HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-17-10 PacketPage 1 of 3
Milton City Hall
City Council Chambers
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite E
Milton, GA 30004
Persons needing special accommodations in order to participate in any City
meeting should call 678-242-2500.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
CITY COUNCIL
Karen Thurman
Julie Zahner Bailey
Bill Lusk
Burt Hewitt
Joe Longoria
Alan Tart
Monday, May 17, 2010 Regular Council Meeting Agenda 6:00 PM
INVOCATION – Dr. Don Martin, Alpharetta First United Methodist Church
1) CALL TO ORDER
2) ROLL CALL
3) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Led by the Mayor)
4) APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA (Add or remove items from the agenda)
(Agenda Item No. 10-1135)
5) PUBLIC COMMENT
6) CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of the April 26, 2010 Special Called Meeting Minutes.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1136)
(Sudie Gordon, Interim City Clerk)
2. Approval of the April 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Minutes.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1137)
(Sudie Gordon, Interim City Clerk)
3. Approval of Financial Statements for the period ending April 2010.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1138)
(Stacey Inglis, Finance Director)
MILTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA MAY 17, 2010 – 6:00 PM
Page 2 of 3
Milton City Hall
City Council Chambers
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite E
Milton, GA 30004
Persons needing special accommodations in order to participate in any City
meeting should call 678-242-2500.
7) REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
1. A Proclamation Recognizing EMS Week 2010 and the City of Milton Fire-Rescue
Department’s First Team of Paramedics.
(Presented by Mayor Joe Lockwood)
2. A Proclamation Recognizing National Public Works Week.
(Presented by Mayor Joe Lockwood)
3. A Memorial Day Proclamation.
(Presented by Mayor Joe Lockwood)
4. Presentation of the City of Milton FY 2009 Annual Audit.
(Presented by Adam M. Fraley, CPA, Mauldin and Jenkins)
8) FIRST PRESENTATION
1. Approval Of An Ordinance To Create Article 13 Of The City Of Milton Zoning
Ordinance To Establish A Historic Preservation Commission In The City Of Milton To
Provide For Designation Of Historic Properties; To Provide For Issuance Of Certificates
Of Appropriateness; To Provide For An Appeals Procedure; To Repeal Conflicting
Ordinances; And For Other Purposes.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1078)
(Previously Discussed at March 8, 2010 Council Work Session)
(Removed from First Presentation on March 15, 2010)
(Presented by Lynn Tully, Community Development Director)
2. Approval of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 20, Environment, Article VI., Soil
Erosion and Sedimentation Control, of the City of Milton Code of Ordinances.
(Previously Discussed at April 19, 2010 Council Work Session)
(Presented by Lynn Tully, Community Development Director)
(Agenda Item No. 10-1139)
9) PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Approval for the Removal of Billy Lovelace Hauling from the List of Approved Solid
Waste Haulers for the City of Milton Due to Non-Compliance with the Ordinance.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1140)
(Matt Marietta, Fire Marshal)
MILTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA MAY 17, 2010 – 6:00 PM
Page 3 of 3
Milton City Hall
City Council Chambers
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite E
Milton, GA 30004
Persons needing special accommodations in order to participate in any City
meeting should call 678-242-2500.
SECOND PUBLIC HEARING
1. Approval of an Ordinance to Adopt Amendments to the Fiscal 2010 Budget for Each
Fund of the City of Milton, Georgia Amending the Amounts Shown in Each Budget as
Expenditures, Amending the Several Items of Revenue Anticipations, Prohibiting
Expenditures to Exceed Appropriations, and Prohibiting Expenditures to Exceed
Actual Funding Available.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1127)
(First Presentation and Public Hearing on May 3, 2010)
(Stacey Inglis, Finance Director)
10) ZONING AGENDA
1. RZ10-01 – 3105 Bethany Bend (Southeast corner of Bethany Bend and Hwy 9) by D-
Squared Development, LLC to rezone from AG-1 (Agricultural) and C-1
(Community Business) to C-1 (Community Business) to develop a 2,100 square
foot convenience store and four pump islands at a density of 2,411 square feet per
acre.
(First Presentation on March 1, 2010; Deferred by Mayor and Council on March 15, 2010)
(Presented by Lynn Tully, Community Development Director)
(Agenda Item No. 10-1063)
11) UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Approval of an Ordinance to Adopt Amendments to the Fiscal 2010 Budget for Each
Fund of the City of Milton, Georgia Amending the Amounts Shown in Each Budget as
Expenditures, Amending the Several Items of Revenue Anticipations, Prohibiting
Expenditures to Exceed Appropriations, and Prohibiting Expenditures to Exceed
Actual Funding Available.
(Agenda Item No. 10-1127)
(First Presentation and Public Hearing on May 3, 2010; 2nd Public Hearing May 17, 2010)
(Stacey Inglis, Finance Director)
12) NEW BUSINESS (None)
13) MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
14) STAFF REPORTS
15) EXECUTIVE SESSION (If needed)
16) ADJOURNMENT
(Agenda Item No. 10-1141)
The minutes will be
Provided
electronically
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway Suite 107G Milton, Georgia 30004
1
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Stacey Inglis, Finance Director
Date: May 17, 2010 City Council Meeting
Agenda Item: Financial Status Report for Period 7 – April 2010
OVERVIEW and FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS:
General Fund
Revenues continue to be skewed higher than the normal anticipation for this period in
the fiscal year at 125.7%. As mentioned in previous financial reports, these excess funds
will replenish the depleted FY 2009 fund balance. The first public hearing for the budget
amendment was presented during the May 3 council meeting and the second is
scheduled for May 17. This amendment will capture the additional property tax
revenues received for the prior year due to the late tax billing.
Total expenditures to-date are $8,654,672 and are 11.1% less than expected for this
period of the fiscal year.
Capital Project Fund
Expenditures within this fund continue to occur on a project-by-project basis. With a
total project expenditure budget of $6,334,903, capital expenditures-to-date total
$694,783.
FINANCIAL OPERATIONS:
Tree Replacement Fund: Balance: $12,800
Sidewalk Replacement Fund: Balance: $70,558
City of MiltonSTATEMENT OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURESGeneral FundFor the Period Ending April 2010Actual BudgetedVarianceover/(under)Actual BudgetedVarianceover/(under)Property Tax 9,177,549 97,081 0 97,081 8,065,451 1,292,549 6,772,902Motor Vehicle Tax 500,000 46,947 41,667 5,281 237,217 250,000 (12,783)Intangible Tax 190,000 12,593 15,833 (3,240) 78,625 95,000 (16,375)Real Estate Transfer Tax 35,000 2,528 2,917 (388) 18,660 17,500 1,160Franchise Fees 1,700,000 313,603 425,000 (111,397) 883,273 850,000 33,273Local Option Sales Tax 3,400,000 324,187 283,333 40,854 1,874,282 1,700,000 174,282Alcohol Beverage Excise Tax 254,000 22,746 21,167 1,579 133,274 127,000 6,274Business & Occupation Tax 575,000 26,565 28,750 (2,185) 536,570 540,500 (3,930)Insurance Premium Tax 850,000 0 0 0 0 0 0Financial Institution Tax 23,000 5,085 0 5,085 26,158 23,000 3,158Penalties & Interest 53,000 25,741 0 25,741 104,168 51,000 53,168Alcohol Beverage Licenses 122,000 0 0 0 128,700 122,000 6,700Other Non-Business Permits/Licenses 11,710 1,900 923 977 11,089 8,545 2,544Zoning & Land Disturbance Permits 32,500 1,558 2,708 (1,150) 10,625 18,958 (8,333)Building Permits 50,000 9,444 4,167 5,277 37,035 29,167 7,868Intergovernmental Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Other Charges for Service 326,160 13,731 27,555 (13,824) 167,184 179,218 (12,035)Municipal Court Fines 452,500 0 37,708 (37,708) 260,011 263,958 (3,947)Interest Earnings 20,000 2,334 1,667 667 12,805 11,667 1,138Contributions & Donations 0 0 0 0 2,370 0 2,370Other Revenue 37,802 0 0 0 6,761 0 6,761Other Financing Sources 7,000 0 0 0 0 0 0Total Revenue 17,817,221 906,044 893,395 12,649 12,594,256 5,580,063 7,014,193Current Month Year-to-DateAnnual BudgetRevenueCurrent Month Year-to-DateActual BudgetedVarianceover/(under)Actual BudgetedVarianceover/(under)Mayor and Council 157,189 8,672 12,505 (3,833) 71,961 82,366 (10,405)Clerk of the Council 572,785 14,348 107,496 (93,148) 261,738 341,075 (79,337)City Manager 395,023 19,653 32,128 (12,475) 150,076 224,215 (74,138)General Administration 0 20,630 0 20,630 300,051 0 300,051Finance 1,029,285 39,921 93,463 (53,542) 489,281 599,605 (110,324)Legal 200,000 40,585 16,667 23,918 103,296 83,333 19,962Information Technology 1,073,453 57,558 88,422 (30,864) 638,119 623,774 14,345Human Resources 334,251 14,697 25,111 (10,414) 119,716 191,962 (72,246)Risk Management 195,252 13,607 91,376 (77,769) 98,274 113,897 (15,623)General Government Buildings 482,415 0 40,201 (40,201) 0 281,409 (281,409)Public Information & Marketing 493,811 5,157 41,096 (35,939) 180,457 287,671 (107,214)Municipal Court 244,982 17,544 19,010 (1,465) 131,849 141,501 (9,652)Police 2,583,623 166,299 201,877 (35,578) 1,390,723 1,491,189 (100,466)Fire 4,189,001 240,598 326,351 (85,752) 2,253,440 2,415,851 (162,411)EMS Operations 132,250 11,021 11,021 (0) 77,146 77,146 (0)Public Works 2,025,376 93,918 168,776 (74,858) 1,014,290 1,181,226 (166,935)Parks & Recreation 140,339 15,138 10,905 4,233 71,460 81,241 (9,781)Community Development 1,379,700 49,526 114,650 (65,124) 579,718 803,367 (223,649)Debt Service - Capital Lease Payment 709,395 0 709,395 (709,395) 716,541 709,395 7,146Operating Transfers to Other Funds 1,316,236 6,536 0 6,536 6,536 0 6,536Operating Reserve 163,630 0 0 0 0 0 0Total expenditures 17,817,996 835,410 2,110,450 (1,275,041) 8,654,672 9,730,223 (1,075,551)Net Income/(Loss)70,635 3,939,584Operating Expenditures Annual BudgetCurrent MonthYear to Date5/7/2010
Original
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Contributions & Donations 5,000$ 100$ 2,800$ (2,200)$
Interest Revenues - - - -
Holiday Card Sales - - - -
T-shirt Sales - - - -
Mayor's Run - - 2,367 2,367
Total revenues 5,000$ 100$ 5,167$ 167$
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Special Events 45,000$ 500$ 28,003$ 16,997$
Total Expenditures 45,000$ 500$ 28,003$ 16,997$
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in from Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 40,000$ 3,858$ 20,791$ (19,209)$
Total other financing sources and uses 40,000$ 3,858$ 20,791$ (19,209)$
Net change in fund balances -$ (2,045)$
Fund balances - beginning 3,356 20,253
Fund balances - ending 3,356$ 18,208$
City of Milton
Special Events Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Original
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Cash Confiscations $ - $ - $ - $ -
Interest Revenues - 7 50 50
Total revenues $ - $ 7 $ 50 $ 50
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Police $ - $ - $ 4,487 $ (4,487)
Total Expenditures $ - $ - $ 4,487 $ (4,487)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in from General Fund $ - $ - $ - $ -
Total other financing sources and uses $ - $ - $ - $ -
Net change in fund balances $ - $ (4,437)
Fund balances - beginning - 43,810
Fund balances - ending $ - $ 39,373
City of Milton
Confiscated Assets Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Original
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Wireless 911 Fees 570,000$ 112,324$ 392,723$ (177,277)$
Total revenues 570,000$ 112,324$ 392,723$ (177,277)$
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety 554,000$ 144,509$ 465,629$ 88,371$
Total Expenditures 554,000$ 144,509$ 465,629$ 88,371$
OTHER FINANCING USES
Unallocated 16,000$ -$ -$ (16,000)$
Total other financing sources and uses 16,000$ -$ -$ (16,000)$
Net change in fund balances -$ (72,906)$
Fund balances - beginning - 175,972
Fund balances - ending -$ 103,066$
City of Milton
E-911 Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Original
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Intergovernmental Revenues
SAFER Grant 85,934$ 23,341$ 49,486$ (36,448)$
GEMA Grant - - 40,348 40,348
Crabapple Festival Grant - - 1,016 1,016
Total revenues 85,934$ 23,341$ 90,849$ 4,915$
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Public Safety 118,530$ -$ 32,682$ 85,848$
Community Development 20,000 - - (20,000)
Total Expenditures 138,530$ -$ 32,682$ 65,848$
Excess of revenues over expenditures (52,596) 23,341 58,167 110,763
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in from General Fund 52,596$ -$ 6,536$ (46,060)$
Total other financing sources and uses 52,596$ -$ 6,536$ (46,060)$
Net change in fund balances - 64,704
Fund balances - beginning 2,670 3,164
Fund balances - ending 2,670$ 67,868$
City of Milton
Operating Grant Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Original
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Taxes
Hotel/Motel Taxes 47,000$ 3,923$ 20,791$ (26,209)$
Total revenues 47,000$ 3,923$ 20,791$ (26,209)$
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers out to General Fund (7,000)$ -$ -$ 7,000$
Transfers out to Special Events Fund (40,000) (3,858) (20,791) 19,209
Total other financing sources and uses (47,000)$ (3,858)$ (20,791)$ 26,209$
Net change in fund balances - -
Fund balances - beginning - -
Fund balances - ending -$ -$
City of Milton
Hotel/Motel Tax Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Final
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Charges for Service
Infrastructure Maintenance Fee 65,000$ 13,867$ 31,457$ (33,543)$
Landfill Host Fees 185,000 25,951 97,405 (87,595)
Tree Recompense 12,800 - - (12,800)
Interest Revenue 2,000 - - (2,000)
Sidewalk Replacement Account 70,558 - - (70,558)
Total revenues 335,358$ 39,818$ 128,862$ (206,496)$
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
City Council 9,466$ 2,209$ 2,231$ 7,235$
General Admin - - 12,300 (12,300)
IT 35,000 - 31,325 3,675
Police 128,852 18,905 101,328 27,524
Fire 182,479 29,580 29,580 152,899
Public Works 4,491,632 38,774 484,438 4,007,194
Parks & Recreation 1,198,514 - 10,710 1,187,804
Community Development 288,960 - 22,873 266,088
Total Capital Outlay 6,334,903$ 89,468$ 694,783$ 5,640,120$
Excess of revenues over expenditures (5,999,545) (49,650) (565,922) (5,846,616)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
TfifG lFd 1 068 400$$$(1 068 400)$
City of Milton
Capital Project Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Transfers in from General Fund 1,068,400$ -$ -$ (1,068,400)$
Lease Proceeds - - 20,500 20,500
Budgeted Fund Balance 4,931,145 - - (4,931,145)
Total other financing sources and uses 5,999,545 - 20,500 (5,979,045)
Net change in fund balances - (545,422)
Fund balances - beginning 4,900,109 4,900,109
Fund balances - ending 4,900,109$ 4,354,688$
Original
Budgeted
Amounts
Current Period
Actuals
Year-to-Date
Actuals
Variance with
Final Budget -
Positive (Negative)
REVENUES
Intergovernmental Revenues
Transportation Master Plan 348,048$ -$ 121,741$ (226,307)$
GDOT HPP Funds - 36,644 40,789 40,789
Bathroom Renovation - - - -
Interest Revenues - - - -
Contributions & Donations - - -
Total revenues 348,048$ 36,644$ 162,530$ (185,518)$
EXPENDITURES
Capital Outlay
Public Works 1,828,578$ 370$ 116,269$ 1,712,309$
Total Capital Outlay 1,828,578$ 370$ 116,269$ 1,712,309$
Excess of revenues over expenditures (1,480,530) 36,274 46,261 1,526,791
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in from General Fund 178,240$ -$ -$ (178,240)$
Budgeted Fund Balance 1,302,290 - - (1,302,290)$
Total other financing sources and uses 1,480,530$ -$ -$ (1,480,530)$
Net change in fund balances - 46,261
Fund balances - beginning 804,804 804,804
Fdbl di 804 804$851 065$
City of Milton
Capital Grant Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual
For the Period Ended April 30, 2010
Fund balances - ending 804,804$ 851,065$
EMS Week
WHEREAS, It is well recognized that pre-hospital emergency medical care
is the crucial first step in the chain of survival for all manner of
traumatic injuries and sicknesses; and
WHEREAS, As emergency medical professionals, the City of Milton’s
firefighters are on the front line of providing this essential care
to Milton’s residents and visitors alike; and
WHEREAS, Milton’s Emergency Medical Technicians provide not only
professional basic life support services to the community, but
also have worked diligently to increase our level of life-saving
service to include advanced life support; and
WHEREAS, At the forefront of this great leap in the quality and level of
emergency medical service provided by the Milton Fire
Department are its paramedics, who are trained to the highest
level of pre-hospital emergency medical care, and the City
would like to especially recognize our first paramedic team,
including Lt. Bill Garrett, Lt. Clay Barnette, Lt. Russ Scanlan, Lt.
Bill Bourn, Lt. Bruce Borders, Lt. Chris Coker, FAO Ryan James,
FAO Don Patterson, Firefighter Danny Snyder, and Firefighter
Eric Sprouse.
NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Milton,
hereby proclaim the week of May 16 to May 22, 2010 to be
“EMS Week” and do urge all citizens to join in this nationwide
celebration.
Given under my hand and Seal of the City of Milton, Georgia on the 17th day
of May, 2010.
__________________________
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
National Public Works Week
WHEREAS, public works services provided in our community are an integral
part of our citizens’ everyday lives; and
WHEREAS, the support of an understanding and informed citizenry is vital to
the efficient operation of public works systems and programs; and
WHEREAS, the health, safety and comfort of this community greatly depends on
these services and programs; and
WHEREAS, the quality and effectiveness of these services and programs, as well
as their planning, design and construction efforts, are vitally
dependent upon the dedication and skill of public works personnel;
and
WHEREAS, the efficiency of the qualified and dedicated personnel who staff
public works departments is materially influenced by the people’s
attitude and understanding of the importance of the work they
perform,
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton, do
hereby proclaim the week of May 16 – 22, 2010 as “National Public Works
Week” in the City of Milton, and we call upon all citizens and civic organizations
to acquaint themselves with the issues involved in providing our public works and
to recognize the contributions which public works personnel make every day to
our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life.
Given under my hand and Seal of the City of Milton this 17th day of May,
2010.
(Seal) Joe Lockwood, Mayor
Memorial Day
WHEREAS, Memorial Day was first officially proclaimed on May 5, 1868 by general John
Logan in his General order Number 11, and in 1968, by act of Congress, it was
determined that the holiday would be observed on the last Monday in May; and
WHEREAS, from the opening battles of the American Revolution through the turmoil of the
Civil War, to World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, to the Persian
Gulf and today’s operations in the war on terror in Afgha nistan, Iraq, and all
around the world, the members of our military have built a tradition of honorable
and faithful service. As we observe Memorial Day, we remember the more than
one million Americans who have died to preserve our freedom, the more than
140,000 citizens who were prisoners of war, and all those who were declared
missing in action. We also honor our veterans for their dedication to America and
their sacrifice; and
WHEREAS, we have honor and privileges of living in a free county, and Geor gia has a rich
history of great leaders who died fighting for our great nation. Today, all who
wear the uniform of the United States are serving at a crucial hour in history, and
each has answered a great call to serve our nation on the front lines of fre edom.
Let us pray for the safety and strength of our troops, and for God’s blessing on
them and their families, and for those who have lost loved ones; and
WHEREAS, on this Memorial Day, we honor our fallen soldiers, and their commitment to our
country and their legacy of patriotism and sacrifices of many men and women
who answered the nation’s call to duty and fought with honor and valor and, in the
end, gave the ultimate sacrifice to safeguard the rights of all Americans; and
WHEREAS, by giving their lives in this cause of freedom, these heroes have protected and
inspired all Americans and we are truly grateful for the sacrifice; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of Milton join with people across the nation in remembrance of those
who died while courageously service their country during war.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Milton, Georgia hereby dedicate and
proclaim Monday, May 31st, 2010 as Memorial Day in the city of Milton and call this observance to the
attention of all of our citizens.
Given under my hand and seal of the City of Milton, Georgia on this 17th Day of May, 2010.
(Seal)
_________________________________
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
City of Milton, Georgia
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Presented by:
Adam M. Fraley, CPA
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 1
PURPOSE OF ANNUAL AUDIT AGENDA
Engagement Team.
Overview of:
o Audit Opinion
o Financial Statements, Footnotes and Supplementary Information
o Compliance Reports
Required Communications under Government Auditing Standards.
Accounting Recommendations and Related Matters.
Answer Questions.
ENGAGEMENT TEAM
Mauldin & Jenkins:
Large regional firm serving the Southeastern United States with a primary emphasis in
Georgia.
Founded in 1920.
Offices located in Atlanta, Macon, Albany and Birmingham with firm governmental
leadership positioned in the Atlanta and Macon offices.
Serve more governmental entities in Georgia than any other certified public accounting
firm requiring over 50,000 hours of service on an annual basis.
Most recent auditor for 25 counties in Georgia, as well as another 45 cities in Georgia,
and over 160 total governmental entities in Georgia.
Auditor of a substantial part of the State of Georgia including approximately 25% of the
State’s general fund, and 13 of the State of Georgia’s component units.
Engagement team leaders on the audit engagement include:
Adam Fraley, Engagement Partner – 13 years experience serving governments.
James Bence, Engagement Manager – 6 years experience serving governments.
Emily Kisabeth, Engagement Supervisor – 5 years experience serving governments.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 2
AUDIT OPINION
City’s Responsibility
The financial statements are the responsibility of the City of Milton and
management and the City Council Members.
Auditor’s Responsibility
Our responsibility, as external auditors, is to express an opinion on these financial
statements.
Auditing Standards
We audited the City’s financial statements in accordance with auditing standards
generally accepted in the United States of America and Government Auditing
Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.
Clean Opinion
The financial statements of the City are considered to present fairly the financial
position and results of operations as of, and for the year ended September 30,
2009.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 3
REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS,
FOOTNOTES & SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Statement of Net Assets
This statement attempts to provide a reader of the financial statements with a full accrual
perspective of the City, as a whole.
The City’s governmental activities net assets position as of September 30, 2009 was
$49,044,889. This change is reconciled on the City’s “Statement of Activities.”
In reference to the City’s net assets, it is important to note that $36,524,637 of total net assets is
invested in capital assets, net of related debt. While the City is reflecting total net assets of
$49,044,889, it reflects unrestricted net assets of $12,520,252 at September 30, 2009. This
unrestricted net assets position is reconciled on the City’s “Statement of Activities.”
Statement of Activities
This statement reflects the net costs of providing governmental activities on the full accrual basis
of accounting and reconciles to the statement of net assets.
Footnotes
Note 1 - Accounting Policies
This footnote discusses the overall organization of the City and the nature of its
operations. This note also discloses pertinent information regarding the
governing body of the City.
This footnote continues by sharing with a reader of the financial statements the
significant accounting policies and principles utilized in the preparation of the
financial statements.
Note 2 - Reconciliation of Government-wide Financial Statements and Fund
Financial Statements
This footnote provides additional detailed information that is not already shown
within the financial statements themselves, on the differences between the City’s
fund level financial statements and its government-wide financial statements.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 4
Footnotes (continued)
Note 3 - Legal Compliance - Budgets
This footnote discloses the City’s procedures in establishing its annual budget.
Note 4 - Deposits
This disclosure addresses common deposit risks related to custodial credit risk.
Note 5 - Receivables
This footnote discloses the City’s property tax calendar and detailed information
on various receivable (and allowances for doubtful receivables) balances.
