Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 08/09/2010 - 08-09-10 S.C. Mins (Migrated from Optiview)Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 1 of 7 • This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to transcribe proceedings verbatim. Any reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted and heard by Council, but not quoted. This document includes limited presentation by Council and invited speakers in summary form. This is an official record of the Milton City Council Meeting proceedings. Official Meetings are audio recorded. The Special Called Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on August 9, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Mayor Pro Tem Hewitt presiding. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pro Tem Hewitt called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL Interim City Clerk Gordon called the roll and made general announcements. Council Members Present: Councilmember Karen Thurman, Councilmember Julie Zahner Bailey, Councilmember Bill Lusk, Councilmember Burt Hewitt, Councilmember Joe Longoria, Councilmember Alan Tart. Mayor Joe Lockwood was absent for the August 9, 2010 Special Called meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pro Tem Hewitt led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Approval of Meeting Agenda (Agenda Item No. 10-1203) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item 10-1203, Approval of Meeting Agenda. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 6-0 (Mayor Joe Lockwood was not present for the meeting). PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Pro Tem Hewitt read the rules for Public Comment. • Public comment is a time for citizens to share information with the Mayor and City Council and to provide input and opinions on any matter that is not scheduled for its own public hearing during today's meeting. • There is no discussion on items on the Consent Agenda or First Presentation from the public or from Council. • Each citizen who chooses to participate in public comment must complete a comment card and submit it to the City Clerk. • Please remember this is not a time to engage the Mayor or members of the City Council in conversation. • When your name is called please step forward and speak into the microphone stating your name r and address for the record. • You will have five minutes for remarks. There was no public comment. Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 2 of 7 PUBLIC HEARING (None) CONSENT AGENDA (None) REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS (None) FIRST PRESENTATION 1. An Ordinance of The Mayor and Council of the City of Milton, Georgia, To Fix The Ad Valorem Tax Rate of the City of Milton for Fiscal Year 2010; and For Other Purposes. (Agenda Item No. 10-1204) (Stacey Inglis, Finance Director) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Zahner Bailey moved to approve the Agenda Item 10-1204, Approval of An Ordinance of The Mayor and Council of the City of Milton, Georgia, To Fix The Ad Valorem Tax Rate of the City of Milton for Fiscal Year 2010; and For Other Purposes. Councilmember Tart seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 6-0 (Mayor Joe Lockwood was not present for the meeting). ZONING AGENDA (None) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Approval of an Ordinance to Replace Chapter 54, Regulating the Location, Placement and Leasing of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. (Agenda Item No. 10-1161) (Previously Discussed at June 14, 2010 Council Work Session) (First Presentation on June 21, 2010 Regular Council Meeting) (Deferred from July and August 2, 2010 Regular Council Meetings) (Lynn Tully, Community Development Director) Ordinance No. 10-08-70 Mayor Pro Tem Hewitt: I would like to hear the public comments before we discuss this item. Dennis Boyden, 675 West Peachtree St. NW, Atlanta, GA: • I am the Regional Director of AT&T External Affairs. • I am here tonight to speak directly in reference to the Ordinance revision plans for cell towers. • On August 6, 2010 one of our Attorneys sent an email to City Attorney Jarrard with a copy sent to each councilmember about our ongoing concerns regarding proposed revisions for this ordinance. • This has been a very prolonged process, but we hope there is an opportunity tonight for discussion about those issues at it relates to application fees, annual license fees, and a requirement of PE engineers. • We understand that your first priority is to protect and reflect your Citizens of the City. • We respect the knowledge brought along with your Council and staff to handle this project. • We ask tonight that if given the opportunity if additional comments need to be made to clarify a point, that you provide such an opportunity. • We do not want to delay this process any longer. 0 Please know that we are concerned about the aspects of our business. Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 3 of 7 ,. Ellen Smith, 100 Galleria Parkway, Atlanta, GA: • I am here tonight on behalf of the Georgia Wireless Association. • I am the co-chair of the regulatory committee. • I hope you know that we are paying attention to the City of Milton. • 1 would like to point out the requirement that you have in section 5 of the Ordinance for a study to be submitted that deals with coverage and for that study to be certified by a PE. • The reason I point that out is because I think a civil engineer will give you a certification of that kind of coverage study but it is going to have any number of qualifications on it. • I think the Ordinance should take out the requirement that it be certified by a PE. • Your other language in Article 5 requires a radio frequency engineer to certify information for you. • Other jurisdictions handle radio frequency analysis by requiring an affidavit from that radio frequency engineer. • You could require the radio frequency engineer and give you their credentials. • Having the PE certify to it, you are getting an engineer that is not specialized in radio frequency to certify this study. • We have no problem with the requirement that you get a study, just how you get it is the concern. • The last thing is something else I urge you to consider which is the requirement for an annual licensing. • We would like clarification as to what the fees are in totality. • The carriers and tower owners are willing to put up a substantial application fee up front. • They are putting the capital investment in. WN -0 • The fact that the annual licensing fee isn't a specified dollar amount is scary. • If they don't pay it or there is a transfer of the tower and someone misses it, not only could they be VAM. subject to paying that fee but they also potentially could be subject to a misdemeanor in the City Court which could be day to day fees. • That is a little bit harsh considering the