The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes CC - 01/25/2007 - MINS 01 25 07 SCWS (Migrated from Optiview)Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 1 of 21 Work Session of the Milton City Council was held Thursday, January 25, 2007 at 5:30 p.m. Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding. All Councilmembers were present. Presentation of a donation by Greg Mishkin, Milton Organizing Committee. Greg Mishkin stated that he was the treasurer of the Milton Organizing Committee who helped create the City of Milton before its incorporation. Through this process, there were approximately 40 citizens who had donated their time for approximately 18 months to lay the framework and the foundations for this new City. He presented the City of Milton with a check in the amount of $1,650, which is the remaining money from several fund raising events which is to be earmarked to help with the costs of the Incorporation Party being held this week-end. Review of Crabapple Crossroads Development Master Plan. Bill de St. Aubin with the Sizemore Group gave the following presentation. ISSUES: COMMUNITY CONCERNS: Public Participation (18 Meetings from July 2001 to January 2002) Traffic Congestion Character of Crabapple (Land Use and Design) SURVEY SUMMARY: ASSETS: Getting Stronger: - Excellent Schools - Sense of Community - Shopping / Convenience Being Lost: - Rural/country setting - Open space / trees - Small town feel - Horse farms / farms - Peace & quiet - Historic buildings - Good / un-crowded schools CONCERNS: Most common concerns: - Too much / increased Traffic Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 2 of 21 - Overdevelopment / overbuilding (*) - Loss of green space / farms / natural settings - School overcrowding - Loss of small town feel (“don’t want this side to get as crowded as the East side of Alpharetta”) - Property values will decrease if more is built (particularly commercial) SURVEY SUMMARY: DESIGN GUIDELINES: Are Design Guidelines for new development appropriate? Are Design Guidelines appropriate? No 22% Yes 60% No Opinion 18% Yes Compatible w/ current architecture / style Small town / rural feel Height limits "Country" architecture Historic regulations like Charleston or Savannah No Design guidelines = over-development No Opinion Don't know what guidelines you mean CATEGORY #2 – WALKS Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 3 of 21 Desirable: + Visual change in paving materials + Walkway covered and set back from road + Landscaping & trees at street edge Marginal: + Trees / natural setting - Narrow sidewalks that do not connect - No separation from traffic - No landscaping Unacceptable: - No separation from traffic - Feels unsafe and dangerous - Visually not attractive - Exposed utilities CATEGORY #3 – STOREFRONTS Desirable: + Landscaped barrier between building and roadway + Pedestrian scale + Marked crosswalks Marginal: Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 4 of 21 + Pedestrian scale + Trees as canopies - No signage of interest - Cars encroach on walkway Unacceptable: - Cars encroach on walkway - No canopies - No Landscaping CATEGORY #5 – OFFICES Desirable: + Attractive character & massing with depth + Street level storefront + Integrated landscaping Marginal: + Historic character +Balconies +Pedestrian scale - No protection from traffic Unacceptable: - Modern Character - Disconnected with street - Block massing - Visually not attractive CATEGORY # 6 – RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 5 of 21 Marginal/Desirable: + Hidden behind residences + Not concentrated + Blends with surroundings + Higher overall density Marginal: + Brick and cast stone - Very high density - Gated Community Unacceptable: - Unattractive architecture - Parking between road and building - High density CATEGORY #7 – RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY Desirable: + Historic detailing + Porches & balconies + Buffer yards + Vertical massing + Landscaping Marginal: Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 6 of 21 + Front porches + “Traditional” look - Garage in front - Walkway to front door from driveway rather than street - Bland architecture Unacceptable: - No buffer yard - Lacks vertical impact - Visually not attractive CATEGORY #9 – STREETS/COMMERCIAL Desirable: + Added tree canopy + Pedestrian corridor + Traffic Calming + Cars are prominent Marginal: + Pedestrian corridor + Traffic Calming - Street too narrow for façade height Unacceptable: - Visual Clutter - Unattractive, ugly signage - Exposed power lines - No tree canopy - Not pedestrian friendly - Pavement dominates CATEGORY #10 – SIGNS Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 7 of 21 Desirable: + Integrated into canopy + Light letters on dark background + Attractive scale Marginal: - Freestanding signage - Less attractive detailing - Garden vs. urban solution Unacceptable: - Visual clutter - Unattractive - Offensive scale - Lacking quality detailing & consistent type set TRAFFIC EXISTING STREET HIERARCHIES FARM VILLAGE INFRASTURCTURE ------- THOROUGHFARES – (SPARSE) PRIMARY TRAFFIC ------- SECONDARY THOROUGHFARES – ------- (HELP CONNECTIVITY) SUB PARCELS (DEADENDS) ------- EXISTING • FARM INFRASTRUCTURE Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 8 of 21 T ROBLEM: A RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL NODE, NOT A FARM K REQUIRES MORE CONNECTIVITY TO SUPPORT NEW USE raffic Problem: • SECONDARY HOUROUGHFARE • SUB PARCEL P THIS IS NOW INFRASTRUCTURE. THE ROAD NETWOR T OO FEW ROUTE OPTIONS / NOT ENOUGH CONNECTIVITY LL NEW DEVELOPMENTS FEED TRAFFIC ONTO A COUPLE OF ROADS OCAL, SCHOOL, TRUCK, AND COMMUTER TRAFFIC USE SAME ROAD otential Traffic Options T A L P : . BYPASS . PROVIDE OPTIONS FOR COMMUTER TRAFFIC AROUND CROSSROADS . WIDEN ROADS . INTERCONNECTED NETWORK OF NEW ROADS 1 2 3 4 OPTION 1: BYPASS s: enter -scale village streets PTION 2: Provide options for commuter traffic = Recommended PTION 3: WIDEN CROSSROADS INTERSECTION = Not recommended PTION 4: INTERCONNECTED NETWORK OF NEW STREETS = Recommended PTION 4: INTERCONNECTED NETWORK OF NEW “NEIGHBORHOOD” STREETS WHY NEW STREETS IN THE CRABAPPLE AREA Good Planning Principle • Mixed Use Village C • Integrated network of small • Gradual transition in use and density O O - Would destroy historic character - Would attract MORE commuters - Minimal funding available O O ? reating alternative routes for trucks and commuters addresses only part C of the traffic problem. Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 9 of 21 - Crabapple will continue to develop more local traffic as land is sold and developed (even robable Build out Under Current Regulations RAFFIC: Conceptual Road Network Development under current rules) P (No bypass) T Bro adw ell Bi r m in g h Crabap ple Mayfi eld TRAFFIC – Proposed Street Standards Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 10 of 21 Type ‘A’ Village Main Street Type ‘B’ Village Secondary Street Type ‘C’ Neighborhood Internal Street Type ‘D’ Alleys TRAFFIC – Proposed Street Standards No new type ‘A’ streets proposed Existing commercial streets should conform with new standards. (Crabapple, Mayfield) Recommended maximum block depth in commercial areas = 400 feet Maximum block length = 660 feet Blocks longer than 400 feet must include alley or path for mid-block pedestrian crossing New type ‘B’ streets to be located around commercial core and schools (Birmingham, Broadwell) Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 11 of 21 Recommended maximum block depth in mixed use areas = 400 feet Maximum block length = 660 feet Blocks longer than 400 feet must include alley or path for mid-block pedestrian crossing Narrow travel lanes Discourage through-traffic Maximum block length = 660 feet Block length evaluated on case by case basis in rural residential sub-area containing conservation areas (New neighborhood internal streets) Type “D” Alleys OTHER RECOMMENDED OPPORTUNITIES (for possible construction by Fulton County) - Divert parent traffic at existing schools - Re-align Mid-Broadwell and Mayfield intersection and improve street character - Re-route trucks - Crosswalk and intersection improvements - Implement on-street parking to slow through traffic and enhance pedestrian safety - Improve timing of existing traffic signals - Explore installation of signal at elementary or middle school - Build sidewalks to the schools - Reduce and enforce speed limits OTHER RECOMMENDED OPPORTUNITIES - Divert parent traffic at existing schools - Re-align Mid-Broadwell and Mayfield intersection - Improve “old” Mid-Broadwell as a more pedestrian-friendly local access drive Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 12 of 21 RIMARY CRITERIA FOR LAND USE POLICY: e Policies P - Follow Smart Growth, Node and Transitional Us - Implement Greenspace Program - Adhere to Regional Land Use Policies pment- Provide for Pedestrian Oriented Develo - proximity to services and recreation - Observe existing River Basin and Sewer availability - Conform with Market Analysis Results - Build on Current and Historic Land Use Patterns ures- Be sensitive to topography and environmental feat - Factor in Community meetings and survey responses - Consider Stakeholder interviews and Meetings SMART GROWTH” “a development pattern which provides for the efficient use of land and public infrastructure, provides for lton ULTON COUNTY SMART GROWTH LAND USE POLICIES - Encourage development of communities that incorporate: diverse housing types, green space and - od Development. orthwest and South Fulton. ublic services are available or - mpatible development along jurisdictional borders. needs. policies. .C. NODE AND TRANSITIONAL USE POLICIES 