Note 6 - Capital Assets
This footnote discloses the City’s capital asset activity and its related accumulated
depreciation for the period.
Note 7 - Short Term Borrowings
This footnote discloses the City’s short term borrowings for the period, and the
specific terms of those borrowings.
Note 8 - Long-Term Debt
This footnote discloses the City’s long-term debt activity for the period, and other
information and maturities for this long-term debt.
Note 9 - Interfund Receivables, Payables, and Transfers
This footnote discloses detailed information on the City’s interfund balances and
transfers and the purpose of these balances and transactions.
Notes 10 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities
This footnote discloses the contingencies from potential litigation, claims, and
assessments filed against the City and significant contractual commitments of the
City at year end.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 5
Footnotes (continued)
Notes 11 - Defined Benefit Pension Plan
This footnote discloses the details of the City’s Defined Benefit Plan, including
funding policies and the amount of required contributions as compared to actual
contributions.
Notes 12 - Defined Contribution Pension Plan
This footnote discloses the details of the City’s Defined Contribution Plan.
Notes 13 - Fund Deficits
This footnote discloses any deficit equity positions within the City’s funds and the
City’s plans to alleviate such deficits.
Notes 14 - Joint Venture
This footnote discloses the City’s relationship with the Atlanta Regional
Commission.
Note 15 - Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax
This footnote discloses the City’s tax rate for hotel/motel taxes, along with the
amounts and nature of these revenues and expenditures.
Note 16 - Risk Management
This footnote discloses the City’s various risks of loss and the measures the City
has taken to mitigate those potential losses.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 6
COMPLIANCE REPORT
The financial report package contains a report on our tests of the City’s internal controls and
compliance with laws, regulations, etc. The report is not intended to provide an opinion, but to
provide a form of negative assurance as to the City’s internal controls and compliance with
applicable rules and regulations.
This report makes reference to the fact that we have issued a management letter which contains
recommendations for improvement we noted during the course of our annual audit engagement.
This report and the procedures performed are required by Government Auditing Standards.
REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS
The Auditor’s Responsibility Under Auditing Standards
Generally Accepted in the United States of America
Our audit of the financial statements of the City for the period ended September 30, 2009, was
conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America and Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United
States. Those standards require we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance
about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by
error, fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets. An audit includes examining,
on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An
audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Accordingly, the
audit was designed to obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about the financial
statements. We believe our audit accomplishes that objective.
In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also performed tests of controls
and compliance with laws and regulations that contribute to the evidence supporting our opinion
on the financial statements. However, they do not provide a basis for opining on the City’s
internal control or compliance with laws and regulations.
Accounting Policies
Management has the ultimate responsibility for the appropriateness of the accounting policies
used by the City. There were no significant new accounting policies or standards implemented
this period. There are new accounting standards which will be required to be implemented in the
coming years. These are discussed later in this document.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 7
In considering the qualitative aspects of the City’s accounting policies, we did not identify any
significant or unusual transactions or significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging
areas for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. The City’s policies
relative to the timing of recording of transactions are consistent with GAAP and typical
government organizations.
Management Judgments and Accounting Estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the preparation of financial statements and are based
upon management’s current judgment. The process used by management encompasses their
knowledge and experience about past and current events and certain assumptions about future
events. Management has informed us they used all the relevant facts available to them at the
time to make the best judgments about accounting estimates and we considered this information
in the scope of our audit. We considered this information and the qualitative aspects of
management’s calculations in evaluating the City’s significant accounting estimates. Estimates
significant to the financial statements include such items as the estimated historical value of
donated infrastructure and other capital assets, the estimated lives of capital assets, and the
estimated allowance for doubtful accounts receivables.
Financial Statement Disclosures
The footnote disclosures to the financial statements are also an integral part of the financial
statements. The process used by management to accumulate the information included in the
disclosures was the same process used in accumulating the financial statements and the
accounting policies described above are included in those disclosures. The overall neutrality,
consistency, and clarity of the disclosures was considered as part our audit and in forming our
opinion on the financial statements.
Significant Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no difficulties in dealing with management relating to the performance of the
audit.
Audit Adjustments
During our audit of the City’s basic financial statements as of and for the period ended
September 30, 2009, there were some adjustments proposed to the funds of the City. The detail
of all proposed adjustments for each fund are included with our Audit Agenda package of
information for your review and discussion. All adjustments have been discussed with
management.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 8
Uncorrected Misstatements
We had no passed adjustments.
Disagreements with Management
We encountered no disagreements with management over the application of significant
accounting principles, the basis for management’s judgments on significant matters, the scope of
the audit or significant disclosures to be included in the financial statements.
Representation from Management
We requested written representations from management relating to the accuracy of information
included in the financial statements and the completeness and accuracy of various information
requested by us, during the audit. Management provided those written representations without a
problem.
Management’s Consultations with Other Accountants
We are not aware of any consultations management had with other accountants about accounting
or auditing matters.
Significant Issues Discussed with Management
There were no significant issues discussed with management related to business conditions,
plans, or strategies that may have affected the risk of material misstatement of the financial
statements. We are not aware of any consultations management had with us or other accountants
about accounting or auditing matters. No major issues were discussed with management prior to
our retention to perform the aforementioned audit.
Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements
We are not aware of any other documents that contain the audited basic financial statements. If
such documents were to be published, we would have a responsibility to determine that such
financial information was not materially inconsistent with the audited statements of the City.
Independence
We are independent of the City, and all related organizations, in accordance with auditing
standards promulgated by the American Institute of Public Accountants and Government
Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 9
ACCOUNTING RECOMMENDATIONS AND RELATED MATTERS
Recommendations for Improvement
During our audit of the financial statements as of and for the period ended September 30, 2009,
we noted areas within the accounting and internal control systems that we believe can be
improved. We noted certain items as significant deficiencies in our supplemental reports on
internal controls and compliance. Additionally, we noted certain items management should
consider as part of its decision making process. Our recommendations (also commonly referred
to as management points) are presented in the following paragraphs. We believe consideration
of these recommendations will help provide proper control over financial activities, and add
effectiveness and efficiency to overall operations.
Significant Deficiency (Material Weakness)
As noted in our supplemental reports on internal controls and compliance, we reported the
following significant deficiency that was also considered a material weakness:
1) Internal controls were not sufficient to detect a misstatement in the reporting of the City’s
revenue and related receivables. During our testing, certain audit adjustments were required
to correct current year amounts. The nature of these adjustments is as follows:
The Capital Grant Fund required an adjustment of approximately $165,000 to
properly report revenue, deferred revenue, and accounts receivable related to
grant activity.
An adjustment of approximately $74,500 was required to properly recognize
revenues related to deferred lease incentives in the General Fund.
Audit adjustments totaling approximately $239,500 were needed to correctly record
revenues, related receivables, and deferred revenues. We recommend the City carefully
review all revenues, receivables, and deferred revenues to ensure they are reported in the
proper reporting period, properly valued, and in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 10
Management Points
We have discussed various matters with management pertaining to operations and controls
including, but not limited to:
1) During our testing of capital assets, we noted that the City maintains their capital assets in
an Excel spreadsheet. Maintenance of capital assets and the related depreciation in Excel
creates inherent risks of errors that would not occur if these assets were maintained in
software that is designed to manage the data and perform calculations such as depreciation
on capital assets. To properly maintain the City’s capital assets and mitigate the risk of
errors occurring in the accounting for capital assets, we recommend the City utilize a
capital assets program that is designed to assist in the accounting for such capital assets.
2) During our testing of subsequent disbursements, we noted a disbursement of $10,000 in the
Capital Projects Fund that was improperly excluded from accounts payable at
September 30, 2009. We recommend the City carefully review all expenditures and related
liabilities to ensure they are reported in the proper reporting period and in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles.
3) During our testing of prepaid expenditures, an adjustment of approximately $40,000 was
required in the General Fund to properly recognize expenditures that were incurred during
the year but improperly included in prepaid expenditures at September 30, 2009. We
recommend the City carefully review expenditures and related assets and liabilities to
ensure they are reported in the proper reporting period and in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles.
Other Matters
During our audit of the financial statements as of and for the year ended September 30, 2009, we
noted other matters which we wish to communicate to you in an effort to keep the City abreast of
accounting matters that could present challenges in financial reporting in future periods.
1) American Recovery & Reinvestment Act - In February 2009, the Federal Government
passed the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), often called the
Federal Stimulus or Recovery Act. ARRA provides for approximately $580 billion in
additional Federal spending, which will predominately be distributed to state and local
governments. Of this amount, the State of Georgia expects to receive $7.3 billion, the
majority of which is expected to be spent in state fiscal years 2010 and 2011, with the
programs receiving funding ranging from Department of Education programs,
transportation infrastructure, justice programs, and GEFA energy related programs. The
funding available to local governments in Georgia is significant and should have a positive
impact in stabilizing budgets and providing for programs that might not otherwise have
been funded. That being said, this funding also comes with significant and increasing
administrative requirements as well as potentially adding future commitments to your
government. In regards to these ARRA funds, we recommend that you do the following:
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 11
a) Establish a centralized process for accepting ARRA funds – this should be a conscious
management decision with the entire organization aware of the requirements.
b) Ensure you have proper internal control procedures in place to track funds and ensure
compliance with all grant requirements. This should include enhancing current controls
for identified weaknesses.
c) Ensure subrecipient monitoring controls will meet higher than ever scrutiny. The
Federal Government wants the process to proactively identify issues and not just react
to issues once they’ve occurred.
d) Be prepared for the quarterly Section 1512 reporting requirements. Additionally, be
prepared to report ARRA funded projects separately on the SEFA, even if they have the
same CFDA number as an existing federal program.
2) New GASB Standards - As has been the case for the past 10 years, GASB has issued
several other new pronouncements which will be effective in future years. The following
is a brief summary of the new standards:
a) Statement No. 49, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pollution Remediation
Obligations, addresses liabilities for existing pollution remediation projects as they are
discovered and acted upon. This was effective and implemented for the City with fiscal
year ending September 30, 2009, and is a pronouncement that the City should consider
at least on annual basis going forward.
b) Statement No. 51, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Assets,
which establishes accounting for assets such as easements, water rights, trademarks,
and internally generated computer software. This is effective for the City with fiscal
year ending September 30, 2010.
c) Statement No. 53, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Derivative
Instruments, which is intended to improve how governments report information about
derivative instruments in their financial statements.
Over the past two decades, the use of derivative instruments by state and local
governments has increased significantly. Although derivatives often result from
complex financial transactions, governments have discovered their usefulness in
lowering borrowing costs, providing up-front cash payments, and reducing future risks
of declining cash flows or asset values. Many governments also use derivative
instruments as simple investments intended to generate additional revenues. Examples
of derivative instruments commonly used in the public sector include interest rate
swaps, forward delivery swaps, "swaptions," and interest rate caps.
Specifically, this pronouncement requires governments to measure most derivative
instruments at fair value in their financial statements. It also addresses hedge
accounting requirements to determine whether a derivative instrument results in an
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 12
effective hedge. This is effective for the City with fiscal year ending September 30,
2010.
d) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type
Definitions, which changes the terminology and reporting relative to the presentation
of fund balance in governmental funds at the fund level. This is effective for the City
with fiscal year ending September 30, 2011.
Currently, we have fund balance terms such as reserved, unreserved and designated.
Going forward under this new pronouncement we will have terms such as:
a. Nonspendable
b. Restricted
c. Committed
d. Assigned
e. Unassigned
Nonspendable fund balance would include amounts associated with inventory,
prepaids, long-term receivables, property held for sale and the corpus of a permanent
fund. In essence, nonspendable is the fund balance term to indicate that the respective
resources are not available to be spent in any way due to their very nature and, or their
lack of availability.
Restricted carries the same definition as set forth by GASB No. 34 relative to net
assets. This would include any fund balance that is restricted in its use by: a) external
parties; b) constitutional provisions; or, c) enabling legislation. Good examples in
Georgia would include the fund balances associated with an E-911 Fund, a Hotel/Motel
Tax Fund, or a SPLOST Fund. Another example would be the fund balance mandated
by bond resolutions and covenants to be carried and reported in a Debt Service Fund.
Committed fund balance represents amounts for which the governing board of the
respective reporting government imposes constraints on how funds may or may not be
used. In such a case, the only way a constraint can be removed or changed is by action
of the respective governing board. Actions to constrain resources should occur prior to
the end of a fiscal year, though the exact amount may be determined subsequently.
Assigned fund balance represents amounts intended to be used for specific purposes
with the intent being expressed by the reporting government’s governing board or a
high level body or individual authorized by the governing board. With the exception of
the General Fund, amounts in all other governmental funds that are not nonspendable,
restricted or committed will be considered to be assigned. Also, at the fiscal year end
any appropriation of existing fund balance to eliminate a projected budgetary deficit in
the next year’s budget is considered to be an assignment of fund balance.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 13
Unassigned fund balance is anything that does not meet the above definitions and
represents fund balance that is available for any purpose. The only fund that will ever
report unassigned fund balance is the General Fund except in cases of other
governmental funds reporting deficit fund balance (or negative fund balance).
As you can see, financial reporting for governmental units continues to evolve and
change with each and every GASB pronouncement. Along with the above financial
statements elements this new pronouncements will require additional information and
changes to the respective notes to the financial statements and the management
discussion and analysis (MD&A).
The biggest implication to consider today is how your fund balance will be reflected
under these new reporting standards and what will interested parties think and
understand these amounts to mean and represent. For instance, will your unreserved
fund balance of today equate with unassigned fund balance of tomorrow?
3) Sales Tax Collections and Remittances by the State of Georgia’s Department of
Revenue
During April and May 2009, the Georgia Department of Revenue (DOR) upgraded to a
new system for distributing sales taxes and also changed their method of distribution.
Previously, sales taxes collected were not substantially disbursed by the DOR to the local
governments until two (2) months subsequent to the month that the sales taxes were
collected.
The DOR now claims the speed of remittances to local governments to substantially take
only one (1) month as compared to their old system. Additionally, the DOR is now able to
produce more detailed information including the ability to report to local governments a
breakdown showing the percentage of each disbursement by month and by jurisdiction.
Meaning, when a local government receives sales tax funds from the DOR, the DOR can
provide a breakdown of what the percentage relates to by month of sales. (Example: a
City’s July 2009 collection of $1,000,000 could be noted to include 70% from June sales,
20% from May sales, and 10% from April and prior sales).
This change in process and additional information requires local governments receiving
sales taxes to change their approach to analyzing, recording and reporting receivables,
revenues, and deferred revenues for sales taxes at both the governmental fund level and
government-wide level. Based on this updated information, we recommend the City
research and request the necessary information from the DOR in order to properly record
its receivables, revenues, and deferred revenues at year-end. The City will need to continue
to monitor this information until issuance of the financial statements to ensure amounts are
properly reported.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 14
One last thought on this subject - the DOR has created a new Sales Tax Distribution Report
on its website which allows every local government the ability to identify its monthly sales
tax distribution amounts from January 1999 to the present. In an effort to better manage
the recognition of revenues, we recommend the City consider utilizing the information as
part of its ongoing budget process.
Summations of Thoughts Noted Above
We believe the implementation of these suggestions will enhance both the control environment
and the financial reporting process, making both more effective. We also believe these
recommendations can be easily implemented, and all problems resolved quite timely should
management elect to employ the corrective measures.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 15
FREE QUARTERLY CONTINUING EDUCATION
AND NEWSLETTERS FOR GOVERNMENTAL CLIENTS
Free Continuing Education. Beginning in March 2009, we began providing free quarterly
continuing education for all of our governmental clients. Each quarter we pick a couple of
significant topics tailored to be of interest to governmental entities. In an effort to accommodate
our entire governmental client base, we offer the sessions two or three times per quarter at a
variety of client provided locations resulting in greater networking among our governmental
clients. We normally see approximately 50 people per session. We hope City staff and officials
have been able to participate in this opportunity, and that it has been beneficial to you.
Governmental Newsletters. Beginning in August 2009, we began producing newsletters
tailored to meet the needs of governments. The newsletters have addressed a variety of subjects,
and are authored by Mauldin & Jenkins personnel. The newsletters are produced and delivered
periodically, and are intended to keep you informed of current developments in the government
finance environment.
Communication. In an effort to better communicate our free continuing education plans and
newsletters, please email Lauren Payne at LPayne@mjcpa.com (send corresponding copy to
afraley@mjcpa.com), and provide to her individual names, mailing addresses, email addresses
and phone numbers of anyone you wish to participate and be included in our database of client
representatives and interested parties. We hope our additional services have been beneficial and
a valuable use of your time.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Audit Agenda
September 30, 2009
Mauldin & Jenkins CPA’s, LLC Page 16
CLOSING
If you have any questions regarding any comments, suggestions or recommendations set forth in
this memorandum, we will be pleased to discuss it with you at your convenience.
This information is intended solely for the use of the City of Milton’s management, and others
within the City’s organization and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other
than these specified parties.
We appreciate the opportunity to serve the City of Milton, Georgia and look forward to serving
the City in the future. Thank you.
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT’S REPORT
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
City of Milton, Georgia
We have examined management's assertion included in the accompanying Annual Report
of 9-1-1 Collections and Expenditures about the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance during the fiscal
year ended September 30, 2009 with the requirement that information presented in the Annual Report of
9-1-1 Collections and Expenditures is accurate and correct and that 9-1-1 funds were expended in
compliance with the expenditure requirements specified in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated,
Section 46-5-134. Management is responsible for the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance with this
requirement. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the City of
Milton, Georgia’s compliance based on our examination.
Our examination was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards established
by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test
basis, evidence about the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance with the above mentioned requirement
and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that
our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance with the specified requirement.
In our opinion, management's assertion that the City of Milton, Georgia complied with
the aforementioned requirement during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 is fairly stated, in all
material respects.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of management and the Georgia
Department of Audits and Accounts, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other
than these specified parties.
Atlanta, Georgia
February 22, 2010
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Report of 9-1-1 Collections and Expenditures
For the Year Ended September 30, 2009
Line O.C.G.A.
No.Reference:
1 Indicate UCOA Fund Type Used to Account for 9-1-1 Activity (choose one):
__X___ Special Revenue Fund _____ Enterprise Fund
2 Monthly 9-1-1 charge billed to each exchange access facility subscriber: 46-5-134(a)(1) $ 1.50
3 Total revenue from exchange access facility subscribers: $ 185,672
4 Does 9-1-1 system provide automatic number identification of a
wireless telecommunications connection? (choose one)
__X___ Yes _____ No
5 If the answer to Line 4 is "yes", indicate below which of the
following apply (choose one)
_____ System provides location of base station or cell site 46-5-134(a)(2)(A)
__X___ System provides automatic location identification 46-5-134(a)(2)(B)
6 If the answer to Line 4 is "yes", identify the monthly 9-1-1 charge
billed to each wireless telecommunications connection subscriber: 46-5-134(a)(2) $ 1.50
7 Total revenue from wireless telecommunications connection subscribers: $ 548,544
8 Total Line 3 plus Line 7 (should equal UCOA Revenue Source 34.2500) $ 734,216
9 Additional revenue sources:
9a Federal (UCOA Revenue Source 33.1000) 46-5-134(j)
Identify each funding agency individually. Attach list, if necessary.
$-
$-
9b State (UCOA Revenue Source 33.4000) 46-5-134(j)
Identify each funding agency individually. Attach list, if necessary.
$-
$-
9c Local (UCOA Revenue Source 33.6000) 46-5-134(j)
Identify each unit of local government individually. Attach list, if necessary.
$-
$-
9d Private (UCOA Revenue Source 37.1000) 46-5-134(j)
Identify each private source individually. Attach list, if necessary.
$-
$-
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Report of 9-1-1 Collections and Expenditures
For the Year Ended September 30, 2009
Line O.C.G.A.
No.Reference:
10 Investment Income (UCOA Revenue Source 36.1000 through 36.3000) $ 60
11 Other revenue sources not included above.
Identify each source individually. Transfers from other funds of the
local government should be reported on Line 25 and not included here.
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
12 Total Revenues (total of all amounts reported on Lines 8 through 11) $ 734,276
Expenditures (UCOA Activity 3800)
13 Wireless service supplier cost recovery charges 46-5-134(e)
(identify each supplier individually on lines below - attach list, if necessary)
$-
$-
$-
14 Emergency telephone equipment, including necessary computer hardware,
software, and data base provisioning, addressing, and nonrecurring costs of
establishing a 9-1-1 system:
14a Lease costs 46-5-134(f)(1) $ -
14b Purchase costs 46-5-134(f)(1) $ -
14c Maintenance costs 46-5-134(f)(1) $ 1,480
15 Rates associated with the service suppliers 9-1-1 service and other service
suppliers recurring charges 46-5-134(f)(2) $ 20,405
16 Employees hired by the local government solely for the operation and
maintenance of the emergency 9-1-1 system:
Number of employees classified as: Full time ______ Part time ________
16a Salaries and wages 46-5-134(f)(3) $ -
16b Employee benefits 46-5-134(f)(3) $ -
Page 2 of 4
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Report of 9-1-1 Collections and Expenditures
For the Year Ended September 30, 2009
Line O.C.G.A.
No.Reference:
17 Cost of training of employees who work as dispatchers 46-5-134(f)(3) $ -
18 Office supplies of the public safety answering points used directly in
providing emergency 9-1-1 system services 46-5-134(f)(4) $ -
19a Building used as a public safety answering point:
19a1 Lease costs 46-5-134(f)(5) $ -
19a2 Purchase costs 46-5-134(f)(5) $ -
19b Has the local government completed its street addressing plan? (choose one) 46-5-134(f)(5) $ -
_X__ Yes ____ No
20 Computer hardware and software used at a public safety answering point, including
computer assisted dispatch systems:
20a Lease costs 46-5-134(f)(6) $ -
20b Purchase costs 46-5-134(f)(6) $ -
20c Maintenance costs 46-5-134(f)(6) $ -
21 Supplies directly related to providing emergency 9-1-1 system services,
including the cost of printing emergency 9-1-1 public education materials 46-5-134(f)(7) $ -
22 Logging recorders used at a public safety answering point to record
telephone and radio traffic:
22a Lease costs 46-5-134(f)(8) $ -
22b Purchase costs 46-5-134(f)(8) $ -
22c Maintenance costs 46-5-134(f)(8) $ -
23 Other expenditures not included in Lines 13 through 22 above.
Identify by object and purpose. Transfers to other funds of the local government
should be reported on Line 26 and not included here.
Intergovernmental Agreement with City of Alpharetta to provide E911 svcs. $ 536,419
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
$-
24 Total Expenditures (total of all amounts reported on Lines 13 through 23 above) $ 558,304
Page 3 of 4
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
Annual Report of 9-1-1 Collections and Expenditures
For the Year Ended September 30, 2009
Line O.C.G.A.
No.Reference:
25 Transfers From Other Funds (identify by fund)
$-
$-
26 Transfers To Other Funds (identify by fund)
$-
$-
27 Proceeds from Capital Lease (identify by asset class and, if equipment, purpose)
$-
$-
28 Net Change in Fund Balance (Line 12 - Line 24 + Line 25 - Line 26 + Line 27) $ 175,972
29 Fund Balance - Beginning of Year $-
30 Fund Balance - End of Year $ 175,972
31a Do amounts on Lines 12, 24, 28, 29, and 30 agree to amounts reported in the
government's audited financial statements submitted to the Georgia
Department of Audits and Accounts?
_X____ Yes _____ No
31b If the answer to Line 31a is "no", provide explanation (including amounts) to reconcile
each line item specified in Line 31a above to government's audited financial statements. Reconciliation
should be attached to this report.
I have reviewed the information presented in this report and certify that it is accurate and correct. I further certify that
the 9-1-1 funds were expended in compliance with the expenditure requirements specified in the Official Code of Georgia
Annotated (OCGA), Section 46-5-134. I understand that, in accordance with OCGA Section 46-5-134(m)(2), any local
government which makes expenditures not in compliance with this Code section may be held liable for pro rata
reimbursement to telephone and wireless telecommunications subscribers of amounts improperly expended. Further, the
noncompliant local government shall be solely financially responsible for the reimbursement and for any costs
associated with the reimbursement. Such reimbursement shall be accomplished by service providers abating the
imposition of the 9-1-1 charges and 9-1-1 wireless enhanced charges until such abatement equals the total amount
of the rebate.