initial capital investment that they are giving., Jennifer Blackburn, 104 Terrace Drive, Atlanta, GA: • I am here tonight on behalf of Verizon Wireless. • I would like to echo both Dennis and Ellen's concerns. • First I would like to thank the City Attorney and Lynn Tully for working so well with us. • The only two areas of concerns I have are what Ellen mentioned, the requirement of a PE on radio frequency engineer materials. • It requires a Georgia licensed PE to sign off on RF information. • Georgia does not have a specific license for RF engineers which would require us to get a PE which is generally a structural engineer to sign off on the radio frequency engineer information. • It presents a problem for Verizon. All of our RF engineers are not Georgia Certified because it is not required in the state. • While they are schooled in RF engineers and experts in that area that could provide you with a resume with their experience, we would not be able to submit their information to you directly. • We would then have to go get a PE that isn't specialized in RF engineering information to sign off. • It seems like an extra step that does not seem to benefit the city or the industry. • We would like to request that that this section be revised to require that it be a trained RF engineer or the language that was in draft one which we did not object to. • Our second objection would be to the annual licensing fee. • We are required to maintain a license every year from the FCC. • 1 think this provision is to show who all is in the tower, how many carriers in the tower, and make sure you have your records straight. • The tower owner could easily submit an affidavit every year to do that. 0 We do not feel that it is something that requires a third party consultant to go out and look at the tower. Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 4 of 7 We could submit an affidavit swearing to the number of people on the tower and that way you could make sure that you have your records correct for tax purposes and things like that and it wouldn't be mmW hitting the industry or the tower owner with whatever that fee may be. I believe I heard that the fee would be around Ik per carrier and that would be a huge cost to the carrier for the number of towers that we have. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • We are here this evening to improve the amendments that we have been working on. • We have tried to consult with our own experts and Mrs. Tully and I have sat down and gone through line by line of the code again. • That is the reason we did not take it up for a vote at the last meeting. • We feel like we have the makings of a very good ordinance now. • There are still two issues that continue to cause the industry concern which is remarkable given the length of this ordinance that we have it down just to two. • The two issues are on page 5 and it has to do with the radio frequency engineer. • I have talked at length to attorneys in the industry as well as our own experts and attorneys as well as Mrs. Tully and even to the City Manager. • All I'm going to talk about today are things that might have changed from the last time we talked about this. The City of Milton has an interest in insuring that a professional certified engineer from the state of Georgia signs off on plans that pertain particularly to the issue of the weight loading and the structural integrity of the facilities. • Mrs. Tully and I spoke today and we agreed that we will not budge a bit on that subject because of public safety. • ation studies and some of the technical elements that a PE is It also appears that with respect to the propag not necessary in those types of situations. • I have tweaked the definition of a radio frequency engineer to provide that either we will have to get a certification from someone with the training and experience in the development analysis of telecommunications networks or facilities or a professional engineer licensed in the state of Georgia. • In the event that this Ordinance requires an engineer certification regarding structural loading or other certifications associated with the safety or integrity of structures, a certification by a PE licensed in the state of Georgia shall be required. • If we look at every instance where a radio frequency engineer is required or a PE, it will give staff the discretion that if it is in the realm of propagation studies or coverage that the more liberal definition of a radio frequency engineer can be used. • However, if it is associated with structure loading or integrity then a professional engineer or certification would be required. • That would be the discretion of Mrs. Tully to make that determination as to which one is required. • If she is comfortable with that, I am comfortable with that. Councilmember Longoria: • If we are in the definition section of this Ordinance and it seems strange that we put in some language that goes beyond what a radio frequency engineer is? • Are we trying to cover a base there? • Normally under definitions you just say a radio frequency engineer is someone who is trained in understanding radio frequencies. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • It is part of the Ordinance and it is part of the Code and if we have an issue arise as to what was meant later in the Code, then the community development staff can go back and say that it is their call and their discretion. Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 5 of 7 Councilmember Zahner Bailey: rWA. • With regards to the radio frequency expert, the fact that it doesn't further define what that expertise would be. • It seems a little too broad. • Would there be additional language that would help to be more specific? • I really think this works towards a positive compromise. • 1 question whether or not we need to define specifically what that expertise needs to require. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • The industry is going to be required to put their file together and submit their information to us and rely on those people and those experts that they believe they have confidence in to give us the right information. • As you know, one of the reasons that the application fee in this code is what it is, is because the City on our end will be reviewing and having these applications looked at by our own experts. • This council will not be in a situation where we will be relying upon someone that may not have the appropriate credentials or the training to make this sort of call. • As long as we call out what their specialization needs to be and get the sort of information we need to have, if we choose to put up someone that isn't as credentialed as someone else, that is their problem. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • Short of having our speakers come back up, if there is any specific, short of that PE certification, if there is anything that represents a standard, because there may be between AT&T and Verizon and the Georgia Wireless Association that there are some things that define that. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • I think it is the reason that we are comfortable with the PE. • It is a know entity and it has the certifications. • The industry is very comfortable with that. Trying to narrow a specific specialty without having objective criteria is challenging. Councilmember Lusk: • I agree with the definition as written. • I think what we have been talking about as far as RF engineers doesn't carry the same element of public safety as the structural part of the facilities is a concern of mine. • We are talking about structural stability. • The RF doesn't have the safety of the public involved. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • To clarify, my understanding is in instances where that RF expert is needed, it is not about the integrity of the structure. • It would be helpful to at least provide information in terms of how the industry would define expertise so we know what to look for in the future. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • I agree. They have no reason to get that wrong. Councilmember Lusk: • "Professional" and "Engineer" should be capitalized throughout the document for consistency. Councilmember Tart: Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 6 of 7 • "Radio frequency" is listed as one word and two words throughout the document. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: Moog ess even under • The next section is section five and there are exemptions of this expedited permitting proc the law there are exemptions. • Even though colocation or modification are entitled to this process, you will see four exemptions if the proposed colocation increases the overall height or width. • If the proposed colocation increases the dimensions of the equipment, if the proposed colocation is not complied with applicable conditions, these are all straight out of the Georgia Code. • It has all been put in here for ease of reading and to make sure everyone understands that they will be entitled to this expedited approval process if you trigger these conditions. • On page 12 at the top, with the setbacks we had some councilmember feedback with respect to potentially allowing stealth technology to be used. • After reviewing it again, we have taken that out all together to provide that the 3,500 foot setback is the setback and it is clean and easy to enforce and that is how it has been left at the current time. • On page 19 the annual license fee, the issue of the fee continues to be a concern by the industry. • At the present time we continue to be comfortable with the annual license fee. • They seem to be able to comply with little difficulty. • The way that we have proposed to make sure we have inspections of the structure and property is to use a third -party consultant. • They will have to be paid. • This fee is to provide feedback and to provide a service, not to make money. • We may determine that there is no longer a fee for these annual inspections. • We have included some language that provides that this license shall serve as a mechanism for obtaining current information regarding telecommunication permit holders and annually inspecting the document of permitted towers, antennas, and other facilities. • All telecommunication towers, each antenna array, and any array located on a rooftop or other location will have to have a separate license. • The fee has not been determined yet. • It will be put together on or before the first annual permitting begins. Councilmember Longoria: • The concern was the fee and lack of knowledge of what the fee was going to be. • Is there some jurisdiction that we can go to nearby and see what they cost and what for? • Can we get an idea of the cost? City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • The folks that want to do this service may fashion the fee based on the volume of inspections. • The lower you go the less the volume. • The ballpark is 1 k a year for the fee. Councilmember Thurman: • I'm assuming since this is a license we will have to set the amount up up front? City Attorney Jarrard: • Yes. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: Now • The cost needs to be shared between the company and the city for these inspectors because both parties are benefitting from these inspections. Special Called Meeting of the Milton City Council Monday, August 9, 2010 at 5:45 pm Page 7 of 7 &MWA Councilmember Lusk: • Where it starts with "inspecting and documenting the condition" it seems to leave it very vague. • It isn't establishing any perimeters as far as what the inspection includes or excludes and who it is to be done by. • It would make more sense if that is where a professional engineer would do the inspecting and inspecting the structural integrity of the entire facility. City Attorney, Ken Jarrard: • I think the inclusion of that language was not to give the perimeters for the consultants, it was to provide in the event that there are third parties reviewing this ordinance to provide the rational for why we are doing this. • One of the industry comments that we received back was "why? What are you doing?". • We thought we should put some arguably generic language to say we are inspecting the condition and what is on the tower. • This council in the upcoming months will be presented with some recommendations from people who want to do these inspections that will be much more specific as to what they will be looking for. • It will be much more specific than just the condition of the tower. • We think this is a solid Ordinance. • I would like to ask that this council give strong consideration to approve it. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • For notification purposes, the language does mirror that for a rezoning and that it is not just distance but ar.r also up to a certain number of citizens that would be for everyone? Lynn Tully: • Yes, that is correct. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Tart moved to approve the Agenda Item 10-1161, Approval of an Ordinance to Replace Chapter 54, Regulating the Location, Placement and Leasing of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 6-0 (Mayor Joe Lockwood was not present for the meeting). NEW BUSINESS (None) MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS (None) STAFF REPORTS(None) ADJOURNMENT (Agenda Item No. 10-1205) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to adjourn the special called meeting at 6:30 p.m. Councilmember Zahner Bailey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 6-0. (Mayor Joe mpg" Lockwood was not present for the meeting). Date Approved: August 16, 2010. Sud"AMordon, I terim City Clerk Mayor Pro Tem, Burt Hewitt No Text