1. “Direct future non-residential development to highway interchanges and intersection of major nodes in 2. “Provide for the transition of land uses from higher to lower intensity land uses” “ future planned population growth, creates communities that incorporate a mix of uses for a diverse population, provides multiple housing and transportation options and protects the environment.” Fu County F connectivity in mixed-use nodes. Encourage Traditional Neighborho - Protect stable residential communities. - Protect historic and cultural resources. - Protect the existing rural character of N - Encourage development in areas where infrastructure capacity and p planned. Ensure co - Provide health and human services in proximity to community - Provide County and/or other public resources to achieve Smart Growth F a pattern of mixed-use activity nodes” LAND USE CRITERIA rvices 00’ RADIUS – 3 min. walk kable commercial core Walkable Proximity to Se 6 Guideline dimension for wal Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 13 of 21 MILE RADIUS – 5 min. walk lk to service & social destinations (e.g. Schools) MILE RADIUS – 10 min. walk e “village” rk or natural area AND USE CRITERIA VILLAGE” Market Mix: esidential: ¼ Distance most Americans will wa ½ Guideline boundary for identifiabl Goal: every resident to be within ½ mile of pa L Market Analysis “ R t) obs: Housing Ratio: 1-8 / acre (ne J ocal Retail: 0.75:1.0 – 1.75:1 200-350 sf / job L ing reen/Common Space: 26-52 sf/dwell G stitutional: 200 sf/dwelling In esidential: 300 sf/dwelling CURRENT: R s oss) ffice: +/- 130 home = 0.25 / acre (gr O f welling ocal Retail: 8,000+ s = 61.5 sf/d L ing +/- 30,000 sf =230 sf/dwell Institutional: lling esidential is currently LOW compared to other existing uses. 410,000+ sf 3,100 sf/dwe R Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 14 of 21 A MIX of housing types and densities are key components of a village That mix is currently absent. Crabapple can support another 87,000 – 89,000 SF of retail, mostly in smaller high-end specialty shops (Gibbs Planning Group, 2002) LAND USE – Proposed Rural Residential – 42.25% • Conservation Easements • Wetlands Protection • Residential: • Single Family large lot • Conservation subdivisions (when approved) Current development rights are maintained (2.5 Units per gross acre, in non-conservation areas with 40% conservation; otherwise 1 unit per acre) Rural Residential Conservation Subdivisions recommended when approved by County Conventional Development 2+ acre lots Natural rural features lost Conservation Subdivisions Variety of lot sizes Substantial preserved open space LAND USE – Proposed Living / Working Sub-Areas Sub Village Residential B 16% • Restricted Office / Service • Residential: • Single Family (75% larger lots) • Ancillary Units (3.5 Units per gross acre maximum aggregate 10% conservation, parks, or common amenities required) Sub Village Residential A 9% • Limited Office / Service • Residential: Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 15 of 21 • Duplex • Single Family (75% smaller lots) • Ancillary Units (6.5 Units per gross acre maximum aggregate 10% conservation, parks, or common amenities required) Village Office / Residential 7.7% • Office • Limited Commercial • Residential: • Live/Work flex space • Duplex • Quad (“Big House”) • Single Family – small lot • Ancillary Units (7 Units per gross acre maximum in single-use structures. 10% conservation, parks, or common amenities required) Village Mixed Use 8.9% • Commercial / Retail • Office • Residential: • Residential over Retail • Duplex • Quad / Townhomes • Single Family – small lot • Ancillary Units (8 Units per gross acre maximum in single-use structures 10% conservation, parks, or common amenities required) GREEN SPACE Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 16 of 21 GREEN SPACE RECOMMENDATIONS TOTAL STUDY AREA 438 acres TARGET GREEN SPACE 20%88 acres MIN. Designated Green Space 5 acres Community / Institutional 63 acres Green Space Requirement 0%0 acres Village Mixed Use 45 acres Green Space Requirement 10%4 acres Village Office / Residential 34 acres Green Space Requirement 10%3 acres Sub Village Residential A 37 acres Green Space Requirement 10%4 acres Sub Village Residential B 70 acres Green Space Requirement 10%7 acres Rural Residential 185 acres Green Space Requirement 40%74 acres TOTAL GREEN SPACE 97 ACRES "Green Space" includes natural conservation areas, parks, trails, and other natural public amenities, and is in addition to open space requirements GREEN SPACE Trail System Trails: - Follow public rights of way and power, sewer, and waterway easements that cannot be developed - Can be located in required buffers offset from existing property lines by 25’ min. GREEN SPACE Park Opportunities Park #1 May be developed on site of current front parking lot of