Signature of Chief Financial Officer__________________________________________________ Date_________________
Print Name of Chief Financial Officer __________________________________________________
Certification of Local Government Officials
Signature of Chief Elected Official __________________________________________________ Date__________________
Print Name of Chief Elected Official __________________________________________________
Title of Chief Elected Official ____________Mayor______________________________________
Page 4 of 4
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT
Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
City of Milton, Georgia
We have examined management’s assertion included in the accompanying State of Georgia
Grant Certification Forms about the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance during the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2009 with the requirement to use grant proceeds solely for the purpose or
purposes for which the grant was made for the following grant award: Special Project Local
Assistance Grant No. 027. Management is responsible for the City of Milton, Georgia’s
compliance with this requirement. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s
assertion about the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance based on our examination.
Our examination was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a
test basis, evidence about the City of Milton, Georgia’s compliance with the above mentioned
requirement and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the City of Milton, Georgia’s
compliance with the specified requirement.
In our opinion, management’s assertion that the City of Milton, Georgia complied with the
aforementioned requirement for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 is fairly stated in all
material respects.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, City Council and the
Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts, and is not intended to be and should not be used by
anyone other than the specified parties.
Atlanta, Georgia
February 22, 2010
State of Georgia Grant Certification Form
Local Government Recipient (with no subrecipient)
LINE
A Local Government …………………..
B State Awarding Agency …………….
C Grant Identification Number ….…….
D Grant Title ……….……………………
E Grant Award Date ……..…………….
F Grant Amount ………………..………
COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2
Current Year Activity Cumulative Grant Activity
For the Year Ended: Through the Year Ended:
G 9/30/2009 9/30/2009
H
Balance - Prior Year
(Cash or Accrued or Deferred
Revenue)-$17,500.00
I
Grant Receipts or Revenue
Recognized $17,500.00 $70,000.00
J
Grant Disbursements or
Expenditures EXCLUDING
AUDIT FEES $0.00 $70,000.00
K
Disbursements or Expenditures
for Audit Fees $0.00 $0.00
L
Balance - Current Year
(Cash or Accrued or Deferred
Revenue)
[Line H (col 1 only) + Line I -
Line J - Line K]$0.00 $0.00
Column 1, Line L equals Column 2, Line L.Line A Is Completed.
Grant Receipts/Revenue Does Not Exceed Grant Award. Line B Is Completed.
Date Is Provided in Line G, Column 1.Line C Is Completed.
Date Is Provided in Line G, Column 2.Line D Is Completed.
Year End Dates On Line G Agree.Line E Is Completed.
Column 1, Line L Foots Correctly. Line F Is Completed.
Column 2, Line L Foots Correctly.
Audit Fee is Within Legal Limit ($250).
Signature of Chief Financial Officer__________________________________________________ Date_________________
06/07/07
EDIT CHECKS IF FORM COMPLETED ON EXCEL SPREADSHEET:
Certification of Local Government Officials
I have reviewed the information presented above and certify that it is accurate and correct. I further certify that the
$70,000.00
City of Milton
GA Department of Community Affairs
027
Special Project Local Assistance Grant
Signature of Chief Elected Official __________________________________________________ Date__________________
proceeds of the grant award identified above were used solely for the express purpose or purposes for which the grant was
made.
Rev. 8/2006
To the Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council and Management of
the City of Milton, Georgia
This letter includes comments and suggestions with respect to matters that came to our attention
in connection with our audit of the basic financial statements of the City of Milton, Georgia (the
“City”) for the year ended September 30, 2009. We have also communicated to management
other matters involving the internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be
significant deficiencies, as defined by Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States. Please refer to the communications noted in the Report Over
Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial
Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards dated February 22,
2010.
The following items are offered as constructive suggestions to be considered part of the ongoing
process of modifying and improving the City's practices and procedures.
1. During our testing of capital assets, we noted that the City maintains their capital
assets in an Excel spreadsheet. Maintenance of capital assets and the related
depreciation in Excel creates inherent risks of errors that would not occur if these
assets were maintained in software that is designed to manage the data and perform
calculations such as depreciation on capital assets. To properly maintain the City’s
capital assets and mitigate the risk of errors occurring in the accounting for capital
assets, we recommend the City utilize a capital assets program that is designed to
assist in the accounting for such capital assets.
2. During our testing of subsequent disbursements, we noted a disbursement of $10,000
in the Capital Projects Fund that was improperly excluded from accounts payable at
September 30, 2009. We recommend the City carefully review all expenditures and
related liabilities to ensure they are reported in the proper reporting period and in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
3. During our testing of prepaid expenditures, an adjustment of approximately $40,000
was required in the General Fund to properly recognize expenditures that were
incurred during the year but improperly included in prepaid expenditures at
September 30, 2009. We recommend the City carefully review expenditures and
related assets and liabilities to ensure they are reported in the proper reporting period
and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
This letter is intended solely for the information and use of the Mayor and City Council of the
City of Milton, Georgia, and its management and other officials and is not intended to be and
should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
We appreciate serving the City of Milton, Georgia and would be happy to assist you in
addressing and implementing any of the suggestions in this letter.
Atlanta, Georgia
February 22, 2010
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS
BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
Honorable Mayor and Members
Of City Council
City of Milton, Georgia
We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund,
and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Milton, Georgia (the “City”) as of and for the
year ended September 30, 2009, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements and
have issued our report thereon dated February 22, 2010. We conducted our audit in accordance with
auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to
financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the
United States.
Internal Control over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City’s internal control over financial
reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on
the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the
City’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the
effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose
described in the preceding paragraph and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control
over financial reporting that might be significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses and therefore, there
can be no assurance that all deficiencies, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses have been
identified. However, as described in the accompanying schedule of findings and responses, we identified
certain deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses.
A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow
management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or
detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination
of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement
of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. We
consider the deficiency described in the accompanying schedule of findings and responses, as item
2009-1, to be a material weakness.
A significant deficiency is a deficiency or a combination of deficiencies in internal control that
is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with
governance. We consider the deficiency described in the accompanying schedule of findings and
responses, as item 2009-1, to be a significant deficiency.
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are
free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws,
regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material
effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance
with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an
opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are
required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards.
We noted certain matters that we reported to management of the City in a separate letter
dated February 22, 2010.
The City’s response to the finding identified in our audit is described in the accompanying
schedule of findings and responses. We did not audit the City’s response and, accordingly, we express
no opinion on it.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management,
and others within the organization, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other
than these specified parties.
Atlanta, Georgia
February 22, 2010
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND RESPONSES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
SECTION I
SUMMARY OF AUDIT RESULTS
Financial Statements
Type of auditor’s report issued Unqualified
Internal control over financial reporting:
Material weaknesses identified? X yes no
Significant deficiencies identified not considered
to be material weaknesses? yes X no
Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? yes X no
Federal Awards
There was not an audit of major federal award programs for the year ended September 30, 2009 due to the total
amount expended being less than $500,000.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND RESPONSES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
SECTION II
FINANCIAL STATEMENT FINDINGS AND RESPONSES
2009-1 Revenue and Related Receivables Recognition
Criteria: Internal controls should be in place to ensure that the amounts reported as revenue and
related receivables are appropriate and properly valued.
Condition: Internal controls were not sufficient to detect misstatements in the reporting of the City’s
revenue and related receivables.
Context/Cause: During our testing, certain audit adjustments were required to correct current year
amounts. The nature of these adjustments is as follows:
The Capital Grant Fund required an adjustment of approximately $165,000 to properly report
revenue, deferred revenue, and accounts receivable related to grant activity.
An adjustment of approximately $74,500 was required to properly recognize revenues related
to deferred lease incentives in the General Fund.
An adjustment of approximately $36,000 was required to properly recognize receivables and
deferred revenues for landfill use fees in the Capital Projects Fund.
Effects: Audit adjustments totaling approximately $275,500 were needed to correctly record
revenues, related receivables, and deferred revenues.
Recommendation: We recommend the City carefully review all revenues, receivables, and deferred
revenues to ensure they are reported in the proper reporting period, properly valued, and in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Auditee’s Response: We concur with the finding. We will take necessary steps in the future to
ensure that revenues, related receivables, and deferred revenues are properly recorded.
SECTION III
FEDERAL AWARDS FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
Not Applicable
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway Suite 107G Milton, GA 30004
March 30, 2010
Department of Audits and Accounts
Attn: Edward Blaha
270 Washington Street, S.W., Room 1‐156
Atlanta, GA 30334‐8400
Re: Submittal of FY 2009 CAFR and Corrective Action Plan
Dear Mr. Blaha:
This letter transmits the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ending September
30, 2009 and the corresponding Corrective Action Plan of the City of Milton.
Should you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me at 678.242.2508 or
stacey.inglis@cityofmiltonga.us.
Sincerely,
Stacey Inglis
Finance Director
Enc: FY 2009 CAFR
Corrective Action Plan
Cc: City Manager
Mayor
Mauldin & Jenkins, LLC
AGENCY RESPONSE
Expenditures exceeded appropriations at the legal level of control
We concur with this finding. The City recognizes there was one department that showed expenditures
exceeding the budget. The nature of this overage in the Finance department was higher than anticipated
cost for contracted services. The Finance Director was formerly a contracted employee prior to June
2009. The City anticipated a greater credit than it received on the contract for no longer providing these
services.
This instance is considered to be one‐time occurrences and has a minimal likelihood of taking place
again. We have terminated the contracted services.
Contact person: Stacey Inglis, Finance Director
Telephone: (678) 242‐2508; Fax: (678) 242‐2499; email: stacey.inglis@cityofmiltonga.us
AGENCY RESPONSE
2008‐1 Revenue and Related Receivables Recognition
We concur with this finding. The City recognizes the importance of accurately booking revenue and
related receivables. The corrective action that has been taken is to book the revenue and related
receivable when the income is earned.
Contact person: Stacey Inglis, Finance Director
Telephone: (678) 242‐2508; Fax: (678) 242‐2499; email: stacey.inglis@cityofmiltonga.us
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107 Milton, GA 30004
1
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Lynn Tully, AICP, Community Development Director
Date: May 5, 2010, for Submission onto the May 17, 2010, City Council
Regular Meeting for First Presentation.
Agenda Item: Text Amendment to add Article 13, “Historic Preservation” to the City of Milton
Zoning Ordinance, RZ09-04
CMO (City Manager’s Office) Recommendation:
The Mayor and City Council to hear and approve the attached text amendment, Article 13,
“Historic Preservation” of the City of Milton Zoning Ordinance.
Background:
In 2007, a passionate group of residents presented to the Community Development Department
a draft ordinance for the creation of a Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to help preserve
the sites catalogued by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and Fulton County in a
1996 survey. The Mayor and City Council established the Historic Preservation Committee in
December of 2008 to develop an ordinance, along with Staff, to preserve Milton‟s historic
resources.
After review by the City Attorney, Staff presented the Ordinance to the Mayor and City Council
at the August 10, 2009 Work Session. At the meeting, there was extensive discussion about the
Prior Use Incentive and how it would affect the potential sites and adjacent property‟s future
land use. The majority of the Mayor and City Council requested that the Ordinance be reviewed
by the Design Review Board and go before the Planning Commission for their review prior to
the Mayor and City Council‟s vote on September 21, 2009. The Mayor and City Council deferred
the item at the September 21st and October 19th meetings.
The Planning Commission discussed the draft Ordinance, and made recommendations at two
meetings-- on September 22 and a special called meeting on September 29. The discussions
and recommendations occurred with four of the HPC members present at both meetings. Staff
notes that the Planning Commission had specific legal questions for the City Attorney review;
these were addressed.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Ordinance on October 27th, and again on November
18th. The Planning Commission recommended that the Ordinance be forwarded to the Mayor
and Council for the December 21st meeting. The item was administratively withdrawn from the
agenda prior to the Council meeting to allow the HPC to review the Planning Commission
changes.
The HPC met on January 12, 2010, and discussed the changes suggested by the Planning
Commission. The members indentified six areas of concern. They felt that these items should
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107 Milton, GA 30004
2
be brought before the HPC for a vote to decide whether or not they should be revised or re-
inserted into the final draft. Comments on the areas in question included the following:
1. Incentives/rewards—The Ordinance does not offer anything in the way of incentives.
Members agreed that actual incentives should be created by the City Council. They
suggested adding language to indicate that the HPC‟s powers would include making
recommendations to the City Council for incentives, as necessary.
2. Penalties—Members did not like the tone of the Ordinance as revised. Penalties (with
no incentives) make up a large portion of the revised Ordinance. Members agreed to
leave the Penalties section, as suggested by the Planning Commission, unchanged.
3. Historic District—Members felt that including provisions for a Historic District is an
important element of the Ordinance. Once enough structures in a certain area have
been declared historic, the City should have the option of incorporating a Historic
District. Members wanted to change language back to what was originally agreed to by
the HPC.
4. Appointment/Terms—Members felt that part of this section is redundant. The following
should be removed: “HPC members and ex-officio members shall serve terms as
appointed by the Mayor and City Council.”
5. Property owner‟s approval—Members felt that the City Council should have the ability to
nominate a property as Historic without the property owner‟s approval. This ability is
supported by the State model. In particular, this language will provide protection for
structures that the City feels should not be demolished. This language will be added
back to the Ordinance, as written in the State Model Ordinance. Language about the
appeals process and undue hardship for the property owner will also be added.
Also, some of the HPC members were concerned that the language regarding the limitations on
use in the Prior Use Incentive section was not strong enough. There was concern that this
allowance would create spot zoning and open a property up for unlimited commercial uses.
Members present felt that the City Council should at least have the option of considering this
incentive.
Unfortunately, a quorum was not present for this meeting, and the Committee was unable to
vote on the changes. The HPC met again on the 9th of February, and reviewed the changes as
incorporated by Staff. The HPC removed the Prior Use section and replaced it with a proposal
for rezoning to a new „Historic‟ zoning district for properties that meet prior use criteria. This
rezoning option would follow the standard process for rezoning, as set forth in the City of Milton
Zoning Ordinance.
At the March 3rd meeting, the Historic Preservation Committee reviewed Staff‟s changes, and
approved the final draft of the Ordinance.
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107 Milton, GA 30004
3
Discussion:
The HPC and Staff worked over several months to create the Historic Preservation Ordinance,
which is a based on the State model ordinance. The Ordinance establishes the criteria and
process for how a property and/or district may be designated as historic. The language and
structure of the Ordinance is established by the Georgia Historic Preservation Act and regulated
by the Georgia Historic Preservation Division. Once this Historic Preservation Ordinance is
adopted, a local Historic Preservation Commission may be created by the Mayor and City
Council.
Originally, the HPC recommended including a Prior Use Incentive section, which was not
included in the state model ordinance. The purpose of the Prior Use Incentive is to increase the
potential for use of historic properties in the AG-1 zoning district that previously had a non-
residential use, provided the historic structure was lawful during its prior operation. The benefit
of this Prior Use Incentive was to make preservation more attractive to owners of a historic
property because it provides flexibility and economic opportunities. At their meetings, the Design
Review Board and the Planning Commission recommended the deletion of the Prior Use
Incentive. (See the Planning Commission Version Approved and Minutes of 09/29/09 attached.)
The HPC has since removed this section, and replaced it with an option for rezoning to a new
„Historic‟ zoning district.
The Ordinance will alter the authority of the existing Design Review Board in the (DRB)
following manner: 1) Apply new historical design guidelines to ALL contributory structures
including single-family residential. 2) Place authority to regulate contributory structures under
jurisdiction of HPC which will be comprised of experts and enthusiasts. 3) The DRB will continue
to review plans for non-contributory structures in the Overlay Districts.
When the Historic Preservation Ordinance is adopted, the next step is for the Historic
Preservation Commission to be appointed by the Mayor and City Council and for staff to
prepare a new Historic Zoning District for amendment into the current Zoning Ordinance. Once
the Historic Preservation Commission is created, they would develop the Historic District Design
Guidelines, and conduct a public hearing for comments on the design guidelines. The Mayor
and City Council would then approve the Design Guidelines and at that time the Historic
Preservation Commission would begin the process of nominating properties/districts for historic
designation.
The Planning Commission recommended that one member of the DRB be selected by the DRB
to serve as one of the three ex-officio members of the Historic Planning Commission. It was the
Planning Commission‟s opinion that by having a DRB member involved it will provide additional
support to the Historic Planning Commission. The HPC has adopted this suggestion.
Please note that the recommendation brought forward for hearing and approval is the final
version approved by the HPC on March 3, 2010 with amendments as directed by the City
Attorney in consultation with the Community Development Director.
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107 Milton, GA 30004
4
Alternatives:
The Mayor and City Council may choose to approve, deny or defer the Text Amendment to add
Article 13, “Historic Preservation” to the City of Milton Zoning Ordinance.
Concurrent Review:
Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager
Ken Jarrard, City Attorney
[Memo Historic Pres Art 13.050510]
1
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF FULTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE ARTICLE 13 OF THE MILTON ZONING CODE;
TO ESTABLISH A HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IN THE CITY OF
MILTON TO PROVIDE FOR DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES ; TO
PROVIDE FOR ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS; TO
PROVIDE FOR AN APPEALS PROCEDURE; TO REPEAL CONFLICTING
ORDINANCES; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MILTON CITY COUNCIL, OF MILTON,
GEORGIA.
Section I
Purpose
In support and furtherance of its findings and determination that the
historical, cultural, and aesthetic heritage of the City of Milton, Georgia is among
its most valued and important assets and that the preservation of this heritage is
essential to the promotion of the health, prosperity, and general welfare of the
people;
In order to maintain historic structures and to protect and enhance local
historical and aesthetic attractions to residents and tourists and thereby promote
and stimulate business;
In order to enhance the opportunities for federal or state tax benefits under
relevant provisions of federal or state law; and
In order to provide for designation, protection, preservation, and
rehabilitation of historic properties and to participate in federal or state programs
to do the same;
The Milton City Council, Milton, Georgia hereby declares it to be the
purpose and intent of this Ordinance to establish a uniform procedure for use in
providing for the identification, protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of
places, properties, sites, buildings, structures, objects, and landscape features
having special historical, cultural, archeological, or aesthetic interest or value, in
accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance.
2
Section II
Definitions
A. “Application for Designation” – A formal request in writing in a form
specified by the Historic Preservation Commission that the Historic
Preservation Commission consider a property for possible designation as
a historic property or historic district.
B. “Building” - Any structure with a roof, designed or built for the support,
enclosure, shelter, or protection of persons, animals, chattels, or property
of any kind.
C. “Certificate of Appropriateness” – A document evidencing approval by the
Historic Preservation Commission of an application to make a material
change in the appearance of a designated historic property or of a
property located within a designated historic district.
D. “Designation” – A decision by the City of Milton to designate a property as
a “historic property” or as a “historic district” and thereafter prohibit all
material change in appearance of such property or within such district prior
to the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness by the Historic
Preservation Commission of the City of Milton.
E. “Exterior Architectural Features” – The architectural style, general design,
and general arrangement of the exterior of a building, structure, or object,
including but not limited to the kind or texture of the building material and
the type and style of all windows, doors, signs, and other appurtenant
architectural fixtures, features, details, or elements relative to the
foregoing.
F. “Exterior Environmental Features” – All aspects of the landscape or the
development or appearance of a site which affect the historical character
of the property.
G. “Historic District” – A geographically definable area, urban or rural,
possessing a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites,
buildings, structures, works of art, or objects, or a combination thereof,
which (1) have special character or special historical or esthetic interest or
value; (2) represent one or more periods or styles or architecture typical of
one or more eras in the history of Milton, Fulton County, Georgia, or the
Nation; and (3) cause such area, by reason of such factors, to constitute a
visibly perceptible section of the city of Milton. A district may also comprise
individual elements separated geographically but linked by association or
history. A Historic District shall further mean an area designated by the
Milton City Council as a Historic District pursuant to the criteria established
in Section IV (B) of this Ordinance.
3
H. “Historic Property” – An individual building, structure, site, or object
designated by the Milton City Council as a Historic Property pursuant to
the criteria established in Section IV (C) of this Ordinance.
I. “Material Change in Appearance” – A change that will affect the exterior
architectural or environmental features of a historic property or any
building, structure, site, object, or landscape feature within a historic
district, such as:
1. A reconstruction or alteration of the size, shape, or façade of a
historic property, including but not limited to, relocation of any doors
or windows or removal or alteration of any architectural fea tures,
details, or elements;
2. Demolition or relocation of a historic structure;
3. Commencement of excavation for construction purposes;
4. A change in the location or removal of advertising visible from the
public right-of-way; or
5. The erection, alteration, restoration, or removal of any building or
structure within a historic property or district, including but not
limited to walls, fences, steps and pavements, or other appurtenant
features.
J. “Object” – A material thing of functional, aesthetic, cultural, his torical, or
scientific value that may be, by nature or design, movable yet related to a
specific setting or environment.
K. “Site” – The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historical
occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined,
or vanished where the location itself maintains historical or archeological
value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
L. “Structure” – A work of interdependent and inter-related parts in a definite
pattern of organization. A man-made object; it may be large or small in
scale.
Section III
Creation of a Historic Preservation Commission
A. Creation of the Historic Preservation Commission.
There is hereby created a commission whose title shall be “M ilton Historic
Preservation Commission” (hereinafter (“HPC”).
B. HPC Members: Numbers, Appointment, Terms, and Compensation.
4
The HPC shall consist of seven (7) members appointed by the Milton City
Council with each appointing one member whose term will be three (3)
years, but shall be subject to reappointment for concurrent terms. All
members shall be residents of the City of Milton and shall be persons who
have demonstrated special interest, experience, or education in history,
architectural history, or the preservation of historic resources. Each
appointee shall reside anywhere within the city and not be bound to a
Councilperson‟s respective council district.
One member of the Milton Design Review Board (“DRB”), as designated
by the DRB, shall serve as an ex-officio member of the HPC.
In addition, two (2) ex-officio members may be appointed to the HPC by
majority vote of the HPC and will serve at the discretion of the HPC. These
additional ex-officio members are not required to own property in the City
limits, and do not need to be residents of the City of Milton, but have
expressed interest in the surrounding communities and are regarded as
valuable sources of information by consensus of the official members of
the HPC. Ex-officio members of the HPC shall not have voting rights and
shall not be counted for the purpose of determining whether a quorum of
HPC members exists at any HPC meeting.
To the extent an individual is available and willing to serve in the City of
Milton, at least one (1) official, voting HPC member shall be appointed
from among professionals in the disciplines of architecture, history,
architectural history, planning, archeology, building construction, real
property appraisal, or related professions.
HPC members shall not receive a salary, although they may be
reimbursed for expenses with the prior approval of the City Manager.
C. Statement of the HPC‟s Powers.
The HPC shall be authorized to:
1. Prepare and maintain an inventory of all property within the City of
Milton having the potential for designation as historic;
2. Recommend to the Milton City Council specific districts, sites,
buildings, structures, or objects to be designated by ordinance as a
historic property or a historic district;
3. Consider for approval proposals/recommendations for possible
rezoning of property to the Historic (“H”) zoning designation as
provided for in Section IV(D)(2)(a), based on prior use and
otherwise in accord with the requirements of the Historic (“H”)
zoning designation in the Milton Zoning Code.
