lusk
Council Member Rick Mohrig
Council Member Karen Thurman
Interim City Manager Steven Krokoff
City Attorney Ken Jarrard
May 2, 2016
Community Development Director Kathy Field
Planning Commissioners
Planner Robyn MacDonald
Planning Com.missioner Peyton Jamison
RE: RZ16-02 and VC16-01
Dear Mayor and City Council:
joe .Jockwood@cityofiniltonga .us
matt.kunz@citvofmiltonga.us
burt.hewitt@cityofiniltonga.us
joe.longoria@cityofmiltonga.us
bill.lusk@cityofmiltonga .us
rick .mohrig@cityofiniltonga .us
karen .therman@cityofmiltonga .us
steven.krokoff@cityofmiltonga .us
kjarrard@jarrard-davis.com
kathleen.field@cityofmiltonga .us
PC@cityofmiltonga.us
robyn macdonald@cityofiniltonga .us
pjamison@dfplanning .com
peyt()n .jamison@gmail.com
The vote that was conducted to approve the rezoning of the Ebenezer Road parcel by the
Council on April 25, 2016 is not in the best interest of Milton as a policy matter and I also believe
it to be invalid as a legal proposition. I attended the six and a half hour hearing on April 25th in
its entirety and I have made the following observations that I hope will be shared by the entire
Council. It seems to me that the Council would want to "get it right" so the parcel in question can
be developed in a way that protects the interests of all the citizens of Milton:
• The required specificity as contemplated by the zoning regulations was not
accomplished;
• Procedural safeguards were not present throughout the hearing; and
• The analysis given by the City Attorney, Ken Jarrard, on the word ''precedent" is
inconsistent with a broader interpretation commonly used by attorneys for developers.
The details that invalidate the zoning decision on Monday, April 25, 2016 are enumerated
herein. Additionally, please find an attachment with selected video clips from the zoning hearing
supporting these points and the necessity that this rezoning be rescinded.
Immediate action by the City of Milton is required to ensure that due process has not
been violated. An agenda item should be placed on a future agenda so that Council can rescind
this decision. I further request the Interim City Manager Steven Krokoff (given Milton is a strong
City Manager form of government) evaluate and respond to each of these issues. Finally, I
1
request that the meeting minutes from the April 25, 2016 not be approved memorializing Monday,
April 25th 's invalid vote.
Required Specificity As Contemplated By The Zoning Regulations
The April 25th vote by a majority of the Council to approve the rezoning of the Ebenezer
Road parcel did not result in a valid or legal rezoning. I believe the City's interest together with
your constituents in holding the Ebenezer Parcel Developer to a clear and definable set of
requirements may have been lost in the effort to reach a compromise that would garner Council
Member Joe Longoria's vote. I suggest City Staff and retained independent legal counsel1
review the April 25th Council meeting video to asce1tain if what the Council voted to approve
included all the specifications that the City Staff wanted for this parcel and to ascertain if the
required specificity as contemplated by the zoning regulations was accomplished. Specifically, I
refer you to the following points in the televised record of the April 25th Council meeting that
support the lack of specificity:
• 4:57 PM -City Attorney Ken Jarrard makes a statement about tile site plan being a
singular prediction of the future and confirms to Council Member Joe Longoria
tliat tile site plan can't c/iange. Several times after tliat tlte City Attorney appears
to contradict this statement.
Council Member Longoria confirms his understanding that if the rezoning is approved, the site
plan and the conditions are the zoning control documents. City Attorney Ken Jarrard provides
confirmation saying, "Right".
• 5:03 PM -Council Member Longoria asks City Attorney Ken Jarrard if changing
the number of lots makes tile site plan invalid.
Before City Attorney Ken Jarrard responds, the Applicant's attorney suggests that
because the City does not guarantee the number of homes that can be constructed on a site, the
rezoning site plan is conceptual. However, in a Community Unit Plan (CUP) rezoning the site
plan is not conceptual. As prescribed by the CUP ordinance, the rezoning site plan becomes the
zoning control document for features depicted graphically and use areas shown on the rezoning
site plan are required to be located on the ground as shown on the rezoning site plan.2
• 5:04 PM-Counci/Member Longoria asks afol/ow-up question before he receives
an answer to his previous question to tile City Attorney Ken Jarrard.
The suggestion that the site plan is conceptual becomes material after a motion to reduce the
number of homes to 45.
• 6:21 PM -Council Member Longoria asks City Attorney Ken Jarrard about tile
approval process for tile revised site plan that is required if council removes five
homes from a plan that has homes sited in specific locations.