Alpharetta Government Center Requires Alpharetta, F.C., and possible private participation Park #2 May be developed if Mid-Broadwell/Mayfield intersection is realigned Requires Fulton County and private participation (ARC implementation grant application recommended) Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 17 of 21 IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN NEXT STEPS 1. Update Master Plan • LCI Application • Potential Public-Private Sector Leadership • Community Participation 2. Work on Completing Road Network 3. Resolve impact of Milton High School on Traffic 4. Establish Community/Business Based Organization 5. Others? MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Lockwood stated that to a lot of people and it seems the major concerns are obviously the traffic and all the clear cutting that is going on. Bill de St. Aubin replied and stated that he thinks that he has covered the traffic, but he is not familiar with the clear cutting. He has been involved in a lot of mixed-use development. When you deal with mixed-use development where everybody is closer together in a walkable community a lot of trees have got to come down and a lot of the land has got to get flat. He realizes that no one likes to hear that, but what happens over time is you plant the trees in accordance with the human habitat because what you are doing is taking a piece of land that was not designed for human habitat. If you follow their design guides, you will have trees every 25 feet along sidewalks; you will have a shaded environment in July along the walks. Councilmember D’Aversa-Williams asked do you believe that based on the plan that we have put into place and everything that is going on, is your plan being followed. Bill de St. Aubin replied and stated that he really does not know all of them, but the ones he is familiar with are coming pretty close. It is probably good to look at what has been done and also what needs to be done to get it to the next level. Maybe what was looked at five years ago needs to be updated. Councilmember Lusk asked if he knew if the density that is being built now conforms to the density that he had anticipated in your study: Bill de St. Aubin replied that he has not done the math and it is a complicated thing, but he has worked with enough developers to know that they will take that formula to get as much density as they can because that is how they make a living. Councilmember Thurman stated that based on the plan that was ultimately passed by Fulton County, it is set up for a certain amounts of commercial, certain amounts of office and certain amounts of density for residential. It is her understanding now that those have pretty much been used up from what has come in and there are a lot of properties that are close to the center of the area that are still zoned to single-family residential and do not have a bucket to fall into. She asked how you go about handling that issue when the maximum density for the entire area has been used up by the properties in the perimeter and you still have properties closer to the center with nothing left. Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 18 of 21 Bill de St. Aubin stated that he believed you would need to look at the master plan again. It is really a matter of what you want to do. He said you really need to work on the quality of the road network and the green space. Developers are not going to build something that is going to fail, especially in this area. Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated as an extension to that discussion and looking at the Fulton County Zoning Resolution, which is the one we have adopted, she had a question about timing. It was said this was adopted back in 2001 or 2002 and she thought it was adopted just on density back in 2004. Bill de St. Aubin replied you might be right because the work was during that period and then Fulton County and their staff took it and they finished it. Also through the cycle through the approval of the Board of Commissioners, it might have taken that long, but they were not involved at that time. Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she just wanted to be sure we are looking at the most recent document because she knows there were different versions with different input. Also, to answer the question that Councilman Thurman mentioned earlier, in terms of the plan having been adopted as part of our land use plan she requested confirmation that this is indeed a neighborhood activity node. Bill de St. Aubin replied yes. He knows they talked about this because Fulton County had a certain formula. Steve Cover was the planning director at the time and now he is the Commissioner for the City of Atlanta. He called me once about neighborhood nodes and regional nodes and transportation nodes and wanted to know if there was a right mix. He told him that every market is different and there was no magical formula. Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that she just wants to be sure we are all on the same page. It is her understanding that under that legally approved Neighborhood Activity Node there is a total allowable amount of density by category specified as follows: 100,000 sq. ft. of office, 100,000 sq. ft. of commercial and up to 5 units to the acre of residential in certain of the areas designated as the Neighborhood Activity Node. She stated that the land within the node could be commercial or office or residential. Instead, the way the legally approved document reads is that even though the land that might be inside the Neighborhood Activity Node, once the maximums of commercial or office are met, there is no more allowable density to apply to other properties. She believes the legal language of the document that we have to work from says that if the land is within that node it does allow for up to five units per acre in some cases Councilmember Thurman stated that she would like to get some of the members of the Crabapple Coalition who really took over and worked with Fulton County and get their insights. Councilmember Zahner Bailey stated that in terms of the traffic study that Sizemore did and a lot of that was made available to Fulton County, can we get copies of the traffic information and data. Bill de St. Aubin replied that he would give what they had from their sources and others that we used. Buck Bell (former Crabapple Coalition): He stated that they ceased formation when the City of Milton was formed. A lot of the members worked with Sizemore regarding the plan. He and others came in during the passing of the plan to try and work through some of the details. Sizemore had a great plan. Where it fell apart was when Fulton County did not follow through with Sizemore once the plan was passed and it was based on funds. After it passed, Fulton County went internal with it and the coalition was only involved with the zoning. The typical way that the process happened is that the developer approached Fulton County, they would work through what Fulton County thought was an appropriate application to plan, they would visit with us, and we would try to show them what was not meeting the plan. Then the struggle began. What is happening at Crabapple is part of what you all are asking Bill de St. Aubin, and he would not know because he has been off the case since 2003 when the plan was passed. They went into a six month study after that regarding the overlay and then spent another six months on a short study plan and a long study plan that Fulton County was to implement on all the roads around Crabapple that would feed into Crabapple and allow a lot of traffic by-pass. What happened is that Fulton County went into their own interpretation of the plan. There are two things that Fulton County did which got everything messed up: (1) They stopped involving the community; (2) Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 19 of 21 They determined that the Crabapple plan was only a recommendation document and had no value unless the developer wanted to meet those regulations. What you have got going on is what Fulton County provided as the maximum density and not as the plan they proposed. The challenge now is how you reverse the trend to get the results that we are looking for. This area needs to be restudied. PUBLIC COMMENT Laura Vautourstated that she lives in Crabapple Chase subdivision, 12342 Crabapple Meadow Way, Alpharetta, GA 30004, immediately adjacent to the Crabapple Master Plan area. Her children attend Crabapple Crossing Elementary and Northwestern Middle. She is thrilled that Milton City Council is getting up to speed on the Crabapple Master Plan, where it is and where it is going. It gives her hope to have some local control over what is happening in our neighborhood. Thank you for taking the time to do. She, like many of her neighbors, are so thoroughly disappointed with what has happened at the Crabapple cross roads and the surrounding area. The Master Plan was crafted in such a way that it has never provided the limits, scope, and parameters that were needed to prevent the situation we will look at today. It gave us lots of pretty pictures, but no teeth. Thus, we have higher density housing going in everywhere, increased commercial density, commercial owners requesting additional commercial density that will surpass Crabapple’s neighborhood Node designation, increase traffic with no improvement of infrastructure, and the looming of overcrowding of our schools. She knows you all live nearby to and you see the situation daily. Thank you in advance for your time and careful consideration. While the process has already started, perhaps a difference can be made even at this date. Carol