4. Review applications for Certificates of Appropriateness, and grant
or deny same in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance;
5
5. Recommend to the Milton City Council that any designation of a
historic property or historic district be revoked or removed;
6. Restore or preserve any historic properties acquired by the City of
Milton, subject to funding availability and with the prior approval of
the Milton City Council;
7. Promote the acquisition by the City of Milton of façade easements
and conservation easements as appropriate, in accordance with the
provisions of the Georgia Uniform Conservation Easement Act of
1992 (O.C.G.A. § 44-10.1 through 5);
8. Conduct educational programs on historic properties located within
the City of Milton and on general historic preservation activities;
9. Make such investigations and studies of matters relating to historic
preservation including consultation with historic preservation
experts, as the Milton City Council or the HPC itself may, from time
to time, deem necessary or appropriate for the purposes of
preserving historic resources;
10. Research local, state, federal, or private funds for historic
preservation, and make recommendations to the Milton City Council
concerning the most appropriate use of any funds acquired;
11. Recommend to the Milton City Council possible historic resource
incentive programs for their review;
12. Submit to the Historic Preservation Division of the Georgia
Department of Natural Resources a list of designated historic
properties or historic districts;
13. Perform historic preservation activities as the offic ial agency of the
Milton historic preservation program;
14. Retain persons with professional expertise to carry out specific
tasks, as needed, subject to funding availability and prior approval
by the Milton City Council;
15. Receive donations, grants, funds, or gifts of historic property and
acquire and sell historic properties provided the Milton City Council
has provided prior consent to do so and all State and local laws
regarding local government property disposition are followed . The
receipt of donations, grants, funds, or gifts shall be accepted only if
such acceptance does not violate the City of Milton Code of Ethics ;
6
16. Review and make comments to the Historic Preservation Division of
the Georgia Department of Natural Resources concerning the
nomination of properties within its jurisdiction to the National
Register of Historic Places;
17. Participate in private, state, and federal historic preservation
programs and with the approval of the Milton City Council enter into
contractual agreements to do the same; and
18. Recommend to the Milton City Council such sites, buildings,
structures, or objects that shall be considered a “Historical Site of
Interest” and by Milton City Council resolution shall adopt such
designation. The Milton City Council will provide and appropriate
historical marker to be displayed at the designated site.
D. HPC‟s Power to Adopt Rules and Standards.
The HPC shall adopt rules and standards for the transaction of business
and for consideration of applications for designations and Ce rtificates of
Appropriateness, such as By-Laws and design guidelines not inconsistent
with this Ordinance. The HPC shall have the flexibility to adopt such rules
and standards without amendment to this Ordinance. The HPC shall
provide for the time and place of regular meetings and a method for the
calling of special meetings, consistent with the Georgia Open Meetings
Act. The HPC shall select such officers as it deems appropriate from
among its members. A quorum shall consist of a majority of voting
members. All rules shall be ratified by the Milton City Council before
becoming effective.
E. Conflict of Interest.
The HPC shall be subject to all conflict of interest laws set forth in the
Georgia statutes and in the City of Milton Charter.
F. HPC‟s Authority to Receive Funding from Various Sources.
The HPC shall have the authority to accept donations and shall ensure
that these funds do not displace ap propriated governmental funds. The
HPC shall be subject to and comply with the Milton Ethics C ode.
G. Records of HPC Meetings.
A public record shall be kept of the HPC‟s resolutions, proceedings, and
actions. Reports to the Milton City Council will also be made on a regular
and timely basis.
Section IV
Recommendation and Designation of Historic Properties
7
A. Preliminary Research by HPC.
1. HPC‟s Mandate to Conduct a Survey of Local Historical Resources:
The HPC shall compile and collect information on historic resources
with the City of Milton. Records shall be stored in the City of Milton
storage area.
2. HPC‟s Power to Recommend Districts and Buildings to the Milton
City Council for Designation: The HPC shall present to the Milton
City Council recommendations for historic districts and properties.
The HPC shall consider for approval proposals/recommendations
for possible rezoning of property to the Historic (“H”) zoning
designation as provided for in Section IV(D)(2)(a), based on prior
use and otherwise in accord with the requirements of the Historic
(“H”) zoning designation in the Milton Zoning Code.
3. HPC‟s Documentation of Proposed Designation: Prior to the HPC‟s
recommendation to the Milton City Council of a property or district
for historic designation, the HPC shall prepare a Report for
Nomination consisting of:
a. A detailed physical description of the proposed historic property
or historic district; and,
b. A statement of the historical, cultural, architectural, and/or
aesthetic significance of the proposed historic property or historic
district; and
c. A map showing district boundaries and classification (i.e.,
contributing, non-contributing) of individual properties therein, or
showing boundaries of individual properties; and
d. A statement justifying the boundaries of the proposed property or
district; and
e. Representative photographs of the proposed property or district.
B. Designation of Historic District.
1. Criteria for Selection of Historic Districts: A historic district is a
geographically definable area, urban or rural, possessing a
significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings,
structures, works of art, or objects, or a combination thereof, which
(1) have special character or special historical or esthetic interest or
value; (2) represent one or more periods or styles or architecture
typical of one or more eras in the history of Milton, the State of
Georgia, or the Nation; and (3) cause such area, by reason of such
factors, to constitute a visibly perceptible section of the city of
Milton. A district may also comprise individual elements separated
geographically but linked by association or history. A Historic
8
District is deemed worthy of preservation by reason of value to the
Nation, the State of Georgia, or the City of Milton for one or more of
the following reasons:
a. It possesses an outstanding example of structures representative
of its era; or
b. It contains the few remaining examples of a past architectural
style or type over fifty (50) years old; or
c. It is a place associated with an event or persons of historic or
cultural significance to the City of Milton, State of Georgia, or the
region; or
d. It is the site of natural, archeological, or aesthetic interest that
contributes to the cultural or historical development and heritage of
the municipality, county, State, or region.
2. Boundaries of a Historic District: Boundaries of a Historic District
shall be included in the separate ordinances designating such
districts and shall be shown on the Official Zoning Map of the City of
Milton, Georgia.
3. Evaluation of Properties with Historic Districts: Individual properties
within historic districts shall be classified as:
a. Contributing (contributes to the district); or
b. Non-Contributing (Does not contribute to the district as provided
for in IV (B)(1) of this Ordinance).
C. Designation of Historic Property.
1. Criteria for Selection of Historic Properties: An individual building,
structure, site or object deemed worthy of preservation by reason of
value to the Nation, the State of Georgia, or the City of Milton for one
or more of the following reasons:
a. It is an outstanding example of a structure representative of its
era; or
b. It is one of the few remaining examples of a past architectural
style or type over fifty (50) years old; or
c. It is a place associated with an event or persons of historic or
cultural significance to the City of Milton, State of Georgia, or the
region; or
d. It is the site of natural, archeological, or aesthetic interest that
contributes to the cultural or historical development and heritage of
the municipality, county, State, or region.
9
2. No building, structure, site or object shall be eligible to be
designated as a Historic Property unless it existed on the same
property since the incorporation of the City of Milton.
D. „Historic‟ (H) Zoning Designation.
1. Purpose: This base zoning designation allows for a historic
property to be used, protected, renovated and preserved. It may allow a specific,
previous use to continue in a structure where that use would be considered non -
conforming as defined in the Milton Zoning Code. Creation of the Historic (“H”)
zoning designation shall be in accord with the ordinary procedures and processes
for zoning district creation in the City of Milton, and the final decision regarding
the components and uses authorized by and in the Historic (“H”) zoning district
shall remain exclusively with the Milton City Council.
2. Approval process:
a. Designation is proposed per Section IV (E)(1) followed by formal
approval of the HPC, except that when the proposal originates in the HPC or the
Milton City Council no additional HPC approval shall be required prior to
commencement of the formal zoning process;
b. The property owner shall follow the process for rezoning as
established by Article 28 of the Zoning Ordinance.
E. Requirement for Adopting an Ordinance for the Designation of Historic
Districts, Historic Properties, and Historic Zoning.
1. Application for Designation of Historic Districts, Properties or
Historic Zoning – Designations may be proposed by the Milton City
Council, via majority vote, or by the HPC via a majority of that
Commission, or:
a. for Historic Districts – a historical society, neighborhood
association, or the owners of a group of properties;
b. for Historic Properties – a historical society, neighborhood
association, or the property owner;
c. for a Historic Zoning Designation – a historical society,
neighborhood association, or the property owner.
2. Required Components of a Designation Ordinance: Any ordinance
designating any property or district as historic shall:
a. list each property in a proposed historic district or describe the
proposed individual historic property;
b. set forth the name(s) of the owner(s) of the designated property
or properties;
10
c. require that a Certificate of Appropriateness be obtained from the
HPC prior to any material change in appearance of the designated
property; and
d. require that the property or district be shown on the Official
Zoning Map of the City of Milton, Georgia and kept as a public
record to provide notice of such designation.
3. Require Public Hearings: The HPC and the Milton City Council shall
hold a joint public hearing at a special or regular HPC meeting on
any proposed ordinance for the designation of any historic district or
property. Notice of the hearing shall be published in at least three
(3) consecutive issues of the newspaper utilized by Milton as the
legal organ, and written notice of the hearing shall be mailed not
less than ten (10) or more than twenty (20) days prior to the date
set for the public hearing. A notice sent via the United States mail to
the last-known owner of the property shown on the City of Milton tax
digest and a notice sent via attention of the occupant shall
constitute legal notification to the owner and occupant under this
Ordinance.
4. Notification of Historic Preservation Division: No less than thirty (30)
days prior to making a recommendation on any ordinance
designating a property or district as historic, the HPC must submit
the report, required in Section IV (A)(3), to the Historic Preservation
Division of the Department of Natural Resources.
5. Recommendations on Proposed Designations: A recommendation
to affirm, modify or withdraw the proposed Ordinance for
Designation shall be made by the HPC within fifteen (15) days
following the joint Public Hearing and shall be in the form of a
resolution to the Milton City Council.
6. Milton City Council Action on the HPC‟s Recommendation:
Following receipt of the HPC recommendation, the Milton City
Council may adopt the Ordinance for Designation as proposed, may
adopt the ordinance with any amendments it deems necessary, or
reject the ordinance.
7. Notification of Adoption of Ordinance for Designation: Within thirty
(30) days following the adoption of the Ordinance for Designation
by the Milton City Council, the owners and occupants of each
designated historic property, and the owner(s) and occupants of
each building, structure, or site located within a designated historic
district, shall be given written notification of such designa tion by the
Milton City Council, which notice shall apprise said owners and
occupants of the necessity of obtaining a Certificate of
Appropriateness prior to undertaking any material change in
11
appearance of the historic property designated or within the historic
district designated. A notice sent via the United States mail to the
last-known owner of the property shown on the City of Milton tax
digest and a notice sent via United States mail to the address of the
property to the attention of the occupant sha ll constitute legal
notification to the owner and occupant under this Ordinance.
8. Notification of Other Agencies Regarding Designation: The HPC
shall notify all necessary agencies within the City of Milton of the
Ordinance for Designation.
9. Moratorium on Applications for Alteration or Demolition While
Ordinance for Designation is pending: If an Ordinance for
Designation is being considered, the HPC shall notify the permitting
division of the Community Development Department. No permit of
any kind shall be issued for work which would constitute a material
change in the appearance of a structure, site, or landscaping within
the designated area until the proposed Ordinance is enacted or
rejected by the City Council. The HPC must recommend via
resolution an Ordinance for Designation to the City Council within
60 days of the permitting division denying a building permit based
on the moratorium.
Section V
Application to HPC for Certificate of Appropriateness
A. Approval of Material Change in Appearance Involving Historic Properties.
After the designation by ordinance of a historic property or of a historic
district, no material change in the appearance of such historic property, or
of a contributing or non-contributing building, structure, site or object within
such historic district shall occur or be permitted to be made by the owner
or occupant thereof unless or until the application and approval of a
Certificate of Appropriateness. Certificates of Appropriateness for material
changes in historic properties and material changes to contributing
buildings, structures, sites, or objects in historic districts shall be issued by
the HPC in accord with the process set forth below. A Certificate of
Appropriateness for non-contributing buildings, structures, sites or objects
within a historic district shall be considered by the DRB after a public
hearing and otherwise in accord with ordinary and normal DRB processes
and procedures. A Building Permit shall not be issued without a Certificate
of Appropriateness.
A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be required before construction can
begin even in cases where a building permit is not required.
B. Submission of Plans to HPC.
12
An Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be accompanied
by drawings, photographs, plans and documentation required by the HPC.
C. Interior Alterations.
In its review of applications for Certificates of Appropriateness the HPC
shall not consider interior arrangement or use having no effect on exterior
architectural features.
D. Technical Advice.
The HPC shall have the power to seek technical advice from outside its
members on any application.
E. Public Hearings on Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness , Notices,
and Right to be Heard.
The HPC shall hold a public hearing at which each proposed Certificate of
Appropriateness is discussed. Notice of the hearing shall be published in
the newspaper utilized by Milton as the legal organ and written notice of
the hearing shall be made by the HPC to all owners and occupants of the
subject property. The written and published notice shall be provided in the
same manner and time frame as notices as required by the Georgia
Zoning Procedures Law.
The HPC shall provide the property owner and/or applicant an opportunity
to be heard at the Certificate of Appropriateness hearing.
F. Acceptable HPC Response to Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness.
HPC Action: The HPC may (i) approve the application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness as proposed; (ii) approve the Certificate of
Appropriateness with any modifications it deems necessary ; or (iii) reject
it.
1. The HPC shall approve the application and issue a Certificate of
Appropriateness if it finds that the proposed material change(s) in
the appearance would not have a substantial adverse effect on the
aesthetic, historic, or architectural significance and value of the
historic property or the historic district. In making this determination,
the HPC shall consider, in addition to any other pertinent factors,
the following criteria:
a. Reconstruction, Alteration, New Construction or Renovation:
Whether the proposed actions conform in design, scale,
building material, setback and site features and to the United
States Secretary of the Interior‟s Standards for Rehabilitation
and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.
13
b. Relocation:
1. The historic character and aesthetic interest of the
building, structure, or object contributes to its present
setting;
2. Whether there are definite plans for the area to be
vacated and what the effect of those plans on the character
of the surrounding area will be;
3. Whether the building, structure, or object can be moved
without significant damage to its physical integrity;
4. Whether the proposed relocation area is compatible with
the historical and architectural character of the building,
structure, site, or object.
c. Demolition:
1. The historic, scenic, or architectural significance of the
building, structure, site, or object;
2. The importance of the building, structure, site, or object to
the ambiance of the area;
3. The difficulty or impossibility of reproducing such a
building, structure, site, or object because of its design,
texture, material, detail, or unique location;
4. Whether the building, structure, site, or object is one of
the last remaining examples of its kind in the neighborhood
or the City;
5. Whether there are definite plans for use of the property if
the proposed demolition is carried out, and what the effect of
those plans on the character of the surrounding area would
be;
6. Whether reasonable measures can be taken to save the
building, structure, site, or object from collapse;
7. Whether the building, structure, site, or object is capable
of earning reasonable economic return on its value.
G. Deadline for Approval or Rejection of Application for Certificate of
Appropriateness.
1. The HPC shall approve or reject an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness within forty-five (45) days after the filing thereof by the
owner or occupant of a historic property, building, structure or site.
Evidence of approval shall be by a Certificate of Appropriateness issued
14
by the HPC. Notice of the issuance or denial of a Certificate of
Appropriateness shall be sent by United States certified mail to the
applicant and all other persons who have requested such notice in writing
filed with the HPC.
2. Should the HPC fail to approve or reject an Application for Certificate of
Appropriateness within forty-five (45) days the application shall be
deemed automatically approved.
H. Necessary Action to be Taken by HPC upon Rejection of Application for
Certificate of Appropriateness.
1. In the event the HPC rejects an application, it shall state its reasons for
doing so, and shall transmit a record of such actions and reasons, in
writing, to the applicant. The HPC may suggest alternative courses of
action it thinks proper if it disapproves of the application submitted. The
applicant, if he or she so desires, may make modifications to the plans
and may resubmit the application at any time after making said
modifications.
2. In cases where the application covers a material change in the
appearance of a structure which would require the issuance of a building
permit, the rejection of the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
by the HPC shall be binding upon the building inspector or other
administrative officer charged with issuing building permits and, in such a
case, no building permit shall be issued.
I. Requirement of Conformance with Certificate of Appropriateness.
1. All work performed pursuant to an issued Certificate of
Appropriateness shall conform to the requirements of such
certificate. In the event work is performed not in accordance with
such certificate, the HPC may request that the City obtain a cease
and desist order from the appropriate tribunal and all work shall
cease.
2. The Milton City Council may, of its own initiative or at the request of
the HPC, initiate any appropriate action or proceeding in a court of
competent jurisdiction to prevent any material change in
appearance of a designated historic property, except those changes
made in compliance with the provisions of this ordinance or to
prevent any illegal act or conduct with respect to such historic
property.
J. Certificate of Appropriateness Void if Construction not Commenced .
1. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall become void unless
construction has commenced within six (6) months of date of
issuance.
15
2. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall expire after eighteen (18)
months unless said Certificate is renewed. A Certificate may be
renewed for a single eighteen (18) month period. A renewal must
be sought prior to the expiration of the original Certificate.
K. Recording an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness.
The HPC shall keep a public record of all applications for Certificate of
Appropriateness, and of all the HPC‟s proceedings in connection with said
application. These records shall be maintained at City Hall.
L. Acquisition of Property.
The HPC may, where such action is authorized by the Milton City Council
and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for the preservation of a
historic property, enter into negotiations with the owner for the acquisition
by gift, purchase, exchange, or otherwise, to the property or any interest
therein. If property is conveyed based upon the efforts of the HPC, the
property interest shall be conveyed in the name of the City of Milton,
Georgia.
M. Appeals.
Any person adversely affected by any determination made b y the HPC
relative to the issuance or denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness may
appeal such determination to the Milton City Council. Any such appeal
must be filed with the Milton City Council within fifteen (15) days after the
issuance of the determination pursuant to Section V (G)(1) of this
Ordinance. The Milton City Council may approve, modify, or reject the
determination made by the HPC, if the governing body finds that the HPC
abused its discretion in reaching its decision. Appeals from decisions of
the Milton City Council may be taken to the Superior Court of Fulton
County via a writ of certiorari.
Section VI
Maintenance of Historic Properties and Building and Zoning Code Provision .
A. Ordinary Maintenance or Repair.
Ordinary maintenance or repair of any exterior architectural or
environmental feature in or on a historic property to correct deterioration,
decay, or to sustain the existing form, and that does not involve a material
change in design, material, or outer appearance thereof, does not require
a Certificate of Appropriateness.
B. Failure to Provide Ordinary Maintenance or Repair.
Property owners of historic properties or properties within historic districts
shall not allow their buildings to deteriorate by failing to provide ordinary
16
maintenance or repair. The HPC shall be charged with the following
responsibilities regarding deterioration by neglect:
1. The HPC shall monitor the condition of historic properties and
existing buildings in historic districts to determine if they are being
allowed to deteriorate by-neglect. Such conditions as broken
windows, doors and openings which allow the elements and vermin
to enter, and the deterioration of a building‟s structural system shall
constitute failure to provide ordinary maintenance or repair.
2. In the event the HPC determines a failure to provide ordinary
maintenance or repair, the HPC will notify the owner of the property
and set forth the steps which need to be taken to remedy the
situation. The owner of such property will have thirty (30) days in
which to do this. A building permit may be required to accomplish
the necessary remedial measures
3. In the event that the condition is not remedied in thirty (30) days, the
owner shall be sanctioned as provided in Section VII of this
Ordinance and, upon approval of the Milton City Council, the HPC
may perform such maintenance or repair as is necessary to prevent
deterioration by neglect. The owner of the property shall be liable
for the cost of such maintenance and repair performed by the HPC
and shall reimburse the City of Milton for same. In the event
reimbursement does not occur, the Milton City Council shall have
the right to recover same using all available legal means, including
the placement of liens on the property in accordance with law.
C. Affirmation of Existing Building and Zoning Codes.
Nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed as to exempt property owners
from complying with existing City or County building and zoning codes .
Section VII
Penalty Provisions
A person, firm, corporation or other entity commits an offense if he/she/it violates
this Ordinance. Each day the offense continues constitutes a separate offense.
The following penalties, which are nonexclusive, and the exercise of one or more
of which shall not preclude exercise of the others, shall be imposed on those
persons or entities found to have violated this ordinance:
A. The same penalties as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance of the City for all
violations of requirements set forth in the said Zoning Ordinan ce; or
B. The penalties set forth in Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances of the City
for non-zoning violations.
17
C. Restrictions on future development. If a historic property is demolished or
relocated without a Certificate of Appropriateness, or in the event the plans
are changed for the property from which the resource was removed
without approval of the changed plans by the HPC, then the following
restrictions , in addition to any other penalties or remedies set forth in this
Ordinance, shall be applicable to the site where the structure or property
was formerly located:
1. No building or other permits will be issued for construction on the
site, with the exception of a permit to restore such structure or
property after obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness, for a
period of five (5) years after the date of such demolition or removal.
2. No permits shall be issued by the City for any curb cuts on the site
for a period of five (5) years from and after the date of such
demolition or removal.
3. No parking lot for vehicles shall be operated whether for
remuneration or not on the site for a period of five (5) years from
and after the date of such demolition and removal.
4. The owner of the site shall maintain the site in a clean and orderly
state and shall properly maintain all existing trees and landscaping
on the site. When these restrictions become applicable to a
particular site, the building official shall cause to be filed a verified
notice thereof in the Real Property Records of Fulton County and
such restrictions shall then be binding on future owners of the
property.
D. Civil Action. As an additional remedy in addition to the penalties stated
above, the City Attorney for the City of Milton or his or her designee shall
have the power to take all necessary civil action to enforce the provisions
hereof and to request appropriate legal or equitable remedies or relief.
Section VIII
Severability
In the event that any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance shall be declared or adjudged invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall in no manner affect the other sections, sentences, clauses, or
phrases of this Ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect, as if the
section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase so declared or adjudged invalid
or unconstitutional were not originally a part thereof.
18
Section IX
Repealer
In the event the provisions of this Ordinance are in conflict with the provisions of any
other City of Milton Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail.
Section X
Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective on _____________.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Milton City Council does hereby
ordain, resolve and enact the foregoing Ordinance for the City of Milton, Georgia, the
public health, safety and welfare demanding it.
Adopted this __________________.
Implementation: ____________________.
APPROVED:
MILTON CITY COUNCIL
BY: _____________________
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
Attest:
_____________________________
Sudie AM Gordon, Interim City Clerk
City of Milton
Deerfield Professional Centre 13000 Deerfield Parkway Building 100, Suite 107 C Milton, GA 30004
1
SPECIAL CALLED MEETING
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES
Tuesday, September 29, 2009, 7:00 pm
City Council Chambers
13000 Deerfield Parkway
Building 100
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m.
Members Present:
Joe Creamer
Curtis Mills – Left prior to the adjournment
Cary Schlenke
Paul Moore – Chairperson
George Ragsdale
Members Absent:
Jennifer Fletcher
Fred Edwards
3. RZ09-04 – Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance – To add Article 13, Historic
Preservation – Continue to review and make a recommendation to the Mayor
and City Council .
The Planning Commission reviewed the document and recommended various
changes and edits. It was concluded that there were sections of the ordinance
that still needed work and questions for the City Attorney. The Planning
Commission decided to forward the document with the edits to the Council Work
Session on October 12, 2009.
4. Adjourn
A motion was made by Joe Creamer and seconded by Cary Schlenke to adjourn
the meeting. The motion passed unanimously 4-0. Time of adjournment was 10:10
p.m.
__________________________
Date Approved
__________________________
Paul Moore, Chairperson
City of Milton
Deerfield Professional Centre 13000 Deerfield Parkway Building 100, Suite 107 C Milton, GA 30004
1
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES
Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 7:00 pm
1. Invocation
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:07 pm.
Members Present:
Joe Creamer
Curtis Mills
Cary Schlenke
Paul Moore – Chairperson
Jennifer Fletcher
George Ragsdale
Fred Edwards
4. Public Comment
There was no public comment.
A motion to close public comment was made by Cary Schlenke and seconded
by Fred Edwards. The motion passed unanimously 7-0.
5. Approval of Action Minutes – August 25, 2009 Meeting
A motion was made by Fred Edwards and seconded by Jennifer Fletcher to
approve the Action Minutes for August 25, 2009. The motion was approved 5-0-2
with George Ragsdale and Cary Schlenke voting to abstain.