1 We suggest that the independent legal counsel conduct.first a review of whether or not Council had a valid rezoning vote on April
25th; secondly, that the independent legal counsel should assess and evaluate whether due process was followed in accomplishing the
rezoning vote; thirdly, that any issues associated with the following of appropriate parliamentary procedure was observed in the votes
that occurred on April 25th authorizing rezoning of the Ebenezar parcel ; and.finally that the independent legal counsel assess and
evaluate whether or not Council Member Thurman's recusal was effective and did not void the Councils 's rezoning vote .
2 The City does not guarantee the yield of a site, because it is the developer and not the city that determines how many houses can be
constructed as the detailed drawings are prepared for the permitting process . During this process , the developer may determine it is
not possibl e to achieve the maximum yield allowed by the rezoning .
2
City Attorney Ken Jarrard explains the site plan is a conceptual site plan so it is
always anticipated tltere are going be differences between wltat tile site plan may
look like in tile zoning process versus what is actually built on the ground.
This answer by the City Attorney is in conflict with the requirements of the CUP ordinance in my
opinion .
• 6:22 PM -Council Member Longoria: "I guess I just got confused because we are
voting on a very specific application of /tomes on a property and we've got 64 acres
we just said we would allow tit em to build 45 homes if we were to pass it. We got to
know more than tltat. We got to understand where those homes are going to be."
• 6:22 PM -City Attorney Ken Jarrard: "Then some of tile language in the
application indicating conceptual site plan is somethillg you are probably not going
to be comfortable with either. The whole notion of concept anticipates it is going to
look different on the ground." 3
• 6:22 PM -Council Member Longoria: "Okay."
Neither the City Attorney, nor City Staff, explained to Council Member Longoria that the CUP
ordinance anticipates that Council may require the Applicant to make very specific changes to the
site plan as a condition of the rezoning approval, and that a process exists to ensure the Applicant
complies with the revised site plan conditions before construction permits are issued.
• 6:24 PM-Mayor Lockwood remarks tltat the location of the five ltouses to be
removed may not make any material difference on tlie view shed.
It is unclear why the City Attorney did not advise the Council that they have the right to identify
specifically the homes Council intended to remove from the site plan as a condition of zoning or
to advise Council that they could require additional buffers to protect the rural view shed .
• 6:25 PM -Less than one minute before the final vote on tile rezoning, tltree
Council Member's remark about tile site plan being conceptual.
Again, the CUP zoning ordinance does not recognize the notion of a conceptual site
plan . The CUP ordinance requires the development on the ground to match those items
graphically depicted on the site plan. The introduction by the Applicant and the approval by
Council of a conceptual site plan is a substantial depa1ture from the requirements of the CUP
ordinance and raises the question of a valid or legal rezoning .
At the end of the Council meeting, no progress was made to bring the Applicant's
promises into alignment with the zoning conditions. Significant differences between his promises
and the site plan and staff proposed conditions had become apparent during the preceding six
hours.4 The Applicant quickly negotiated the acceptance of his own preferred zoning conditions .
3 I do not believe this is a corre ct interpretat ion of the requirem ents of the CUP zoning ordinanc e. The City Attorn ey may have been
inform ing Council Member Long ori a of th e nature of the Applicant 's subm itt al. But th is further do cum ents tha t the rezoning was not
in agreement with the requiremen ts of the CUP ordinance .
4 Many examples are available of tim es when the App li can t agreed to additional requirements reque sted by Co uncil Member Joe
Longoria but the se agreements did no t be come cond itions of zo ning . I believ e these items re pres ent a loss of opp ortuni ty for the City .
3
• 6:23 PM-Applicant requests approval of revised conditions in exchange/or
reducing the number of homes to 45.
• 6: 25 PM -City Attorney Ken Jarrard notes that City Staff has not had significant
time to review the revised conditions proposed by the Applicant.
If City Staff had been provided sufficient time to review the revised conditions submitted
by the Applicant, they may have identified material changes introduced by the Applicant. For
example, the change of a single word from "northwest" to "west" renders the right of way
dedication requested by staff for the benefit of citizens to a condition with limited if any value.
Also, the acceptance of the developer's recommended conditions with little discussion by council
does not achieve the goals intended by City Staff.
In summary, after hours of negotiations with the developer and in a rush to get a deal
done, Council did not obtain adequate protections for the Milton community on the rezoned
property: The final site plan labeled an area as "undeveloped" land that had been identified on
previous sites plans as a "conservation area". In fact, the approved zoning conditions do not
require dedication of any land into a permanent conservation easement.