Lane, 14890 E. Bluff Road, Alpharetta, GA 30004, stated that she lives not far from the Crabapple area and she has some questions. When Mr. Bell was talking about how they were not on the same page with Fulton County, when was all this discussed? Buck Bell replied late 2003 early 2004. The first development was Dean Powers on Broadway. It was actually held through the planning of Crabapple Master Plan. Dean Powers decided to hold off his development and bring it forward once the development was done. The Crabapple Plan was passed June 2003 and Dean Powers immediately went in to proposing the rezoning on that property based on what they believed the plan offered. At that point, Fulton County introduced tri-flexes to the mix, which was not part of the plan. There were several other changes that were made; the most influential in all that is Fulton County had determined that a mixed use development entitled the developer to count their acreage twice and it was passed in June 2003. It was started immediately thereafter as far as petitioning Fulton County. So, it would have happened between then and the end of the year and early 2004 for the first development and they have come pretty sequentially every time thereafter. Carol Lane asked who is on the Crabapple Coalition. Buck Bell said the Crabapple Coalition does not exist any more, but it consisted of himself, Sally Hildebrandt who lives in Westminister, Elyse Anderson who lives in Kensington Farms, and Mark Teegardin who lives in Six Hills. Andrew Furman, 1010 Fieldstone Trail, Alpharetta, GA 30004, stated that he cannot speak for everybody in the audience, but he thinks probably the main reason that people are looking at what is going on, is we cannot change what has happened, but with the traffic that is on Crabapple Road and 372, that is just congestion. It is going to get worse with all the new retail/home development that is going in. The street looks great and he does not think anyone wants it to look like Holcomb Bridge Road, but the area there somehow needs to be widened and he thinks that is something that has to be tackled. The parameter road going around, they are great in theory, but with the way things appear to be done, he does not believe they can be done where it is going to by pass the traffic and not cause more problems. He travels that road, he thinks a lot of people that are here are probably here for the same reasons. If there were left turn lanes that head north on 372 and right turn lanes off 372 onto Crabapple Road where the gas station is, that can be done. He thinks most people out where we live would like the commercial area to end in Crabapple. Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 20 of 21 Marcia O’Shaughnessy, 1135 Nix Road, stated that she has a question for Bill de St. Aubin. He talked about the traffic through the 372 intersection and how difficult it was for trucks. Now that it is beautiful, it is really difficult for big rigs to get through there. She asked how can that be addressed and where else can they go. Bill de St. Aubin said there are alternative truck routes to get around there. Plus they designed it in a way. He does not know if the DOT would let them do it… but you can do a press curb and they can actually go over it. The one time you have a truck that can go over the curb in that area you would ask are you trying to make it so that a pedestrian can move through that area. It is a balancing act to deal with those two things and they dealt more on the side of the pedestrian. The hardest turn for the truck is the right hand turn coming that way. They would not even have to go down to that intersection, they could just take a right back at Charlotte Road. There are other alternatives for the trucks and they need to take those. Sam Benson, 755 Old Rucker Road, Alpharetta, GA, stated that he would like to just mention the property he was representing was the last commercial piece to be zoned in Fulton County, the Old Hackett Place. Penn Hodge was directly in front of them and he changed his residential over on Broadwell Road in the Deans Powers development and took the last bit of office. Also he would like to mention they have been talking to some of the property owners in the area on the eastern side of Birmingham Highway and Broadwell Road and they would like to discuss with Council, at some point, ideas for alternative roads for the Charlotte extension. They would like to be involved in the process. They have some good planners and architects that would be available. Jamie Bendall, 235 Crabapple Chase Court, Alpharetta, GA 30004, stated that he moved here from Decatur with his wife because they wanted a little more space to stretch out, but they admittedly missed some of the Town Square characteristics of Decatur where they lived. He was surprised that it has been so long since some of