6. RZ09-04 – Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance – To add Article 13, Historic
Preservation – This item was deferred by the Planning Commission on August 25,
2009.
Staff updated the Planning Commission on the Mayor and City Council’s decision
to defer the text amendment to be heard by the Planning Commission. The
Council in addition voted to have the Historic Preservation Ordinance brought
back to the Council Work Session on October 12 and to the City Council meeting
on October 19, 2009.
City of Milton
Deerfield Professional Centre 13000 Deerfield Parkway Building 100, Suite 107 C Milton, GA 30004
2
Mr. Mark Hancock, a member of the Historical Preservation Committee (HPC),
provided information as to how and why the HPC developed the Ordinance.
During the discussion, Robert Meyers, Norman Broadwell, and Travis Allen all
members of the HPC answered questions and made additional remarks during
the meeting.
After a lengthy discussion covering pages 1-12 of the Ordinance, various edits
and changes to the document were made. A hand vote was made by the
Commission to delete all references of the Historic Preservation Prior Use
Recognition within the ordinance. It passed unanimously 7-0.
It was decided by the Planning Commission that additional time was needed to
complete the review prior to the City Council’s work session on October 12, 2009.
The Planning Commission agreed upon Monday September 27, 2009 at 7:00 pm.
to hold a Special Called Meeting to complete the review and final
recommendation to the Mayor and City Council.
7. Adjourn
A motion was made by Joe Creamer and seconded by Fred Edwards to adjourn
the meeting. The motion passed unanimously 7-0. Time of adjournment was 10:50
p.m.
__________________________
Date Approved
__________________________
Paul Moore, Chairperson
1
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
PC VERSION APPROVED 09/29/09
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE ARTICLE 13 OF THE MILTON ZONING CODE;
TO ESTABLISH A HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) IN THE
CITY OF MILTON TO PROVIDE FOR DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES OR HISTORIC DISTRICTS; TO PROVIDE FOR ISSUANCE OF
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS; TO PROVIDE FOR AN APPEALS
PROCEDURE; TO REPEAL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MILTON CITY COUNCIL, OF MILTON,
GEORGIA.
Section I
Purpose
In support and furtherance of its findings and determination that the historical,
cultural, and aesthetic heritage of the City of Milton, Georgia is among its most
valued and important assets and that the preservation of this heritage is essential
to the promotion of the health, prosperity, and general welfare of the people;
In order to maintain the historic business districts and neighborhoods and to
protect and enhance local historical and aesthetic attractions to residents and
tourists and thereby promote and stimulate business;
In order to enhance the opportunities for federal or state tax benefits under
relevant provisions of federal or state law; and
In order to provide for designation, protection, preservation, and rehabilitation of
historic properties and historic districts and to participate in federal or state
programs to do the same;
The Milton City Council, Milton, Georgia hereby declares it to be the purpose and
intent of this Ordinance to establish a uniform procedure for use in providing for
the identification, protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of places,
districts, sites, buildings, structures, objects, and landscape features having
special historical, cultural, archeological, or aesthetic interest or value, in
accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance.
Section II
Definitions
A. “Application for Designation” – A formal request in writing in a form
specified by the Historic Preservation CommissionHPC that the
commissionHPC consider a property or district for possible designation as
a historic property or historic district.
2
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
B. “Building” - Any structure with a roof, designed or built for the support,
enclosure, shelter, or protection of persons, animals, chattels, or property
of any kind.
C. “Certificate of Appropriateness” – A document evidencing approval by the
Historic Preservation CommissionHPC of an application to make a
material change in the appearance of a designated historic property or of a
property located within a designated historic district.
D. “Designation” – A decision by the City of Milton to designate a property or
district as a “historic property” or as a “historic district” and thereafter
prohibit all material change in appearance of such property or within such
district prior to the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness by the
preservation commissionHPC of the City of Milton.
E. “Exterior Architectural Features” – The architectural style, general design,
and general arrangement of the exterior of a building, structure, or object,
including but not limited to the kind or texture of the buildi ng material and
the type and style of all windows, doors, signs, and other appurtenant
architectural fixtures, features, details, or elements relative to the
foregoing.
F. “Exterior Environmental Features” – All aspects of the landscape or the
development of a site which affect the historical character of the property.
G. “Historic District” – A geographically definable area, possessing a
significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings,
structures, or objects united by past events or aesthetically by plan or
physical development. A district may also comprise individual elements
separated geographically but linked by association or history. A Historic
District shall further mean an area designated by the Milton City Council as
a Historic District pursuant to the criteria established in Section IV B of this
Ordinance.
H. “Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition” – Permits the owner of a
designated historic property in the AG-1 Zoning District to use a historic
structure, with the approval of the City Council, for retail sales, service, or
office use. All applicants for the Historic Preservation Prior Use
Recognition must establish to the satisfaction of the City of Milton Historic
Preservation Commission that the historic structure had been in a non-
residential use category and been lawful during its prior operation.
I.H. “Historic Property” – An individual building, structure, site, or object
designated by the Milton City Council as a Historic Property pursuant to
the criteria established in Section IV C 1. of this Ordinance.
3
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
J.I. “Material Change in Appearance” – A change that will affect either only the
exterior architectural, aesthetic or environmental features of a historic
property or any building, structure, site, object, or landscape featu re within
a historic district, such as:
1. A reconstruction or alteration of the size, shape, or façade of a
historic property, including but not limited to, relocation of any doors
or windows or removal or alteration of any architectural features,
details, or elements;
2. Demolition or relocation of a historic structure;
3. Commencement of excavation for construction purposes;
4. A change in the location or removal of advertising visible from the
public right-of-way; or
5. The erection, alteration, restoration, or removal of any buildings or
other structures within a historic property or district, including but
not limited to, walls, fences, steps and pavements, or other
appurtenant features.
K.J. “Object” – A material thing of functional, aesthetic, cultural,
historical, or scientific value that may be, by nature or design, movable yet
related to a specific setting or environment.
L.K. “Site” – The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historical
occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standin g, ruined,
or vanished where the location itself maintains historical or archeological
value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
M.L. “Structure” – A work made up of interdependent and inter-related
parts in a definite pattern of organization. A work Cconstructed by man, it
may be large or small in scale.
Section III
Creation of a Historic Preservation CommissionHPC
A. Creation of the CommissionHPC.
There is hereby created a commission whose title shall be “MILTON
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION” (hereinafter “Commission (HPC”).
B. CommissionHPC Position within the City of Milton.
The CommissionHPC shall be part of the planning functions of the City of
Milton.
4
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
C.B. CommissionHPC Members: Numbers, Appointment, Terms, and
Compensation.
The CommissionHPC shall consist of seven (7) members appointed by the
Mayor and City Council with each appointing one member whose term will be
concurrent with the appointing Council member’s term. All members shall be
residents of the City of Milton and shall be persons who have demonstrated
special interest, experience, or education in history, architectural history, or the
preservation of historic resources. Each appointee shall reside anywhere within
the city and not be bound to a Councilperson’s respective council district.
In addition, two (2) ex-officio members may be appointed by and to the
serve at the discretion of the CommissionHPC who do not own property in the
city limits, and who are not residents of the City of Milton, but have expressed
interest in the surrounding communities and are regarded as valuable sources of
information by consensus of the official members of the CommissionHPC. An
additional ex-officio member shall be a member of the HPC serving as a member
of the City Design Review Board and appointed b y the City Design Reviw Board.
Ex-officio members of the CommissionHPC shall not have voting rights, shall not
hold office in the CommissionHPC, and shall not be counted for the purpose of
determining whether a quorum of CommissionHPC members exists at any
CommissionHPC meeting.
To the extent available in the City of Milton, at least one (1)
CommissionHPC member shall be appointed from among professionals in the
disciplines of architecture, history, architectural history, planning, archeology[rhm1],
building construction, real property appraisal, or related professions.
CommissionHPC members and ex-officio members shall serve terms as
appointed by the Mayor and City Council. CommissionHPC members shall not
receive a salary, although they may will be reimbursed for expenses with the prior
-approval of the Milton City Council.
D.C. Statement of the CommissionHPC’s Powers.
The CommissionHPC shall be authorized to:
1. Prepare and maintain an inventory of all property within the City of
Milton having the potential for designation as historic property;
2. Recommend to the Milton City Council specific districts, sites,
buildings, structures, or objects to be designated by ordinance as a
historic property or historic district;
3. Recommend to the Milton City Council specific historic properties to be
designated by ordinance as eligible to receive Historic Preservation
Prior Use Recognition;
5
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
4. Review applications for Certificates of Appropriateness, and grant or
deny same in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance;
5. Recommend to the Milton City Council that the designation of any
district, site, building, structure, or object as a historic property or
historic district be revoked or removed;
6. Restore or preserve any historic properties acquired by the City of
Milton;
7. PromoteEncourage the acquisition by the City of Milton of façade
easements and conservation easements as appropriate, in accordance
with the provisions of the Georgia Uniform Conservation Easement Act
of 1992 (O.C.G.A. § 44-10.1 through 5);
8. Conduct educational programs on historic properties located within the
City of Milton and on general historic preservation activities;
9. Make such investigations and studies of matters relating to historic
preservation including consultation with historic preservation experts,
as the Milton City Council or the CommissionHPC itself may, from time
to time, deem necessary or appropriate for the purposes of preserving
historic resources;
10. Seek out local, state, federal, or private funds for historic preservation,
and make recommendations to the Milton City Council concerning the
most appropriate use of any funds acquired;
11. Submit to the Historic Preservation Division of the Georgia Department
of Natural Resources a list of historic properties or historic districts
designated;
12. Perform historic preservation activities as the official agency of the
Milton historic preservation program;
13. Receive donations, grants, funds, or gifts of historic property and
acquire and sell historic properties provided the Mayor and City
Council have provided prior consent to do so. Donations, grants,
funds, or gifts shall be accepted only if such acceptance does not
violate the City of Milton Code of Ethics ;. The Commission shall not
obligate the City of Milton in any receipt or transaction without the prior
consent of the Milton City Council;
14. Review and make comments to the Historic Preservation Division of
the Georgia Department of Natural Resources concerning the
nomination of properties within its jurisdiction to the National Register
of Historic Places;
6
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
15. Participate in private, state, and federal historic preservation programs
and with the consent of the Milton City Council enter into agreements
to do the same; and
16. Recommend to the Milton City Council such sites, buildings, structures,
or objects that shall be considered a “Historical Site of Interest” and by
Milton City Council resolution shall adopt such designation. The Milton
City Council will provide and appropriate historical marker to be
displayed at the designated site.
DE. CommissionHPC’s Power to Adopt Rules and Standards.
The CommissionHPC shall adopt rules and standards for the transaction
of business and for consideration of applications for designations and Certificates
of Appropriateness, such as By-Laws., and design guidelines and criteria. The
CommissionHPC shall have the flexibility to adopt such rules and standards
without amendment to this Ordinance. The CommissionHPC shall provide for the
time and place of regular meetings and a method for the calling of special
meetings. The CommissionHPC shall select such officers as it deems
appropriate from among its members. A quorum shall consist of a majority of
these members. All rules shall be reviewed approved by the Milton City Council
before going into use.
FE. Conflict of Interest.
The CommissionHPC shall be subject to all conflict of interest laws set
forth in the Georgia statutes and in the City of Milton Charter.
GF. CommissionHPC’s Authority to Receive Funding from Various Sources.
The CommissionHPC shall have the authority to accept donations and
shall ensure that these funds do not displace appropriated governmental funds.
Donations shall be accepted only if such acceptance does not violate the City of
Milton Code of Ethics.
HG. Records of CommissionHPC Meetings.
A public record shall be kept of the CommissionHPC’s resolutions,
proceedings, and actions. Reports to the Milton City Council will also be made
on a regular and timely basis.
Section IV
Recommendation & and Designation of Historic Districts and Properties
A. Initial Historic Business District Boundaries.
There will be no initial Historic Business Districts established by this
Ordinance.
7
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
B.A. Preliminary Research by CommissionHPC.
1. CommissionHPC’s Mandate to Conduct a Survey of Local Historical
Resources: The CommissionHPC shall compile and collect information of
historic resources with the City of Milton. Records shall be stored in the
City of Milton storage area.
2. CommissionHPC’s Power to Recommend Districts and Buildings to the
Milton City Council for Designation: The CommissionHPC shall present to
the Milton City Council recommendations for historic districts and
properties.
3. CommissionHPC’s Documentation of Proposed Designation: Prior to
the CommissionHPC’s recommendation of a historic district or historic
property to the Milton City Council for designation, the CommissionHPC
shall prepare a Report for Nomination consisting of:
a. A detailed physical description of the proposed historic property
or historic district;
b. A statement of the historical, cultural, architectural, and/or
aesthetic significance of the proposed historic property or historic
district;
c. A map showing district boundaries and classification (i.e.
contributing, non-contributing) of individual properties therein, or
showing boundaries of individual historic properties;
d. A statement justifying district or individual boundaries; and
e. Representative photographs.
CB. Designation of a Historic District.
1. Criteria for Selection of Historic Districts: A historic district is a
geographically definable area, possessing a significant concentration,
linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united by
past events or aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district
may also comprise individual elements separated geographically but
linked by association or history. A Historic District is deemed worthy of
preservation by reason of value to the Nation, the State of Georgia, or the
City of Milton for at least one of the following reasons:
a. It is an outstanding example of Sstructures representative of its
era;and;
b. It contains the few remaining examples of a past architectural
style or type over fifty (50) years old;or;
8
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
c. It is a place associated with an event or person s of historic or
cultural significance to the City of Milton, State of Georgia, or the
region; or
d. It is the site of natural, archeological, or aesthetic interest that is
continuing to contribute to the cultural or historical development and
heritage of the municipality, county, state, or region.
2. Boundaries of a Historic District: Boundaries of a Historic District shall
be included in the separate ordinances designating such districts and shall
be shown on the Official Zoning Map of the City of Milton, Georgia.
3. Evaluation of Properties with Historic Districts: Individual properties
within historic districts shall be classified as:
a. Contributing (contributes to the district); or
b. Non-Contributing (Does not contribute to the district as pro vided
for in B. 1).
DC. Designation of Historic Property.
1. Criteria for Selection of Historic Properties: An individual building,
structure, site, or object deemed worthy of preservation by reason of value
to the Nation, the State of Georgia, or the City of Milton for at least one of
the following reasons:
a. It is an outstanding example of a structure representative of its
era and;
b. It is one of the few remaining examples of a past architectural
style or type over fifty (50) years old or;
c. It is a place or structure associated with an event or persons of
historic or cultural significance to the City of Milton, State of
Georgia, or the region; or
d. It is the site of natural, archeological, or aesthetic interest that is
continuing to contribute to the cultural or historical development and
heritage of the municipality, county, state, or region.
2. No building, structure, site or object shall be eligible to be designated
as a Historic Property unless it existed on the same property since th e
incorporation of the City of Milton.
E. Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition.
1. Purpose: Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition increases the
potential for a historic property to be used, protected, renovated, and
preserved. The Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition makes
9
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
preservation more attractive to owners of a historic property because it
provides flexibility and economic opportunities.
2. Eligibility for Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition: Historic
Properties are eligible to use the Historic Preservation Prior Use
Recognition in Subsection E.3 if the requirements of Subsections D and
E.2 are met. Sites with structures identified as contributing to the
significance of a Historic Property or District are eligible to use the Prior
Use Recognition in Subsection E.3 if the following requirements are met:
a. Requirements: Previous non-residential use required. The last
use in the structure must have been in a non-residential use
category and have been lawful when established. If part of the
structure was in residential use, the proposal must include at least
as many dwelling units as were part of the last allowed use or uses.
If the last allowed use was residential only, the structure is not
eligible for this Prior Use Recognition.
3. Prior Use Recognition: The following Prior Use Recognition is allowed
if the Requirements of Article 13.4.E.2 are met:
Nonresidential uses in the AG-1 Zoning District, up to 100 percent
of the floor area of a structure may be approved for retail sales,
service, and office through Historic Preservation Prior Use
Recognition Review.
4. Covenant:
a. The owner(s) of the Historic Property must execute a covenant
with the City of Milton. The covenant may not be revoked or
rescinded.
b. The covenant must:
i. State that the owner(s), and subsequent owners, agree
that the Historic Property will be subject to demolition review
and the owner(s) will not demolish or relocate the Historic
Property unless the City of Milton approves the demolition or
relocation through demolition review.
5. Legal Basis and Public Policy: The legal basis for the Historic
Preservation Prior Use Recognition is the recognition by the City of Milton
of a formerly lawful use and recognition of said use as a legal non-
conforming use. Such recognition is undertaken to further the public policy
objective of the City of Milton in promoting and preserving the City’s
historical, cultural, and aesthetic heritage. No change to the City’s zoning
ordinances shall occur as a result of a Historic Preservation Prior Use
Recognition, and in no event shall the grant of a Historic Preservation Prior
Use Recognition be used as a basis to justify the rezoning of the subject
10
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
property, or an adjacent or nearby property or as a basis to justify changes
to any future land use map.
F. Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition Review.
1. Purpose: These provisions increase the potential for a Historic
Property and structures within a Historic District, and contributing
structures, to be used, protected, renovated, and preserved.
2. Review Procedure: Historic Preservation Prior Use Recognition
Reviews for sites in the AG-1 Zoning District are processed through a
Designation of Historic Property procedure, and consideration of same
shall be made in conjunction with an Application for Designation of a
Historic Property.
3. Approval Criteria: The use of a Historic Preservation Prior Use
Recognition will be approved if the City Council finds that all of the
following approval criteria are met:
a. Establishment of the use will not negatively impact the
surrounding area;
b. The structure will be in accordance with Article 4.3.1.C for
nonconforming lots, uses, and structures; and
c. Documentation must be submitted to establish non-residential
prior use and historical significance.
GD. Requirement for Adopting an Ordinance for the Design ation of Historic
Districts and Historic Properties.
1. Application for Designation of Historic Districts or Properties:
Designations may be proposed by the Milton City Council, the
CommissionHPC, or:
a. for historic districts - a historical society, neighborhood
association, or[a2] group of property owner[a3]s; may apply to the
Commission for designation;
b. for historic properties - a historical society, neighborhood
association, or property owner; may apply to the Commission for
designation.
c. Any group seeking designation for a property that does not
include the property owner; such application must include a sworn
affidavit that the property owner consents to the application for
designation.
2. Required Components of a Designation Ordinance: Any ordinance
designating any property or district as historic shall:
11
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
a. list each property in a proposed historic district or describe the
proposed individual historic property;
b. set forth the name(s) of the owner(s) of the designated property
or properties;
c. require that a Certificate of Appropriateness be obtained from the
CommissionHPC prior to any material change in appearance of the
designated property; and
d. require that the property or district be shown on the Official
Zoning Map of the City of Milton, Georgia and kept as a public
record to provide notice of such designation.
3. Require Public Hearings: The CommissionHPC and the Milton City
Council shall hold a public hearing on any proposed ordinance for the
designation of any historic district or property. Notice of the hearing shall
be published in at least one (1) issue of the principal newspaper of local
circulation, and written notice of the hearing shall be mailed not less than
ten (10) or more than twenty (20) days prior to the date set for the public
hearing. A notice sent via the United States mail to the last -known owner
of the property shown on the City of Milton tax digest and a notice sent via
attention of the occupant shall constitute legal notification to the owner and
occupant under this ordinance.
4. Notification of Historic Preservation Division: No less than thirty (30)
days prior to making a recommendation on any ordinan ce designating a
property or district as historic, the commissionHPC must submit the report,
required in Section IV BA 3, to the Historic Preservation Division of the
Department of Natural Resources.
5. Recommendations on Proposed Designations: A recommendation to
affirm, modify or withdraw the proposed ordinance for designation shall be
made by the CommissionHPC within fifteen (15) days following the Public
Hearing and shall be in the form of a resolution to the Milton City Council.
6. Milton City Council Action on the CommissionHPC’s Recommendation:
Following receipt of the CommissionHPC recommendation, the Milton City
Council may adopt the ordinance as proposed, may adopt the ordinance
with any amendments it deems necessary, or reject the ordinance.
7. Notification of Adoption of Ordinance for Designation: Within thirty (30)
days following the adoption of the Ordinance for designation by the Milton
City Council, the owners and occupants of each designated historic
property, and the owners and occupants of each structure, site or work of
art located within a designated historic district, shall be given written
notification of such designation by the Milton City Council, which notice
shall apprise said owners and occupants of the necessity of obtaining a
12
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
Certificate of Appropriateness prior to undertaking any material change in
appearance of the historic property designated or within the historic district
designated. A notice sent via the United States mail to the last -known
owner of the property shown on th e City of Milton tax digest and a notice
sent via United States mail to the address of the property to the attention
of the occupant shall constitute legal notification to the owner and
occupant under this ordinance.
8. Notification of Other Agencies Regarding Designation: The
CommissionHPCHPC shall notify all necessary agencies within the City of
Milton of the ordinance designation.
[rhm4]9. Moratorium on Applications for Alteration or Demolition While
Ordinance for Designation is Pending: If an ordinance for designation is
being considered, the CommissionHPC shall notify the permitting division
of the Community Development Department. No permit of any kind shall
be issued for work which would constitute a material change in the
appearance of a structure, site, or landscaping within the designated area
until the proposed Ordinance is enacted or rejected by the City Council.
The CommissionHPC must propose an Ordinance of designation to the
City Council no more than 60 days after the permitting division denies a
building permit based on the moratorium.
Section V
Application to Preservation CommissionHPC for Certificate of Appropriateness
A. Approval of Material Change in Appearance in Historic Districts or Involving
Historic Properties.
After the designation by ordinance of a historic property or of a historic
district, no material change in the appearance of such historic property, or of a
contributing or non-contributing building, structure, site or object within such
historic district, shall be made or be permitted to be made by the owner or
occupant thereof unless or until the application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness has been submitted to and approved by the CommissionHPC. A
Building Permit shall not be issued without a Certificate of Appropriatene ss.
B. Submission of Plans to CommissionHPC.
An Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be accompanied
by drawings, photographs, plans and documentat ion required by the
CommissionHPC.
C. Interior Alterations.
In its review of applications for Certificates of Appropriateness the
CommissionHPC shall not consider interior arrangement or use having no effect
on exterior architectural features.
13
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
D. Technical Advice.
The CommissionHPC shall have the power to seek technical advice from
outside its members on any application.
E. Public Hearings on Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness , Notices,
and Right to be Heard.
The CommissionHPC shall hold a public hearing at which each proposed
Certificate of Appropriateness is discussed. Notice of the hearing shall be
published in the principal newspaper of local circulation in the city and written
notice of the hearing shall be made by the CommissionHPC to all owners and
occupants of the subject property. The written and published notice s hall be
provided in the same manner and time frame as notices are provided before a
Public Hearing for Rezoning.
The CommissionHPC shall give the property owner and/or applicant an
opportunity to be heard at the Certificate of Appropriateness hearing.
F. Acceptable CommissionHPC Reaction to the Applications for Certificates of
Appropriateness.
CommissionHPC Action: The CommissionHPC may approve the
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness as proposed, approve the
Certificate of Appropriateness with any modifications it deems necessary or reject
it.