Council did not include in the zoning conditions adequate language to protect the buffer
along Ebenezer. What had been previously identified as a "wooded buffer" is labeled only
"buffer" in the approved site plan. The zoning conditions do not require buffers to be preserved
as natural undisturbed buffers.
Procedural Safeguards Not Present
Procedural safeguards were not maintained during the seven (7) motions and additional
amendments .
1. 5 :24 PM -Motion to accept results in a tie
2. 5:36 PM-Motion to deny is defeated 4-2
3. 5:36 PM-Motion to defer is defeated 4-2
4. 5:55 PM-Motion to deny results in a tie
5. 6:08 PM -Motion to declare impasse results in a tie
6. 6.13 PM -Motion to defer is defeated 4-2
7. 6:24 PM -Motion to accept (45 homes) is approved 4-2
5:35:06 PM -Council Member Burt Hewitt explains that in the past after two ties on
opposite motions deliberations end. The City Attorney confirmed. If the Council runs
out of steam, doesn't feels like anybody else has anything to offer, we kind of get a
sense nothing is going to be feasible or viable tonight, we will end it and move to the
next agenda item. The take away would be that we have a denial.
5:55:30 PM-The vote 011 the opposite motion is tied. (Note: This calls into question
whether deliberations should have ended with a denial of the rezoning).
City Attorney Ken Jarrard explains that Council has the option to defer the agenda item.
Further, he explains that the Applicant has agreed to a deferral or we can simply cry uncle and
decide there is no more action to take on it. (Note: This contradicts Council Member Hewitt's
understanding that after two ties on opposite motions the item is effectively denied.)
4
..
5:56:23 PM-Council Member Longoria calls/or a roll call vote.
5: 58:30 PM -Mayor Lockwood calls for order.
Mayor Lockwood: "At tliis point, if we left it rig/it now, it basically was denied just by
default."
5: 58: 52 PM -Rec used Council Member Tliurman intervenes stating, ''point of order, I
tliink if you leave it like tltis it's not denied, it's tabled."
Mayor Lockwood: "Ken, confirm that for me. Ken that's what you said earlier."
City Attorney: "Your due process is, if it is tabled, it is effectively denied."
5: 59:03 PM -Recused Council Member Thurman intervenes again stating, "I thought
tabled, automatically comes back. "
5:59:15 PM-City Attorney Jarrard states, "Effectively we have denied the Applicant
his appellant rig/it if they wanted to appeal because we liave pocketed the action."
5: 59:21 PM -Mayor Lockwood: "So right now it is sitting on the table?"
5: 59:22 PM -City Attorney Jarrard: "That is correct."
5:59:25 PM-Mayor Lockwood: ''A majority of the council could bring it back."
5: 59:26 PM -Applicant's attorney intervenes, giving advice on returning an item from
the table.
5: 59:49 PM -Mayor Lockwood asks for guidance from the City Attorney.
5:59:53 PM-City Attorney Jarrard: "So candidly the action to take now at 11:55,
would be deferral, think about it at the next meeting, or we give up."
6:00:27 PM-City Attorney Jarrard suggests a motion to declare impasse.
6:00:35 PM-Mayor Lockwood: "What does that do?"
6:00:27 PM -City Attorney Jarrard: "That is effectively a denial."
6:00:54 PM -Council Member Matt Kunz begins negotiating with Council Member
Rick Mo/trig and deliberations resume without regard/or the declaration of denial
prior to recused Council Member Thurman's intervention.
Beginning at 6: 15 PM in the video several significant issues occur within one minute. I
encourage the Mayor and Council to look at this one minute of video . Without being addressed
by the Council the Applicant's attorney intervenes .
6:15 PM-Applicant's attorney gives advice and comment from the Applicant.
6:15 PM -Mayor Lockwood: "I want to make sure this is the rig/it conversation."
5
6:15 PM -Council Member Longoria: "Why do we liave any comment coming from
the Applicant?"
Without being addressed by Council the Applicant intervenes offering to concede to a
maximum yield of 45 homes. Council Member Longoria attempted to call the Applicant to order,
calling the Applicant by name, "Charlie, Charlie." However, the Applicant completed his offer to
negotiate with Council materially affecting a favorable outcome over what seemed to be Council
Member Longoria's objections .
6:15 PM-Applicant Bostwick: "/fit will help us move along ... "
6: 15 PM -Council Member Longoria: "Charlie, Charlie."