the earlier meetings he had attended and felt that he wanted to make the comment. One of the older residents had made in one of the planning meetings when one of the residents of his community was expressing some resistance to some of the development. She had made mention of the fact that she was at one of the original meeting to protest the construction of their neighborhood. It put for him in perspective how communities do change and how we all become accustomed to usage in our own individual areas. While he was initially very enthusiastic for the development of the Crabapple Crossroad, his own life has changed and he is now one of those people trying to get his children to those schools. He realizes how these challenges face them. However, his daughter who is now a kindergartner, did remark the other morning “what happened to all the trees.” He is a business owner in Sandy Springs and the plan in Sandy Springs is terrific. They did a great job, but oftentimes implementation looks very different than the drawing. To the extent reasonable, whatever guidelines are adopted, he thinks the watch word should be “caution” and reasonably holding tight to those things. The development that they put in further down Birmingham where the Publix is looks terrific. Carl Fleischer, 14530 Wood Road, stated that he thinks the immediate problem that we need to deal with is the traffic that is coming down Crabapple Road trying to get on Birmingham Highway heading northbound. We have the power of eminent domain and he says that to the point that if we do not have the road to get us from Crabapple Road to Birmingham north, now is the time when we have the vacant land, not trees, etc. to maybe start looking at the opportunity. Those developers will not work with Milton in putting together the roads that we need to get around Crabapple, not forcing it through Crabapple. Brad Hobbs, 12471 Crabapple Meadow Way, Alpharetta, GA 30004, stated that just like they are saying the big issue is left hand turn lane north on Birmingham Hwy. He loved the graphic Mr. Sizemore put up earlier about the road grid vs. the little segregated neighborhood where everybody has to get on the main road. That picture was on the right hand side. That is Crabapple Road and with the two new developments coming in on the north side and south side, he believes a reasonable estimate is 300 homes. If the average American home has 2½ cars, that is 800 cars coming at that intersection. He lives in Crabapple Chase and they already have traffic back all the way past his neighborhood. With 800 more cars coming in just for the development and then they have the high school... One other thing he would like looked into is that at the meeting where he was called honey, they were actually mentioning a proposed day care center that would be coming in right outside Milton High School on Birmingham Hwy. He does not know if that is still going to happen or not, if it does that is another 150 – 200 more cars a day. Fulton County obviously has not done anything except make that intersection better by taking out the fifth row that came in, but they did tear up that Special Called Work Session of the Milton City Council Thursday, January 25, 2007, 5:30 PM Page 21 of 21 corner and put it back together the way it was. Traffic is a big deal and we have a lot more cars coming in. A comment was made that it was actually bought by the school board so he does not have to worry. Denise Moss, 210 Berkshire Lane, Alpharetta, GA 30004, stated that she does not have any suggestions but to say ‘thank you’ to the Crabapple Coalition. She does not know the hours they spent being the keeper of the gate and they did not get reimbursed for it. One of the members is a good friend of hers and she appreciates the time, the sweat, and the tears. They were just good citizens and just wanted to keep the integrity of the area and she appreciates it so much. Another thing is she loves our community and she has been here since 1991. She knows that we can put in crosswalks and nice stores, but she really wants to challenge everybody to remember community is good people working together for the common cause. She does not want us to have to walk on opposite sides of the crosswalk. Let us keep the issues the main thing and let us have a great neighborhood. Cathleen Messira, 495 Sherman Oaks Way, Alpharetta, GA 30004 (Did not speak – comments on the public comment card.) Crabapple Chase resident. Would request that the new City of Milton fully enforce the Master Plan and if possible strengthen the restructuring guidelines specifically addressing density and traffic issues. Deny all variances for reduced buffers and setbacks. After no further business, the meeting adjourned the Work Session at 6:55 p.m. Date Approved: March 15, 2007 _______ Jeanette R. Marchiafava, City Clerk Joe Lockwood, Mayor