1. The CommissionHPC shall approve the application and issue a
Certificate of Appropriateness if it finds that the proposed material
change(s) in the appearance would not have a substantial adverse eff ect
on the aesthetic, historic, or architectural significance and value of the
historic property or the historic district. In making this determination, the
CommissionHPC shall consider, in addition to any other pertinent factors,
the following criteria for each of the following acts:
a. Reconstruction, Alteration, New Construction or Renovation:
The CommissionHPC shall issue Certificates of Appropriateness
for the above proposed actions if those actions conform in design,
scale, building material, setback and site features and to the United
States Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. [rhm5]
b. Relocation:
A decision by the CommissionHPC approving or denying a
Certificate of Appropriateness for the relocation of a building,
structure, or object shall be guided by:
14
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
1. The historic character and aesthetic interest of the
building, structure, or object contributes to its present
setting;
2. Whether there are definite plans for the area to be
vacated and what the effect of those plans on the character
of the surrounding area will be;
3. Whether the building, structure, or object can be moved
without significant damage to its physical integrity;
4. Whether the proposed relocation area is compatible with
the historical and architectural character of the building,
structure, site, or object.
c. Demolition:
A decision by the CommissionHPC approving or denying a
Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of buildings,
structures, sites, or objects shall be guided by:
1. The historic, scenic, or architectural significance of the
building, structure, site, or object;
2. The importance of the building, structure, site, or object to
the ambiance of the district;
3. The difficulty or impossibility of reproducing such a
building, structure, site, or object because of its design,
texture, material, detail, or unique location;
4. Whether the building, structure, site, or object is one of
the last remaining examples of its kind in the neighbo rhood
or the city;
5. Whether there are definite plans for use of the property if
the proposed demolition is carried out, and what the effect of
those plans on the character of the surrounding area would
be;
6. Whether reasonable measures can be taken to save the
building, structure, site, or object from collapse;
7. Whether the building, structure, site, or object is capable
of earning reasonable economic return on its value.
G. Deadline for Approval or Rejection of Application for Certificate of
Appropriateness.
1. The CommissionHPC shall approve or reject an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness within sixty (60) days after the filing thereof
15
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
by the owner or occupant of a historic property, or of a building, structure,
site, or object located within a historic district. Evidence of approval shall
be by a Certificate of Appropriateness issued by the CommissionHPC.
Notice of the issuance or denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness shall
be sent by United States certified mail to the applicant and all other
persons who have requested such notice in writing filed with the
CommissionHPC.
2. Should the CommissionHPC fail to approve or reject an Application for
Certificate of Appropriateness within said sixty (60) days the application
for will be sent to the Milton City Council for a vote without comment by
the CommissionHPC.
H. Necessary Action to be Taken by CommissionHPC upon Rejection of
Application for Certificate of Appropriateness.
1. In the event the CommissionHPC rejects an application, it shall state its
reasons for doing so, and shall transmit a record of such actions and
reasons, in writing, to the applicant. The CommissionHPC may suggest
alternative courses of action it thinks proper if it disapproves of the
application submitted. The applicant, if he or she so desires, may make
modifications to the plans and may resubmit the application at any time
after making said modifications.
2. In cases where the application covers a material change in the
appearance of a structure which would require the issuance of a building
permit, the rejection of the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
by the CommissionHPC shall be binding upon the building inspector or
other administrative officer charged with issuing building permits and, in
such a case, no building permit shall be issued.
I. Requirement of Conformance with Certificate of Appropriateness .
1. All work performed pursuant to an issued Certificate of Appropriateness
shall conform to the requirements of such certificate. In the event work is
performed not in accordance with such certificate, the CommissionHPC
may shall request that the City obtain issue a cease and desist order and
all work shall cease.
2. The Milton City Council or the Commission may or at the request of the
HPC request shall be authorized to institute any appropriate action or
proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction to prevent any material
change in appearance of a designated historic property or historic district,
except those changes made in compliance with the provisions of this
ordinance or to prevent any illegal act or conduct with respect to such
historic property or historic district.
J. Certificate of Appropriateness Void if Construction not Commenced .
16
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
1. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall become void unless construction
is has commenced within six (6) months of date of issuance or completed
within 18 months or the Certificate of Appropriateness shall be renewed .
2. Certificates of Appropriateness shall be issued for a period of eighteen
(18) months and are renewable.
K. Recording an Application for Certificate of Appropriateness.
The CommissionHPC shall keep a public record of all applications for
Certificate of Appropriateness, and of all the CommissionHPC’s proceedings in
connection with said application. These records shall be maintained at City Hall.
L. Acquisition of Property.
The CommissionHPC may, where such action is authorized by the Milton
City Council and is reasonablye necessary or appropriate for the preservation
of a unique historic property, enter into negotiations with the owner for the
acquisition by gift, purchase, exchange, or otherwise, to the property or any
interest therein.
M. Appeals.
Any person adversely affected by any determination made by the
CommissionHPC relative to the issuance or denial of a Certificate of
Appropriateness may appeal such determination to the Milton City Council. Any
such appeal must be filed with the Milton City Council within fifteen (15) days
after the issuance of the determination pursuant to Section V. HG 1 of this
Ordinance. or, in the case of a failure of the Commission to act, within fifteen
(15) days of the expiration of the forty-five (45) day period allowed for the
Commission action, Section V. H2 of this Ordinance. The Milton City Council
may approve, modify, or reject the determination made by the
CommissionHPC, if the governing body finds that the CommissionHPC. abused
its discretion in reaching its decision. Appeals from decisions of the Milton City
Council may be taken to the Superior Court of Fulton County in the manner
provided by law for appeals from conviction for the City of Milton ordinance
violations.
Section VI
Maintenance of Historic Properties and Building and Zoning Code Provision
A. Ordinary Maintenance or Repair.
Ordinary maintenance or repair of any exterior architectural or
environmental feature in or on a historic property to correct deterioration, decay,
or to sustain the existing form, and that does not involve a material change in
design, material, or outer appearance thereof, does not require a Certificate of
Appropriateness.
17
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
B. Failure to Provide Ordinary Maintenance or Repair.
Property owners of historic properties or properties within historic districts
shall not allow their buildings to deteriorate by failing to provide ordinary
maintenance or repair. The CommissionHPC shall be charged with the following
responsibilities regarding deterioration by neglect:
1. The CommissionHPC shall monitor the condition of historic properties
and existing buildings in historic districts to determine if they are being
allowed to deteriorate by-neglect. Such conditions as broken windows,
doors and openings which allow the elements and vermin to enter, and the
deterioration of a building’s structural system shall cons titute failure to
provide ordinary maintenance or repair.
2. In the event the CommissionHPC determines a failure to provide
ordinary maintenance or repair, the CommissionHPC will notify the owner
of the property and set forth the steps which need to be ta ken to remedy
the situation. The owner of such property will have thirty (30) days in
which to do this.
3. In the event that the condition is not remedied in thirty (30) days, the
owner shall be punished as provided in Section VII of this Ordinance and,
at the direction of the Milton City Council; the CommissionHPC may
perform such maintenance or repair as is necessary to prevent
deterioration by neglect. The owner of the property shall be liable for the
cost of such maintenance and repair performed by the CommissionHPC.
[rhm6]
C. Affirmation of Existing Building and Zoning Codes.
Nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed as to exempt property owners
from complying with existing City or County building and zoning codes ., except to
the extent that a Historic Property is eligible for and receives Historic
Preservation Prior Use Recognition.
Section VII
Penalty Provisions
Violations of any provision of this Ordinance shall be punished in the
same manner as provided for punishment of violations of validly enacted
Ordinances of the City of Milton, Georgia set forth in Article 29.2 of the City of
Milton Zoning Ordinance. [rhm7]
Section VIII
Severability
In the event that any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of
this Ordinance shall be declared or adjudged invalid or unconstitutional, such
18
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
adjudication shall in no manner affect the other sections, sentences, clauses, or
phrases of this Ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect, as if the
section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase so declared or adjudged invalid
or unconstitutional were not originally a part thereof.
19
RZ09-04 – Sept 29, 2009 Planning Commission edits
RZ09-04 – For Mayor and City Council Meeting on Monday, October 19, 2009
Section IX
Repealer
All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby
repealed.
[rhm8]Section X
Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective on _____________.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Milton City Council does hereby
ordain, resolve and enact the foregoing Historic Preservation CommissionHPC
Ordinance for the City of Milton, Georgia.
Adopted this __________________.
Implementation: ____________________.
APPROVED:
MILTON CITY COUNCIL
BY: _____________________
MAYOR
ATTEST: ______________
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107 Milton, GA 30004
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Lynn Tully, AICP, Community Development Director
Date: May 5, 2010, for Submission onto the May 17, 2010, City Council
Meeting (First Read May 17, 2010)
Agenda Item: Amendments to Chapter 20, Article VI. Soil Erosion, Sedimentation and Pollution
Control, of the City of Milton Code of Ordinances.
CMO (City Manager’s Office) Recommendation:
To approve and hold public hearing on amendments to the existing Soil Erosion, Sedimentation
and Pollution Control ordinance for compliance with state requirements and continuance of local
issuing authority status.
Background:
At the April 19, 2010 work session staff presented proposed changes to the Soil Erosion Control
ordinance. Staff notes that compliance with the model ordinance is required by the state EPD to
retain Local Issuing Authority status. Their deadline for adoption of the changes is July 1, 2010.
Discussion:
The majority of the changes included in the proposal are to conform to the state model ESC
ordinance. During the work session Council requested that staff look for opportunities to clean
up any other discrepancies or issues within the text. Those other minor clarifications have been
included in the version presented for hearing. This ordinance amendment has been reviewed
by the legal department and those edits have also been included in this version.
Alternatives:
The Mayor and City Council may choose to approve, deny or defer this text amendment.
Concurrent Review:
Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager
Ken Jarrard, City Attorney
[Council Memo.051710]
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF FULTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE VI. SOIL EROSION,
SEDIMENTATION AND POLLUTION CONTROL, OF THE MILTON CITY CODE
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Milton, GA while in a regularly called council
meeting on June 7, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. as follows:
SECTION 1. That the Ordinance relating to Amending Chapter 20, Article VI. of the
Milton City Code, as it relates to Soil Erosion, Sedimentation and Pollution Control, is hereby
adopted and approved, replacing existing Chapter 20, Article VI in its entirety; and is attached hereto
as if fully set forth herein, and;
SECTION 2. All ordinances, parts of ordinances, or regulations in conflict herewith are
repealed.
SECTION 3. That this Ordinance shall become effective upon its adoption.
ORDAINED this the 7th day of June, 2010.
__________________
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Sudie Gordon, Interim City Clerk
(Seal)
CHAPTER- 20 ENVIRONMENT*
*State law reference—references: Conservation and natural resources, O.C.G.A. § 12-1-1 et
seq.; water resources, O.C.G.A. § 12-5-1 et seq.; control of soil erosion and sedimentation,
O.C.G.A. § 12-7-1 et seq.; control of water pollution and surface water use, O.C.G.A. § 12-5-
20.
Article VI. Soil Erosion, sedimentation and pollution control
- ARTICLE VI. SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL
DIVISION 1. GENERALLY
Sec. 20-490. - Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
100-year floodplain means land in the floodplain subject to a one percent or greater
statistical occurrence probability of flooding in any given year.
Best management practices (BMPs) means sound conservation and engineeringa
collection of structural practices to preventand vegetative measures which, when properly
designed, installed and minimizemaintained, will provide effective erosion and resultant
sedimentation, which are consistent control. The term "properly designed" means designed in
accordance with, and no less stringent than, those practices hydraulic design specifications
contained in the "Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia" published by the
Commission as of January 1 of the year in which the land-disturbing activity was
permitted.specified in O.C.G.A. § 12-7-6(b).
Board means the Georgia Board of Natural Resources.
Board of zoning appeals means the board appointed by the city council that hears appeals of stop work
orders.
Buffer means the area of land immediately adjacent to the banks of state waters in its
natural state of vegetation that facilitates the protection of water quality and aquatic habitat.
Certified PersonnelCommission means a person who has successfully completed the
appropriate certification course approved by the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation
Commission.
Commission means the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC).
Construction Board of Appeals means the board appointed by the city council that hears
appeals of stop work orders.
CPESC means Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment control with current
certification by Certified Professional in Erosion and sSediment Control Inc., a corporation
registered in North Carolina which is also referred to as CPESC or CPESC, Inc.
Cut means a portion of land surface or area from which earth has been removed or will be
removed by excavation (the depth below the original ground surface to the excavated surface also
known as excavation). ).
Department means the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR).city department
of community development.
Design Professional means a professional licensed by the State of Georgia in the field of:
engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, forestry, geology or land surveying; or a person
that is a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC) with a current
certification by Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control Inc.
Development means the alteration of property for any purpose involving building, subdividing, and the
preparation of land for any of the above purposes. The term "development" includes, but is not limited
to, providing:
(1) Utilities;
(2) Access;
(3) Parking;
(4) Stormwater management;
(5) Sewage disposal systems; and
(6) Construction of a structure.
Development sequence means the sequence of activities to be completed, in order, during the
development of a land disturbance project as per approved construction plans.
Director means the director of the Environmental Protection Division city department of
community development or his or her designee.
Director DPW means the director of the department of public works or his or her designee.
District means the Fulton County Soil and Water Conservation District.
Division means the Environm ental Protection Division (EPD) of the Department of Natural
Resources.
Drainage structure means a device composed of a virtually nonerodible material such as
concrete, steel, plastic, or other such material that conveys water from one place to another by
intercepting the flow and carrying it to a release point for stormwater management, drainage
control, or flood control purposes.
EPD means the Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources.
EPD director means the Director of the Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of
Natural Resources.
Erosion means the process by which land surface is worn away by the action of wind,
water, ice or gravity.
Erosion, sedimentation and pollutionsediment control plan means a plan required byfor
the Erosioncontrol of soil erosion and Sedimentation Act, O.C.G.A. Chapter 12-7sedimentation
resulting from land disturbance activity to be maintained until project completion, that includes,
as a minimum protections at least as stringent as the State General Permit, best management
practices,is designed to minimize soil erosion, protect state waters and requirements in section
20-567prevent off-site sedimentation. The term "erosion and 568 of this
ordinancearticle.sediment control plan" also means the "plan."
Erosion and sedimentation control manual means a field manual produced by the Georgia
Soil and Water Conservation Commission that illustrates vegetative and structural best
management practices (BMPs), and their use for land disturbing activities.
Fill means a portion of land surface to which soil or other solid material has been added ;,
the depth above the original ground surface or an excavation. elevation.
Final Stabilization means all soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed, and
that for unpaved areas and areas not covered by permanent structures and areas located outside
the waste disposal limits of a landfill cell that has been certified by EPD for waste dispos al, 100%
of the soil surface is uniformly covered in permanent vegetation with a density of 70% or greater,
or equivalent permanent stabilization measures (such as the use of rip rap, gabions, permanent
mulches or geotextiles) have been used. Permanent vegetation shall consist of: planted trees,
shrubs, perennial vines; a crop of perennial vegetation appropriate for the time of year and region;
or a crop of annual vegetation and a seeding of target crop perennials appropriate for the region.
Final stabilization applies to each phase of construction.
Finished grade means the final elevation and contour of the ground after cutting or filling
and conforming to the proposed design.
Grading means altering the shape of ground surfaces. The term "grading" inclu des:
(1)
Stripping;
(2)
Cutting;
(3)
Filling;
(4)
Stockpiling;
(5)
Shaping or any combination thereof; and
(6)
The land in its cut or filled condition.
Ground elevation means the original elevation of the ground surface as measured from sea
level prior to cutting or filling.
Land disturbing activity means any activity which may result in soil erosion from water or
wind and the movement of sediments into state waters or onto lands within the state;
(1)
The term "land disturbing activity" includes, but is not limited to:
a.
Clearing, dredging or grading; and
b.
Excavating, transporting or the filling of land.
(2)
The term "land disturbing activity" does not include agricultural practices as described in section
20-493(5).
Larger common plan of development or sale means a contiguous area where multiple
separate and distinct construction activities are occurring under one plan of development or sale.
For the purpose of this definition, the term "plan" means:
(1)
An announcement;
(2)
Piece of documentation such as a sign, public notice or hearing, sales pitch, advertisement,
drawing, permit application, zoning request, or computer design; or
(3)
Physical demarcation such as boundary signs, lot stakes, or survey marking, indicating that
construction activities will occur on a specific plot.
Local issuing authority means the governing authority of any county or municipality which is
certified pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-8(a).
Metropolitan River Protection Act (MRPA) means a state law referenced as O.C.G.A. § 12-
5-440 et seq., which addresses environmental and developmental matters in certain metropolitan
river corridors and their drainage basins.
Natural ground surface means the ground surface in its original state before any grading,
excavation or filling.
Nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) means numerical units of measure based upon
photometric analytical techniques for measuring the light scattered by finely divided particles of a
substance in suspension. This technique is used to estimate the extent of turbidity in water in which
colloidallycollioidally dispersed or suspended particles are present.
NOI means a Notice of Intent form provided by EPD for coverage under the State General
Permit.
NOT means a Notice of Termination form provided by EPD to terminate coverage under
the State General Permit.
Notice to comply means enforcement action based on noncompliance through failure to
either properly install or maintain BMPs, where sediments remain within the boundaries of the
property. This enforcement action provides the violator five days to achieve compliance.
Official notice means a posting of a notice to comply or stop work order on a property that
is noncompliant or in violation.
Operator means the party or parties that have: has:
(1)
Operational control of construction project plans and specifications, including the ability to make
modifications to those plans and specifications; or
(2)
Day-to-day operational control of those activities that there are necessary to ensure compliance
with a stormwater pollution prevention plan for the site or other permit conditions, such as a person
authorized to direct workers at a site to carry out activities required by the stormwater pollution prevention
plan or to comply with other permit conditions.
Outfall means the location where storm water in a discernible, confined and discrete
conveyance, leaves a facility or site or, if there is a receiving water on site, becomes a point
source discharging into that receiving water.
Permit means the authorization necessary to conduct a land disturbing activity under the
provisions of this article.
Person means any individual, partnership, firm, association, joint venture, public or private
corporation, trust, estate, commission, board, public or private institution, utility, cooperative, state
agency, municipality or other political subdivision of the State of Georgia, any interstate body or any
other legal entity.
Phase or Phased means sub-parts or segments of construction projects where the sub-part or
segment is constructed and stabilized prior to completing construction activities on the entire
construction site.
Phased development means the development of tracts in maximum of 25-acre increments.
Project means the entire proposed development project, regardless of the size of the area
of land to be disturbed.
Properly Designed means designed in accordance with the design requirements and
specifications contained in the “Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia” (Manual)
published by the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission as of January 1 of the year in
which the land-disturbing activity was permitted and amendments to the Manual as approved by
the Commission up until the date of NOI submittal.
Qualified personnel means any person who meets or exceeds the education and training requirements
of O.C.G.A. § 12-7-19.
Reinspection fee means a fee assessed to the developer/owner/operator or responsible
party for reinspecting the project if requested by the developer/owner/operator or responsible party
prior to the end of the compliance period; provided that upon th at reinspection the project remains
out of compliance.
Roadway drainage structure means a device such as a bridge, catch basin, culvert, or
ditch, composed of a virtually nonerodible material such as concrete, steel, plastic, or other such
material that conveys water under a roadway by intercepting the flow on one side of a traveled way
(public or private) consisting of one or more defined lanes, with or without shoulder areas, and
carrying water to a release point on the other side.
Sediment means solid material, both organic and inorganic, that is in suspension, is being
transported, or has been moved from its site of origin by air, water, ice, or gravity as a product of
erosion.
Sedimentation means the process by which eroded material is transported and deposited
by the action of water, wind, ice, or gravity.
Soil and water conservation district approved plan means an erosion and sedimentation
control plan approved in writing by the Fulton County Soil and Water Conservation District.
Stabilization means the process of establishing an enduring soil cover by the installation of
temporary or permanent structures or vegetation for the purpose of reducing to a minimum the
erosion process and the resultant transport of sediment by wind, water, ice, or gravity.
State general permit means the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
general permit for stormwater runoff from construction activities as is now in effect or as may be
amended or reissued in the future pursuant to the state's authority to implement the same through
federal delegation under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 USC 1251 et seq., and
O.C.G.A. § 12-5-30(f).
State waters means any and all rivers, streams, creeks, branches, lakes, ditches,
reservoirs, ponds, drainage systems, springs, wells, and other bodies of surface or subsurface
water, natural or artificial, lying within or forming a part of the boundaries of the state which are not
entirely confined and retained completely upon the property of a single individual, partnership, or
corporation.
Stop work order means enforcement action that ceases all work on-site or a portion of the
site.
Structural erosion and sedimentation control measures means practices for the stabilizing
of erodible or sediment-producing areas by utilizing the mechanical properties of matter for the
purpose of either changing the surface of the land or storing, regulating, or disposing of runoff to
prevent sediment loss. Examples of structural erosion and sediment control practices are riprap,
sediment basins, dikes, level spreaders, waterways, outlets, diversions, grade stabilization
structures, sediment traps, and sediment barriers, and land grading. Such practices can be found in
the publication "Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia."
Trout streams means all streams or portions of streams within the watershed as designated by the
Wildlife ResourcesGame and Fish Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources under the
provisions of the Georgia Water Quality Control Act, O.C.G.A. § 12-5-20, et seq., in the rules and
regulations for Water Quality Control, Chapter 391-3-6 at www.gaepd.org. Streams designated as .
(1) The term "primary trout waters are defined" means streams designated as water supporting a
self-sustaining population of rainbow, brown, or brook trout. Streams designated as
(2) The term "secondary trout waters are" means streams designated as those in
which there is no evidence of natural trout reproduction, but are capable of supporting trout
throughout the year. First order trout waters are streams into which no other streams flow except
springs.
(3) The term "first order trout waters" means streams into which no other streams flow except
springs.
Turbidity means a measure of clarity of a water sample.
Underbrush means any small shrubs, ground cover, or similar plants growing beneath the canopy of
mature trees.
Vegetative erosion and sedimentation control measures means measurespractices for the
stabilization of erodible or sediment-producing areas by covering the soil with:
(1)
Permanent seeding, sprigging, or planting, producing long-term vegetative cover;
(2)
Temporary seeding, producing short-term vegetative cover; or
(3)
Sodding, covering areas with a turf of perennial sod-forming grass.
Such measurespractices can be found in the publication Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control
in Georgia. Manual.
Watercourse means any natural or artificial watercourse, stream, river, creek, channel,
ditch, canal, conduit, culvert, drain, waterway, gully, ravine, or wash in which water flows either
continuously or intermittently and which has a definite channel, bed, and banks, and including any
area adjacent thereto subject to inundation by reason of overflow or floodwater.
Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances
do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil co nditions. The
term "wetlands" includes:
(1)
Swamps;
(2)
Marshes;
(3)
Bogs; and
(4)
Similar areas.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 3), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 3), 11-17-2008)
State law reference—Similar provisions, O.C.G.A. § 12-7-3.
Sec. 20-491. - Authority and title.
This article is adopted pursuant to the authority and mandate of the Georgia Erosion and
Sedimentation Act of 1975 (O.C.G.A. § 12-7-1 et seq.), as amended. Certification by EPDA
memorandum of agreement authorizes the city as a local issuing authority. As a local issuing
authority, the city is certified to provide and maintain an erosion control program which includes, but
is not limited to, development plan review, permitting and erosion control enforcement. This article
will be known as "The Milton Soil Erosion, and Sedimentation and Pollution Control Ordinance of
2006."
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 1), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 1), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-492. - Intent.
It is the intent of this article to establish soil erosion, and sedimentation and pollution
control minimum requirements, standards, and enforcement procedures for land disturbance
activities in order to conserve and protect the environment, public health, and the general welfare of
the city's citizens.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 2), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 2), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-493. - Exemptions.
This article shall apply to any land disturbing activity undertaken by any person on any land
except for the following:
(1)
Surface mining, as the same is defined in O.C.G.A. § 12-4-72, "The Georgia Surface
MiningMineral Resources and Caves Act of 1968".;"
(2)
Granite quarrying and land clearing for such quarrying;
(3)
Such minor land disturbing activities as home gardens and individual home landscaping, repairs,
maintenance work, fences and other related activities which result in minor soil erosion;
(4)
The construction of single-family residences when such construction disturbs less than one acre
and is not a part of a larger common plan of development or sale with a planned disturbance of equa l to
or greater than one acre and not otherwise exempted under this section; provided, however, that
construction of any such residence shall conform to the minimum requirements as set forth in O.C.G.A.