6:15 PM -Applicant Bostwick: " ... I will go to 45 lots."
Council Member Thurman, although recused, interjects her thoughts into the Council's
conversation.
6:16 PM-Council Member Thurman: "We are not going to make a decision tonight."
Recusal Issue
Additionally, given a potential conflict of interest, I applaud Council Member Thurman's
decision to recuse herself from partiCipation in any aspect of the consideration of the Ebenezer
rezoning at the beginning of the rezoning hearing. Although, I am not clear on exactly what
informal or formal rules the Council may have on recusals, I would assume they would preclude a
recused Council person from participation of any kind whatsoever.5
• 5:44: 11, 5: 58:49 PM -Monday, April 25th 's video of the Council meeting reflects
on at least one occasion, and possibly two occasions, Council Member Thurman
offered a comment on procedural issues related to the rezoning votes that took
place.
• 5: 58 PM -Following a long discussion of the number of motions and the vote
count on each motion, Mayor Lockwood says the motion to deny has been denied
by default. City Attorney Jarrard agrees and Council Member Thurman then
states, "as a point of order the motion is tabled." City Attorney Jarrard then
changes his position and Mayor Lockwood's statement appears to have been
ignored.
Council Member Thurman's impact here is arguably significant and she is not recused at
this point. Many in the audience made comments about her participation.
• 6:02:42 PM -Also, Council Member Thurman votes to extend the discussion of
tlie rezoning bey011d tlie midnight self-imposed timeline for ending Council
meetings.
This vote was also impactful given it was during this "Overtime" period after 4 or 5 votes
that Council Member Longoria aligned himself with the majority that approved the rezoning. It
5 Recusal -to disqualify (oneself) as judge in a particular case ; broadly ; to remove (onese lf) from participation to avoid a conflict of
interest. Merriam-Webster Di ctionary
6
I
\ ..
suggests that the Council would want to give consideration to a clean revote, without the
involvement of Council Member Thurman, participating in the rezoning to cure any concern that
the vote was legally flawed . Such a vote would help the Council arrive at a decision without the
appearance of any conflict, as I am certain Council Member Thurman intended when she initially
recused herself.
Analysis On The Word "Precedent"
Furthermore, the analysis given by City Attorney Ken Jarrard to the word "precedent"
should cause the Council to seek a more fulsome assessment. The City Attorney's brief recitation
on the subject was perhaps technically accurate; nonetheless, it was not consistent with a broader
interpretation of that word for purposes that I believe attorneys for developers will use it in future
Council meetings for rezoning of similar parcels. Although each rezoning is unique as the City
Attorney suggested, where they are substantially comparable, I am confident the Council will be
confronted time and again by Monday, April 25th's decision to move away from the AG-1
designation for similar parcels making meaningless in the long run the AG-1 designation of other
undeveloped land in the City. The Milton Council would be well advised to prepare the City for
the precedent argument coming up in AG-1 rezoning hearings that I predict will be litigated on
some occasions. The Council may have effectively "factually" bound the votes of their
successors on the Council for years to come by getting on the "slippery slope" of relying on the
purely technical legal meaning of a single word --"precedent".
Conclusion
In truth, the enumerated issues are significant, legally troubling and warrant review by an
independent legal counsel. Specifically; I request Council to in effect reach a consensus that the
rezoning vote on Monday, April 25, 2016 was invalid and that the required specificity as
contemplated by the zoning regulations was not accomplished. Council should also incorporate
into the record that this rezoning should not be construed as a precedent for future rezonings. I
request that the meeting minutes from the April 25 , 2016 not be approved affirming Monday's
invalid vote and be placed on a future Council agenda for rescission . The public health, safety
and welfare of the citizens of Milton, Georgia depend on your corrective actions.
In conclusion, I believe there is no disagreement that City Council meetings on rezonings
should provide an opportunity for public debate and open discussion of issues that ultimately
permit the will of the majority to prevail on rezoning issues, within due process. The record in
last week's rezoning hearing is replete with many problems that are manifested in the over six
hours of videotape that have been reviewed by several Milton citizens -all pointing to a denial of
due process to the citizens of Milton. This letter to the Mayor and City Council has been my best
effort, together with other Milton Citizens, to suggest to the Council that in Milton how we get to
a rezoning decision is important and essential to the integrity of the process.
Again, I urge the Mayor and City Council to not affirm last week's minutes as they apply
to the rezoning of the Ebenezer parcel and that the April 25, 2016 vote be rescinded at a future
Council meeting.
7