12-7-6 and this subsection and division 3 of this article. For single-family residence construction covered
by provisions of this subsection, there shall be a buffer zone between the residence and any state waters
classified as trout streams pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 5 of the Georgia Water Quality Control Act
(O.C.G.A. § 12-5-20 et seq.). In any such buffer, no land disturbing activity shall be constructed between
the residence and the point where vegetation has been wrested by normal stream flow or wave action
from the banks of the following trout waters:
a.
For primary trout waters, the buffer zone shall be at least 50 horizontal feet, and no variance to a
smaller buffer shall be granted;
b.
For secondary trout waters, the buffer zone shall be at least 50 horizontal feet, but the EPD
director may grant variances to no less than 25 feet;
c.
Regardless of whether a trout stream is primary or secondary, for first order trout waters, which
are streams into which no other streams flow except for springs, the buffer shall be at least 25 horizontal
feet, and no variance to smaller buffer shall be granted. The minimum requirements of subsection (b) of
O.C.G.A. 12-7-6, division 3 of this article and the buffer zones provided by this section shall be enforced
by the issuing authority;
(5)
Agricultural operations, as defined in O.C.G.A. § 1-3-3, “definitions” include:
a.
The raising, harvesting, or storing of products of the field or orchard;
b.
Feeding, breeding, or managing livestock or poultry;
c.
Producing or storing feed for use in the production of livestock including, but not limited to, cattle,
calves, swine, hogs, goats, sheep, and rabbits;
d.
The production of poultry including, but not limited to, chickens, hens and turkeys;
e.
Producing plants, trees, fowl, or animals;
f.
The production of aquaculture, horticultural, dairy, livestock, poultry, eggs, and apiarian products;
and farm buildings and farm ponds;
(6)
Forestry land management practices, including harvesting; provided, however, that when such
exempt forestry practices cause or result in land disturbing or other activities otherwise prohibited in a
buffer, as established in section 20-568(a)(16414) and (17515), no other land disturbing activities, except
for normal forest management practices, shall be allowed on th e entire property upon which the forestry
practices were conducted for a period of three years after completion of such forestry practices;
(7)
Any project carried out under the technical supervision of the Natural Resource Conservation
Service of the United States Department of Agriculture;
(8)
Any project involving disturbance of one tenth acre 5000 sf or less; provided, however, that this
exemption shall not apply to any land disturbing activity within a larger common plan of development or
sale with a planned disturbance equal to or greater than one acre or within 200 feet of the bank of any
state waters, and for purposes of this subsection, state waters exclude channels and drainageways which
have water in them only during and immediately after rainfall events and intermittent streams which do
not have water in them year round; provided, however, that any person responsible for a project which
involves one tenth acre 5000 sf or less, which involves land disturbing activity, and which is within 200
feet of any such excluded channel or drainageway, must prevent sediment from moving beyond the
boundaries of the property on which such project is located and provided, further, that nothing herein shall
prevent the local issuing authority from regulating any such project which is not specifically exempted by
subsection (1) through (7), (9), (10) or (11) of this section;
(9)
Construction or maintenance projects, or both, undertaken or financed, in whole or in part, or
both, by the department of transportation, the Georgia Highway Authority, or the state road and tollway
authority; or any road construction or m aintenance project, or bothbout, undertaken by any county or
municipality; provided, however, that construction or maintenance projects of the department of
transportation or state road and tollway authority which disturb oneonce or more contiguous acres of land
shall be subject to the provisions of O.C.G.A. § 12-7-7.1; except where the department of transportation,
the Georgia Highway Authority, or the state road and tollway authority is a secondary permittee for a
project located within a larger common plan of development or sale under the state general permit, in
which case a copy of a notice of intent under the state general permit shall be submitted to the City of
Milton. The City of Miltoncounty, the county shall enforce compliance with the minimum requirements set
forth in O.C.G.A. § 12-7-6, and division 3 of this article as if a permit had been issued, and violations shall
be subject to the same penalties as violations by permit holders ; copies of any plans approved under
that code section shall be provided to the director;
(10)
Any land disturbing activities conducted by any electric membership corporation or municipal
electrical system or any public utility under the regulatory jurisdiction of the public service commissi on,
any utility under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, any cable
television system as defined in O.C.G.A. § 36-18-1, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States
engaged in the generation, transmission, or distribution of power, except where an electric membership
corporation or municipal electric system or any public utility under the regulatory jurisdiction of the public
service commission, any utility under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, any cable television system as defined in O.C.G.A. § 36-18-1, or any agency or
instrumentality of the United States engaged in the generation, transmission, or distribution of power is a
secondary permittee for a project located within a larger common plan of development or sale under the
state general permit, in which case the county city shall enforce compliance with the minimum
requirements set forth in O.C.G.A. § 12-7-6 and division 3 of this article as if a permit had been issued
and violations shall be subject to the same penalties as violations by permit holders; and
(11)
Any public water system reservoir.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 4), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 4),
11-17-2008)
State law reference—Exemptions, O.C.G.A. § 12-7-17.
Secs. 20-494—20-512. - Reserved.
- DIVISION 2.-INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
Subdivision 1- In General
Sec. 20-513. - Authority.
(a)
Community development director. The community development director or designee will
periodically inspect the sites of land disturbing activities for which permits have been issued to determine
if the activities are being conducted in accordance with the approved plan, permit and this article and to
determine if the measures required in the plan are effective in controlling soil erosion and sedimentation.
(b)
Primary, and secondary and tertiary permittees regulated. The city shall regulate both primary,
and secondary and tertiary permittees as such terms are defined in the state general permit.
(1)
Primary permittees shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of best management
practices where the primary permittee is conducting land disturbing activities.
(2)
Secondary permittees shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of best
management practices where the secondary permittee is conducting land disturbing activities.
(3)
Tertiary permittees shall be responsible for installation and maintenance where the tertiary permittee is
conducting land-disturbing activities.
(c)
Notice; contents. If, through inspection, it is deemed that a person engaged in land disturbing
activities as defined herein has failed to comply with the approved plan, with permit conditions, or with the
provisions of this article, an official notice shall be posted on site, and as a courtesy a written notice to
comply shall also be served upon that person, except for working without a permit, disturbing a stream
buffer, allowing sediment to enter state waters by failure to properly design, install or maintain best
management practices, or working under a stop work order, which conditions warrant immediate citation.
The notice shall set forth the measures necessary to achieve compliance and shall state the time within
which such measures must be completed.
(d)
Noncompliance. If the person engaged in the land disturbing activity fails to comply with the
corrective measures specified in the posted official notice within the time specified, he or she shall be
deemedfound in violation of this article, and the community development director may take such
additional enforcement actions as he or she deems appropriate.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(a)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(a)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-514. - Authority to investigate; right of entry.
The community development director shall have the power to conduct such investigation as
the community development director may deem reasonably necessary to carry out the duties
prescribed in this article, and for this purpose shall have the power to enter at reasonable times
upon any property, public or private, for the purposes of investigation and inspection of the sites of
land disturbance or building activities.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(b)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(b)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-515. - Unlawful to refuse entry or obstruct, hamper or interfere with inspection.
No person shall refuse entry or access to any authorized representative or agent of the city,
the commission, the district, or division who requests entry for the purposes of inspection, and who
presents appropriate credentials. Nor shall any person obstruct, hamper, or interfere with any such
representative while in the process of carrying out his or her official duties including, but not
limited to, the review of:
(1) Reports;
(2) Studies;
(3) Calculations;
(4) Drawings;
(5) Revisions;
(6) Practices;
(7) Actions; and
(8) Bonds.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(c)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(c)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-516. - Display of plan on site required.
A copy of a current approved plan shall be kept on site until project completion or issuance
of certificate of occupancy.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(d)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(d)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-517. - Periodic review by district or commission.
(a)
The Districtdistrict or the Commissioncommission, or both, shall semi-annuallyperiodically review
the actions of counties and municipalities which have been certified as local issuing authorities pursuant
to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-8(a).
(b)
The Districtdistrict or the Commissioncommission, or both, may provide technical assistance to
any county or municipality for the purpose of improving the effectiveness of the counties or municipality's
erosion, and sedimentation and pollution control program.
(c)
The Districtdistrict or the Commissioncommission shall notify the Divisiondivision and request an
investigation by the Divisiondivision if any deficient or ineffective legal program is found.
(d)
The local Issuing Authority must amend its ordinances to the extent appropriate within (12) months of any
amendments to the Erosion and Sediment Act of 1975.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(e)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(e)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-518. - Divisional review for compliance with state regulations.
(a)
The board shall promulgate rules and regulations setting forth the requirements and standards
for certification and the procedures for decertification of a local issuing authority. The division may
periodically review the actions of counties and municipalities which have been certified as local issuing
authorities pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-8(a).
(b)
Such review may include, but not be limited to, review of the administration and enforcement of a
governing authority's ordinance and review of conformance with an agreement, if any, between the district
and the governing authority.
(c)
If such review indicates that the governing authority of any county or municipality certified
pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-8(a) has not administered or enforced its ordinances or has not conducted
the program in accordance with any agreement entered into pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-7(e), the
division shall notify the governing authority of the county or municipality in writing.
(d)
The governing authority of any county or municipality so notified shall have 9030 days within
which to take the necessary corrective action to retain certification as a local issuing authority.
(e)
If the county or municipality does not take the necessary corrective action within 9030 days after
notification by the division, the division may revoke the certification of the county or municipality as a local
issuing authority.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(f)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 10(f)), 11-17-2008)
Secs. 20-519—20-537. - Reserved.
Subdivision 2- Penalties and Incentives
Sec. 20-538. - Failure to obtain a permit for land-disturbing activitycomply; citation.
If any person commences any land disturbing activity requiring a land disturbing permit, as
prescribed in this article, without first obtaining said permit, the person shall be subject to the
revocation of his or her business license, work permit, or other authorization to conduct any
business and associated work activities within the city's jurisdictional boundaries. The failure to
comply may result in a citation being issued to appear in state magistratemunicipalmagistrate court
which may result in monetary fines.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(a)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(a)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-539. - Stop work orders; notice to comply.
(a)
First and second violations; notice. For the first and second violations of the provisions of this
article, the community development director or designeeEPD director shall post an official notice to
comply and as a courtesy issue a written warning to the violator.letter. The violator shall have five days to
correct the violation. If the violation is not corrected within five days, the community development director
or designeeEPD director shall issue a stop work order requiring the land disturbance activit y to be
stopped until necessary corrective action or mitigation has occurred; provided, however, that, if the
violation presents an imminent threat to public health or waters of the state or if the land disturbing
activities are conducted without obtaining the necessary permit, the community development director or
designeeEPD director shall issue an immediate stop work order in lieu of a warningnotice to comply.
(b)
Three or more violations. For the third and each subsequent violation, the community
development director or designeeEPD director shall issue an immediate stop work order.
(c)
Stop work orders remain in effect until violation cured. All stop work orders shall be in effect
immediately upon issuance and shall remain in effect until the necessary corrective action or mitigation
has occurred.
(d)
Posted notices; removal prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any representative of the owner to
remove an official notice to comply or stop work posting. If this action is observed by a Citycounty
representative, the owner will be responsible for any and all possible fines.
(1)
Upon the issuance of a stop work order, the community development director or his or her
representative shall post official notices at such locations on the project site as deemed appropriate.
(2)
Such posted official notices shall be prominently displayed on the owner's property until the stop
work order is rescinded by the community development director or designee, at which time said posted
notices will be removed by the community development director or designeeEPD director or his or her
representative.
(3)
When a violation in the form of taking action without a permit, failure to maintain a stream buffer,
or significant amounts of sediment, as determined by the community development director or his or her
designee, have been or are being discharged into state waters and where best management practices
have not been properly designed, installed, and maintained, a stop work order shall be issued by the
manager community development director or his or her designee.
(4)
All such stop work orders shall be effective immediately upon issuance and shall be in effect until
the necessary corrective action or mitigation has occurred.
(5)
Such stop work orders shall apply to all land disturbing activity on the site with the exception of
the installation and maintenance of temporary or permanent erosion, and sediment and pollution controls.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(b)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(b)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-540. - Reinspection fee.
The community development director shall assess a minimum $50.00 reinspection fee to a
project if a reinspection is requested prior to the end of a compliance period and the site is found to
remain out of compliance upon that inspection. Such fees to cover administrative, field inspections,
and transportation costs must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a final erosion inspection or a
certificate of occupancy.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(c)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(c)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-541. - Bond forfeiture.
(a)
Posting; notice; contents. If, through inspection, it is determined that a person engaged in land
disturbing activities has failed to comply with the approved plan and permit , writtenan official notice to
comply shall be served upon that person.posted on site and a letter will be issued as a courtesy. The
notice shall set forth the measures necessary to achieve compliance with the plan and shall state the time
within which such measures must be completed.
(b)
Failure to comply. If the person engaged in the land disturbing activity fails to comply within the
time specified, he or she shall be deemed in violation of this article and, in addition to other penalties,
shall be deemed to have forfeited his or her performance bond, if required to post one under the
provisions of section 20-591(g). The city m ay call the bond or any part thereof to be forfeited and may use
the proceeds to hire a contractor to stabilize the site and bring it into compliance.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(d)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(d)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-542. Noncompliance.
Any person found to be in noncompliance with any provision of this article shall be served an official
notice by the city community development department. The offender shall, within the period of time
stated in the notice, take all necessary action to gain compliance and shall permanently cease such
noncompliance.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(e)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(e)),
11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-543. - Monetary penalties.
(a)
Any person who violates any provisions of this article, or any permit condition or limitation
established pursuant to this article or who negligently or intentionally fails or refuses to comply with any
final or emergency order of the CityEPD director of Community Development issued as provided in this
article shall be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed $2,500.00 per day for each violation. For the
purpose of enforcing the provisions of this article, notwithstanding any provisions in the City Charter to the
contrary, municipal courts shall be authorized to impose penalty not to exceed $2,500.00 for each
violation. Notwithstanding any limitation of law as to penalties which can be assessed for violations of city
ordinances, any magistrate court or any other court of competent jurisdicti on trying cases brought as
violations of this article under City ordinance approved under this article shall be authorized to impose
penalties for such violations not to exceed $2,500.00 for each violation. Each day during which a violation
or, failure or refusal to comply continues shall be a separate violation.
(b)
(b) The following minimum penalties shall be imposed:
(1) Conducting land disturbance activities without a land disturbance permit or building permit (first
offense) shall be $250.00 for each violation or each day on which a violation exists.
(2) Conducting land disturbance activities without a land disturbance permit or building permit
(second or subsequent offense) shall be $1,000.00 for each violation or each day on which a violation
exists.
(3) Lack of proper installation or maintenance of structural/vegetative best management practices
shall be $250.00 per violation.
(4) Working under a stop work order (first offense) shall be $500.00.
(5) Working under a stop work order (second or subsequent offense) shall be $1,500.00.
(c) Upon violation of the provisions of this article, the city shall be entitled to take such remedial
action as the community development director deems necessary to ensure compliance, and the violator
shall reimburse the city for any cost or expense associated with such compliance efforts and the city shall
be entitled to place a lien on the property to secure payment and reimbursement for these expenses.
(c)
d) The city community development director has the primar y responsibility for the enforcement of
this article.
(d)
e) Persons designated by the community development director are hereby authorized to issue
official notices, citations, and summons charging violations under this article, returnable to the state or city
municipal court, or any other court of competent jurisdiction.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(f)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 11(f)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-544. - Education and certification.
(a)
PersonsAfter December 31, 2006, all persons involved in land development design, review,
permitting, construction, monitoring, or inspection or any land- disturbing activity shall meet the education
and training certification requirements, dependent on their level of involvement with the process, as
developed by the commission in consultation with the division and the stakeholder advisory board created
pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-20.
(b)
For each site on which land-disturbing activity occurs, each entity or person acting as either a primary,
secondary, or tertiary permittee, as defined in the state general permit, shall have as a minimum one
person who is in responsible charge of erosion and sedimentation control activitie s on behalf of said entity
or person and meets the applicable education or training certification requirements developed by the
Commission present on site whenever land-disturbing activities are conducted on that site. A project site
shall herein be defined as any land-disturbance site or multiple sites within a larger common plan of
development or sale permitted by an owner or operator for compliance with the state general permit.
(c)
Persons or entities involved in projects not requiring a state general permit but otherwise requiring
certified personnel on site may contract with certified persons to meet the requirements of this
ordinancearticle.
(d)
If a state general permittee who has operational control of land-disturbing activities for a site has met the
certification requirements of paragraph (1) of subsection (b) of O.C.G.A. 12-7-19, then any person or
entity involved in land-disturbing activity at that site and operating in a subcontractor capacity for such
permittee shall meet those educational r equirements specified in paragraph (4) of subsection (b) of
O.C.G.A 12-7-19 and shall not be required to meet any educational requirements that exceed those
specified in said paragraph.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 12), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 12), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-545. - Appeals.
(a)
Construction Board of Appeals To city council; hearing. The issuance of a stop work order, as well as
the suspension, revocation, modification, or grant with condition of a permit by the city upon finding that
the holder is not in compliance with the approved erosion and sediment and pollution control plan; or that
the holder is in violation of permit conditions; or that the holder is in violation of any provision of this article
shall entitle the person submitting the plan or holding the permit to a hearing before the city construction
board of appeals within 45 days after receipt by the City director of Community Development of written
request for appeal.
(b)
To Fulton County Superior Court. Any person aggrieved by a decision or order of the city, after
exhausting his or her administrative remedies, shall have the right to appeal de novo to the Superior
Court of Fulton County.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 13), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 13), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-546. - Liability.
(a)
Neither the approval of a plan under the provisions of this article, nor the compliance with
provisions of this article, shall relieve any person from responsibility for damage to any person or property
otherwise imposed by law nor impose any liability upon the city, the district or their officers, employees or
agents for damage to any person or property.
(b)
The fact that a land disturbing activity for which a permit has been issued results in injury to the
property of another shall neither constitute proof of nor create a presumption of a violation of the
standards provided for in this article or the terms of the permit.
(c)
No provision of this article shall permit any person to violate the Georgia Erosion and
Sedimentation Act of 1975, the Georgia Water Quality Control Act or the rules and regulations
promulgated and approved thereunder or pollute any state waters as defined thereby.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 14(c)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 14(c)), 11-17-2008)
Secs. 20-547—20-565. - Reserved.
- DIVISION 3.-MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR EROSION, AND SEDIMENTATION AND
POLLUTION CONTROL USING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP)
Sec. 20-566. - General provisions.
(a)
Excessive soil erosion and resulting sedimentation can take place during land disturbing activities
if the requirements of the ordinancearticle and the NPDES General Permit are not met. Therefore, plans
for those land disturbing activities which are not exemptedexcluded by this article shall contain provisions
for an application of soil erosion, and sedimentation and pollution control measures and practices. The
provisions shall be incorporated into the erosion, and sedimentation and pollution control plans.
(b)
Soil erosion and sedimentation control measures and practices shall conform to the minimum
requirements of sections 20-567 and 20-568.
(c)
The application of measures and practices shall apply to all features of the site, including street
and utility installations, drainage facilities and other temporary and permanent improvements.
(d)
Measures shall be installed to prevent or control erosion and sedimentation and pollution during
all stages of any land disturbing activity in accordance with requirements of this ordinancearticle and the
NPDES General Permit. .
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(a)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(a)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-567. - Minimum requirements (BMP).
(a)
Properly designed defined. Best management practices as set forth in this section and section
20-568 shall be required for all land disturbing activities. Proper design, installation, and maintenance of
BMPs shall constitute a complete defense to any actio n by the DirectorEPD director or to any other
allegation of noncompliance with subsection (b) of this section or any substantially similar terms
contained in a permit for the discharge of stormwater issued pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12 -5-30(f) of the
"Georgia Water Quality Control Act." As used in this subsection, the terms "proper design" and "properly
designed" mean designed in accordance with the hydraulic design specifications contained in the "Manual
for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia" specified in O.C.G.A. § 12-7-6(b).
(b)
Violations. A Each discharge of stormwater runoff from disturbed areas where BMPs have not
been properly designed, installed, and maintained shall constitute a separate violation of any land
disturbing permit issued by the City of Miltonlocal issuing authority (LIA) or of any state general permit
issued by the division, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-5-30(f), the "Georgia Water Quality Control Act," for
each day on which such discharge results and the turbidity of receiving water s being increased by more
than 25 nephelometric turbidity units for waters supporting warm water fisheries or by more than ten
nephelometric turbidity units for waters classified as trout waters. The turbidity of the receiving waters
shall be measured in accordance with guidelines issued by the Director.EPD director. This subsection
shall not apply to any land disturbance associated with the construction of single -family homes which are
not part of a larger common pleanplea of development or sale unless the planned disturbance for such
construction is equal to or greater than five acres.
(c)
Failure to properly design, install, or maintain BMPs shall constitute a violation with of any land
disturbing permit issued by the City of Miltoncity or of any state general permit issued by the division
pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-5-30(f), the "Georgia Water Quality Control Act," for each day on which such
failure occurs. When such noncompliance is identified by the director, official notice will be posted on
that property.
(d)
The DirectorEPD director may require, in accordance with regulations adopted by the board,
reasonable and prudent monitoring of the turbidity level of receiving waters into which discharges from
land disturbing activities occur. as outlined by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
requirements.
(e)
The City of Milton may set more stringent buffer requirements than stated in section 20 -568 (a), (16) and
(17) in light of O.C.G. A. 12-7-6 (c).
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(b)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(b)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-568. - To comply with state general permit.
(a)
The rules and regulations, ordinances, or resolutions adopted pursuant to O.C.G.A. 12-7-1 et.
Seq.this article for the purpose of governing land disturbing activities shall require, as a minimum,
protections at least as stringent as the state general permit; and best management practices (BMPs),,
including sound conservation and engineering practices to prevent and minimize erosion and resultant
sedimentation, which are consistent with, and no less stringent than, those practices contained in the
"Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia," published by the Georgia Soil and Water
Conservation Commission as of January 1 of the year in which the land disturbing activity was permitted,
as well as the following:
(1)
Proper erosion control measures must be installed along site boundaries pri or to the stripping of
vegetation, re-gradingregarding, and other development activities as deemed by the community
development director to minimize erosion. and prevent soil erosion from leaving the site.
(2)
Cut-fill operations must be kept to a minimum.
(3)
Development plans must conform to the topography and soil type so as to minimize erosion
potential.
(4)
Whenever feasible, natural vegetation shall be retained, protected and supplemented.
(5)
The disturbed area and duration of exposure to erosive elements shall be kept to a practicable
minimum. Disturbed soil shall be stabilized as quickly as practicable.
(6)
Disturbed soil shall be stabilized as quickly as practicable.
( 7)
Temporary vegetation or mulching shall be employed to protect all exposed areas (especially
steep cuts and banks, etc.) during development.
(8)
7) Permanent vegetation and structural erosion control measures shall be installed as soon as
practicable.
(9)
8) Sediment in runoff water must be trapped by the use of debris basins, sediment basins, sediment
barriers, construction exits or similar BMPs as outlined in the erosion and sediment control manual until
the disturbed area is stabilized. As used in this subsection (a), a disturbed area is stabilized when it is
brought to a condition of continuous compliance with the requirements of this section and O.C.G.A. § 12-
7-1 et seq.
(10)
9) Adequate provisions must be provided to minimize damage from surface water to the cut face of
excavations or the sloping surface of fills. Cuts and fills must not endanger adjoining properties.
(11)
10) Sound engineering practices or methods shall be employed to protect (i.e. cuts and fills may not
endanger) adjoining properties.
(12)
11) Fills may not encroach upon natural watercourses or constructed channels in a manner so as to
adversely affect other property owners.
(13)
12) Migrated soil materials or soil materials displaced by mechanical means from land disturbing sites
to adjacent watercourses, such as lakes, ponds, streams and creeks etc. must be remediated The
remedial work shall be conducted as per a remedial plan approved by the city City of Milton. .
(14)
13) Grading equipment must cross flowing streams by means of temporary or permanent bridges or
culverts except when such methods are not feasible; provided, in any case, that those such crossings are
kept to a minimum.
(15)
14) Land disturbing activity plans for erosion and sedimentation and pollution control shall include
provisions for treatment or control of any source of sediments and adequate sedimentation control
facilities to retain sediments on site or preclude sedimentation of adjacent waters beyond the levels
specified in section 20-567(b).
(16)
15) Except as provided in subsection (a)(1716) of this section, there is established a 25-foot buffer
along the banks of all state waters, as measured horizontally from the point where vegetation has been
wrested by normal stream flow or wave action, except where the DirectorEPD director determines to allow
a variance that is at least as protective of natural resources and the environment where otherwise allowed
by the DirectorEPD director, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-2-8, or where a drainage structure or a roadway
drainage structure must be constructed; provided that adequate erosion control measures are
incorporated inis the project plans and specifications are implemented; or along any ephemeral stream.
As used in this provision, the term „ephemeral stream‟ means a stream:provided, however, that under
normal circumstances has water flowing only during and for a short duration after precipitation events;
that has the channel located above the ground-water table year round; for which ground water is not a
source of water; and for which runoff from precipitation is the primary source of water flow, unless
exempted as along on ephemeral stream, the buffers of at least 25 feet established pursuant to part 6 of
Article 5, Chapter 5 of Title 12, the “the "Georgia Water Quality Control Act”," (O.C.G.A. § 12-5-20 et seq.)
shall remain in force unless a variance is granted by the DirectorEPD director, as provided in this
paragraphsubsection. The following requirements shall apply to any such buffer.:
a.
No land disturbance activities shall be conducted within a buffer and a buffer shall remain in its
natural, undisturbed state of vegetation until all land disturbing activities on the construction site are
completed, except as otherwise provided by this subsection.
b.
Temporary structural best management practices are required to be removed at the completion
of project. Once the final stabilization of the site is achieved, a buffer mayway be thinned or trimmed of
vegetation as long as a protective vegetative cover remains to protect water quality and aquatic habitat
and a natural canopy is left in sufficient quantity to keep shade on the stream bed; provided, however,
that any person constructing a single-family residence, when such residence is constructed by or under
contract with the owner for his or her own occupancy, may thin or trim underbrush in a buffer at any time
as long as protective vegetative cover remains to protect water quality and aquatic habitat and a natural
canopy is left in sufficient quantity to keep shade on the stream bed; and.
c.
The buffer shall not apply to the following land disturbing activities; provided that they occur at an
angle, as measured from the point of crossing, within 25 degrees of perpendicular to the stream; cause a
width of disturbance of not more than 50 feet within the buffer; and adequate erosion control measures
are incorporated into the project plans and specifications and are implemented:
1.
Stream crossings for water lines; or
2.
Stream crossings for sewer lines.
(17)
d. Except as otherwise described in this article, there is established a 25-foot buffer along the
banks of all state waters, as measured horizontally from the point where vegetation has been wrestled
by normal stream flow or wave action, except where the EPD director determines to allow a variance
that is at least as protective of natural resources and the environment, where otherwise allowed by the
EPD director, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-2-8, or where drainage structures or a roadway drainage
structure must be constructed; provided that adequate erosion control measures are incorporated in
the project plans and specifications, and are implemented; provided, however, the buffers of at least 25
feet established pursuant to the "Georgia Water Quality Control Act" (O.C.G.A. § 12-5-20 et seq.), shall
remain in force unless a variance is granted by the EPD director, as provided in this subsection.
(16) There is established a 50-foot buffer as measured horizontally from the point where vegetation
has been wrested b y normal stream flow or wave action, along the banks of any state waters classified as
"trout streams" pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 5 of Title 12, of ”O.C.G.A. § 12-5-20 et seq., the "Georgia
Water Quality Control Act," except where a roadway drainage structure must be constructed; provided,
however, that small springs and streams classified as trout streams which discharge an average annual
flow of 25 gallons per minute or less shall have a 25-foot buffer or they may be piped, at the discretion of
the landowner, pursuant to the terms of a rule providing for a general variance promulgated by the
Boardboard, so long as any such pipe stops short of the downstream landowner's property and the
landowner complies with the buffer requirement for any adjacent trout steams. For single-family residence
construction covered by the provisions of section 20-493(4), there shall be a buffer zone between the
residence and any state waters classified as trout streams. The Director may grant a variance from
pursuant to the "Georgia Water Quality Control Act" (O.C.G.A. § 12-5-20 et seq.).
a. In any such buffer to zone, no land- disturbing activity, shall be conducted between the residence
and the point where vegetation has been wrested by normal stream flow or wave action from the banks
of the trout waters.
b. For primary trout waters, the buffer zone shall be at least 50 horizontal feet, and no variance to
a smaller buffer shall be granted.
c. For secondary trout waters, the buffer zone shall be at least 50 horizontal feet, but the EPD
director may grant variances to no less than 25 feet.
d. Regardless of whether a trout stream is primary or secondary, for first order trout waters, which
are streams into which no other streams flow except for springs, the buffer shall be at least 25
horizontal feet, and no variance to a smaller buffer shall be granted.
e. The minimum requirements of this division of this article and the buffer zones provided by this
section shall be enforced by the community development director. The EPD director may grant a
variance from such buffer to allow land disturbing activity; provided that adequate erosion control
measures are incorporated in the project plans and specifications and are implemented. The following
requirements shall apply to such buffer;:
a.
1. No land disturbance activities shall be conducted within a buffer and a buffer shall remain in its
natural, undisturbed state of vegetation until all land disturbing activities on the construction site are
completed. Once the final stabilization of the site is achieved, a buffer may be thinned or trimmed of
vegetation as long as a protective vegetative cover remains to protect water quality and aquatic habitat
and a natural canopy is left in sufficient quantity to keep shade on the stream bed; provided, however,
that any person constructing a single-family residence, when such residence is constructed by or under
contract with the owner for his or her own occupancy, may thin or trim vegetation in a buffer at any time
as long as protective vegetation cover remains to protect water quality and aquatic habitat and natural
canopy is left in sufficient quality to keep shade on the stream bed; and
b.
2. The buffer shall not apply to the following land-disturbing activities; provided that they occur at an
angle, as measured from the point of crossing, within 25 degrees of perpendicular to the stream; cause a
width of disturbance of not more than 50 feet within the buffer; and adequate erosion control measures
are incorporated into the project plans and specifications and are implemented:
(i)
Stream crossings for water lines; or
(ii)
Stream crossings for sewer lines.
c.
(b) Nothing contained in O.C.G.A. 12-7-1 et. Seq.this article shall prevent any local issuing authority
from adopting rules and regulations, ordinances, or resolutions which contain stream buffer requirements
that exceed the minimum requirements in sections 20-567 and this section.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(c), (d)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(c), (d)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-569. - No presumption of violation.
The fact that land disturbing activity for which a permit has been issued results in injury to
the property of another shall neither constitute proof of nor create a presumption of a violation of
the standards provided in this article or the terms of the permit.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(e)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(e)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-570. - Additional requirements.
Where the Director or the City director of Community Development finds, through
inspection, that property owners have been adversely affected due to violations clearly identified by
the Director or the City director of Community Development, or that the approved current plans do
not adequately address the features of the site, the Director or the City director of Community
Development can require additional BMPs, drawings, and revisions to comply with the minimum
requirements as outlined in this division.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(f)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 5(f)), 11-17-2008)
Secs. 20-571—20-589. - Reserved.
- DIVISION 4.-APPLICATION/ PERMIT PROCESS
Sec. 20-590. - General provisions.
(a)
The property owner, developer, and designated planners and engineers shall design and review
the :
(1) The general development plans before submittal:
(1)
The and detailed plans of the city shall reviewthat affect the tract to be developed and the area
surrounding it.
(2)
The City shall consult the zoning ordinanceresolution, stormwater management ordinance,
subdivision ordinance, flood damage prevention resolution, this article, and other ordinances which
regulate the development of land within the, jurisdictional boundaries of the city.
(b)
However, the property owner and/or operator areis the only partiesparty who may obtain a
permit.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(a)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(a)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-591. - Application requirements.
(a)
Prior to any land disturbing activity, the property in question must be part of an approved and
recorded legal lot of record (including, but not limited to, exemption plat, minor plat, or final plat).
Additionally, no land disturbing activity, including grading, excavating, filling, and foundation work, shall be
conducted within the city, until a land disturbance permit or a building permit (for those projects not
requiring a land disturbance permit under this article) shall have been issued by the community
development director allowing such activity, pursuant to the provisions herein provided. If a project is to
be developed in phases, then a separate land disturbance permit or building permit is required for each
phase not to exceed 25-acre increments and the development sequence should be followed on all
projects issued a land disturbance permit.
(b)
No person shall conduct any land disturbing activity within the city's jurisdictional boundaries
without first obtaining a permit from the city community development department or its successor to
perform such activity and provide a copy of Notice of Intent submitted to EPD if applicable. .
(c)
All developments, construction, improvements, utilities, and demolitions that occur within the
boundaries of the incorporated city limits that disturb more than 5,000 square feet of land shall be
required to submit an application for a land disturbance permit.
(d)
The application for a permit shall be submitted to the community development department and
must include the applicant's erosion and sedimentation control plan with supporting data, as necessary.
Said plans shall include, as a minimum, the data specified in section 20-592. Soil erosion and
sedimentation and pollution control plans, together with supporting data must demonstrate affirmatively
that the land disturbing activity proposed shall conform to the provisions of this section and section 20-
592. Applications for a permit will not be accepted unless accompanied by three copies of the applicant's
soil erosion, and sedimentation and pollution control plans and a physical address of the property owner
(post office box not acceptable). All applications shall contain a certification stating that the plan preparer
or the designee thereof visited the site prior to the creation of the plan or that such a visit was not
required in accordance with EPD Rule 391-3-7-10rules and regulations established by the board.
(e)
A minimum fee, as set by the city council, shall be charged for each acre, or fraction thereof, of
the project area.
(f)
In addition to the city's permitting fees, fees also will be assessed pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-5-23
(a)((5) ()(a); provided that such fees shall not exceed $80.00 per acre of land disturbing activity and these
fees shall be calculated and paid by the primary permittee as defined in the state general permit for each
acre of land disturbing activity included in the planned development or each phase of development. All
applicable fees shall be paid prior to issuance of the land disturbance permit. Half of such fees levied
shall be submitted to the division; except that any and all fees due from an entity which is required to give
notice pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-17(9) or (10) shall be submitted in full to the division, regardless of the
existence of a local issuing authority in the jurisdiction.
(g)
The permit applicant shall be required to post a bond (surety) in the form of cash prior to issuing
the permit. The bond amount shall be determined as established by the community development
department, but not exceeding $3,000.00 per acre or fraction thereof of the proposed land disturbing
activity. Surety bonds shall be: 1) on the bond form provided by the City; 2) properly executed by the
permit applicant and surety; and 3) issued by a surety company determined to be: a) in good standing
with the office of the Georgia Insurance and Fire Safety Commissioner; and b) listed in Circular 570
(Federal Register Vol. 62, No. 126) among companies holding certificates of authority as acceptable
sureties on Federal bonds and as acceptable reinsuring companies .
(1)
If the applicant does not comply with this article or with the conditions of the permit after issuance,
the city may call the bond or any part thereof to be forfeited and may use the proceeds to hire a
contractor to stabilize the site of the land disturbing activity and bring it into compliance. These corrective
actions may include, but are not limited to:
a. Desilting detention ponds, water bodies, stormwater facilities and roadways;
b. Installing a fence with locking device;
c. Restablishing damaged buffers; and
d. Similar or related actions.
(2)
If a permit applicant has had two or more outstanding violations of previous permits, this article,
or the Erosion and Sedimentation Act of 1975 (O.C.G.A. § 12-7-1 et seq.), as amended, within three
years prior to the date of filing of the application under consideration, the city may deny the permit
application.
(h)
If applicable, immediately upon receipt of an application and plan for a permit, the city shall refer
the application and plan to the, district for its review and approval or disapproval concerning the adequacy
of the erosion and sedimentation and pollution control plan. The district shall approve or disapprove a
plan within 35 days of receipt. Failure of the district to act within 35 days shall be considered an approval
of the pending plan. The results of the district review shall be forwarded to the city. No permit will be
issued unless the plan has been approved by the district, and any variances required by section 20 -568
(a) (165)(15) and (17616), and bonding, if required as per subsection (g) of this section, have been
obtained. Such review will not be required if the city and the district have entered into an agreement
which allows the city to conduct such review and approval of the plan without referring the application and
plan to the district. The Local Issuing Authority with plan review authority shall approve or disapprove a
revised plan submittal within 35 days of receipt. Failure of the Local Issuing Authority with plan review
authority to act within 35 days shall be considered an approval of the revised Plan submittal.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(b)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(b)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-592. - Plan requirements.
(a)
Plans must be prepared to meet the minimum requirements as contained in sections 20-567 and
20-568. Conformance with the minimum requirements may be attained through the use of this
articledesign criteria in the current issue of the Manual for Erosion and Sedimentation Control in
Georgia, published by the State Soil and Water Conservation as a guide; or through the use of more
stringent, alternate design criteria which conform to sound conservation and engineering practices. The
Manual for Erosion and Sedimentation Control in Georgia is hereby incorporated by reference into this
article. The plan for the land disturbing activity shall consider:
(1)
The interrelationship of the soil types;
(2)
Geological and hydrological characteristics;
(3)
Topography;
(4)
Watershed;
(5)
Vegetation;
(6)
Proposed permanent structures including roadways, constructed waterways, sediment control
and stormwater management facilities; and
(7)
Local ordinances and state laws.
(b)
Data required for site plan.
(1)
All the Narrative or notes, and other information required from : Notes or narrative to be located on the
site plan in general notes or in erosion and sedimentation control notes.
(2) Description of the appropriate Erosion, Sedimentation and Pollution Control Plan Review
Checklist established byexisting land use at the Commission as of January 1project site and description
of the year in whichproposed project.
(3) Name, address, and phone number of the property owner.
(4) Name and phone number of 24-hour local contact who is responsible for the erosion and
sedimentation controls.
(5) Size of the project, or the phase under construction, in acres.
(6) Activity schedule showing the anticipated started and completion dates for the project. Include
the statement, in bold letters, that "the installation of erosion and sedimentation control measures and
practices shall occur prior to or concurrent with land disturbing activity was permittedactivities."
(7) Stormwater and sedimentation management systems-storage capacity, hydrologic study, and
calculations, including off-site drainage areas.
(8) Vegetative plan for all temporary and permanent vegetative measures, including species,
planting dates, and seeding, fertilizer, lime, and mulching rates. The vegetative plan should show
options for yearround seeding.
(9) Detailed drawing for all structural practices. Specifications may follow guidelines set forth in the
Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia.
(10) Maintenance statement. The site plan shall contain the following statement: "Erosion and
sedimentation control measures will be maintained at all times. If full implementation of the approved
plan does not provide for effective erosion and sediment control, additional erosion and sediment
control measures shall be implemented to control or treat the sediment source."
(c)
Maps, drawings, and supportive computations shall bear the signature/seal of a registered or
certified designprofessional in engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, land surveying, or
erosion and sediment control. After December 31, 2006, all persons involved in land development
design, review, permitting, construction, monitoring, or inspection or any land disturbing activity shall meet
the education and training certification requirements, dependent on his or her level of involvement with
the process, as developed by the commission and in consultation with the Division and the Stakeholder
Advisory Board created pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 12-7-20. The certified plans shall contain:
(1) Graphic scale and north point or arrow indicating magnetic north.
(2) Vicinity maps showing the location of the project and existing streets.
(3) Boundary line survey.
(4) Delineation of the disturbed areas within the project boundary.
(5) Existing and planned contours, with an interval in accordance with the following:
TABLE INSET:
Map Scale Ground Slope Contour Interval (in ft.)
1 inch = 100 ft.
or larger scale Flat: 0%--2% 0.5 or 1
Rolling: 2%--8% 1 or 2
Steep: 8% or more 2, 5 or 10
(6) Adjacent areas and feature areas such as streams, lakes, residential areas, etc., which might be
affected should be indicated on the plan.
(7) Proposed structures or additions to existing structures and paved areas.
(8) Delineate the 25-foot horizontal buffer adjacent to the state waters and the specified width in
MRPA areas.
(9) Delineate the specified horizontal buffer along designated trout streams, where applicable.
(10) Location of erosion and sedimentation control measures and practices using coding symbols
from the Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia.
(d) Maintenance of all soil erosion and sedimentation control practices, whether temporary or
permanent, shall be at all times the responsibility of the property owner.
(Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(c)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-593. - Permits and development activity.
(a)
Permits shall be issued or denied as soon as practicable but, in any event, not later than 45 days
after receipt by the city of a completed application; providing variances and bonding are obtained ,where
necessary and all applicable fees have been paid prior to permit issuance. The permit shall include any
conditions under which the activity may be undertakenprovided that any necessary variances have been
obtained, bonding has been provided, and specifications developed and maintained by the public works
department and permitted by the community development department have been met.
(b)
No permit shall be issued by the city unless the erosion and sedimentation and pollution control
plan has been approved by the district or by the city, and unless the city has affirmatively determined that
the plan is in compliance with this article, any variances required by section 20-568(a)(141614) and
(151715) are obtained, bonding requirements, if necessary, as per section 20-591(g), are met and all
ordinances and rules and regulations in effect within the jurisdictional boundaries of the unincorporated
city are met. If the permit is denied, the reason for denial shall be furnished to the applicant.
(c)
If the tract is to be developed in phases, then a separate permit shall be required for each phase
to include the development sequence.
(d)
The permit may be suspended, revoked, or modified by the city, as to all or any portion of the
land affected by the plan, upon finding that the holder or his or her successor in title is not in compliance
with the approved erosion and sedimentation control plan or that the holder or his or her successor in title
is in violation of this article. A holder of a permit shall notify any successor in title to him or her of the
conditions contained in the permit as to all or any portion of the land affected by the approved plan.
(e)
The city may reject a permit application if the applicant has had two or more violations of previous permits
or the Erosion and Sedimentation Act permit requirements within three years prior to the date of the
application, in light of O.C.G.A. 12-7-7 (f) (1).basins shall not be allowed in a live stream.
(f)
(f) The permittee shall ensure that engineering and construction on any land within the city shall be
carried out in such a manner as to protect neighboring persons and property from damage or loss
resulting from stormwater runoff, soil erosion, or deposition upon private property or public streets or
water-transported silt or debris.
(g) If, through inspection, the community development director determines that the full
implementation of the approved plan does not provide for effective erosion and sedimentation control,
additional erosion and sedimentation control measures shall be implemented to control or treat the
sediment source.
(h) It shall constitute noncompliance with this article to engage in land disturbance activity involving
clearing, grading, timber harvesting, or grubbing without a permit, which activity may immediately warrant
citation.
(i) Design and installation of properly functioning detention facilities, including outflow and
overflow control devices, shall be the owner's responsibility. If any erosion control devices are damaged
or destroyed during grading or construction; all construction processes shall cease until the devices are
restored to their functioning capability. The owner, through an application for grading or construction
permits, accepts the responsibility of maintenance of the control devices.
(j) The owner and operator shall be responsible for the maintenance of the storm drainage
facilities during grading, construction, and for a 15-month period following the final approval of the
completed project. Maintenance will be construed to include preserving the enclosing walls or
impounding embankment or the detention basin and sedimentation ponds, in good condition; ensuring
structural soundness, functional adequacy, and freedom from sediment of all drainage structures; and
rectifying any unforeseen erosion problems.
(k) The developer shall provide stabilization by covering the soil with permanent seeding, sprigging,
or pivoting, producing long-term vegetative cover, temporary seeding producing short terra vegetative
cover, sodding or covering areas with a turf of perennial sod forming grass; and security fences for
safety purposes at detention facilities as prescribed by and prior to approval by the city.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(d)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 6(d)), 11-17-2008)
State law reference—Permits for land disturbing activities, O.C.G.A. §§ 12-7-7, 12-7-9.
Sec. 20-594. - City or county construction; compliance with article.
All engineering and construction involving land disturbance performed by or on behalf of
the city and under the direction of the public works department or any other city entity, whether
such engineering or construction is being accomplished on existing and proposed public land or on
public easement, shall comply with the requirements of this article and any other ordinances
relating to land disturbance, as are applied to private persons and the division shall enforce such
requirements upon the Citysubdivision II of division 2 and division 3 of this article.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 7), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 7), 11-17-2008)
Secs. 20-595—20-613. - Reserved.
Secs. 20-617—20-635. -DIVISION 5. RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
Sec. 20-614. Building permit required.
No land disturbing activity or other work, including moving and demolition, shall commence on a project
until the owner or the contractor undertaking the work shall have applied for, and been issued, a land
disturbance permit or building permit by the community development director. The owner/contractor
shall prominently display on site the building permit, a signed erosion and sedimentation control
agreement and approved site plan in full public view, until issuance of certification of occupancy.
Demolition projects shall be required to install BMPs where necessary to prevent erosion. Failure to
install BMPs shall constitute noncompliance with this article.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 8(a)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 8(a)), 11-
17-2008)
Sec. 20-615. Notice to comply.
The community development director shall issue a notice to comply for failure to either install or
maintain the best management practices (BMPs), even though sediments remain contained within the
boundaries of the property by the use of debris basins, sediment basins, sediment barriers, and
construction exits in accordance with this article. Subsequently, a stop work order shall be issued if
compliance with a notice to comply is not achieved by the end of the specified compliance period of five
days.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 8(b)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 8(b)), 11-
17-2008)
Sec. 20-616. Stop work order.
The community development director or his or her representative shall issue an order to cease all work
(i.e., stop work order) on a project covered by this section if any work on that project is proceeding
without a land disturbance permit or building permit or, when silt, mud, or other waterborne debris
leave the property boundary or, if such a permit has been issued, it is found by the community
development director or his or her representative that all or any portion of the project remains out of
compliance with any requirements of sections 20-567 and 20-568, any other provision of this article or
any other city ordinance, regulation or requirement after the specified compliance period or a site has
been in violation at least two prior occurrences, to include any applicable fines and penalties. All other
requirements of section 20-539 also apply to projects covered by this section.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 8(c)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 8(c)), 11-
17-2008)
Secs. 20-617--20-635. Reserved.
- DIVISION 5.- DESIGN PROFESSIONAL INSPECTION
Sec. 20-636. - Required; exception.
The design professional referenced in the state general permit (except when the primary
permittee has requested in writing and EPD has agreed to an alternative design professional) must
inspect the installation of BMPs which the design professional designed within seven days after the
initial construction activities commenced. The design professional shall determine if these BMPs
have been installed and are being maintained as designed. The design professional shall report the
results of the inspection to the primary permittee within seven days and the primary permittee must
correct all deficiencies within two business days of receipt of the inspection report from the design
professional unless weather related site conditions are such that additional time is required. The
community development director shall withhold the occupancy permit until full compliance has been
achieved.
(Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 9(a)), 11-17-2008)
Sec. 20-637. - Additional reporting requirements.
Applicants/owners/operators shall provide the community development director with a copy
of any monitoring results submitted to EPD regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES). Reports shall be in a format as prescribed by EPD. A copy of the notice of intent
which has been sent to EPD in compliance with the permit requirements must be presented to the
community development director prior to the issuance of any land -disturbance permit.
(Ord. No. 06-12-72, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 9(b)), 12-7-2006; Ord. No. 08-11-29, § 1(ch. 14, art. 7, § 9(b)), 11-17-2008)
Secs. 20-638—20-656. - Reserved.
City of Milton
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Milton, Georgia 30004
1
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Matt Marietta
Date: Submitted on April 29, 2010for the May 17, 2010 Regular Council Meeting
Agenda Item: Approval for the Removal of Billy Lovelace Hauling from the List of Approved
Solid Waste Haulers for the City of Milton Due to Non-Compliance with the
Ordinance
City Manager’s Office Recommendation
Approve the revocation of the non-exclusive solid waste management contract with Billy
Lovelace Hauling due to repeated infractions of the solid waste ordinance, and continued non-
compliance with its requirements despite notification from code enforcement and the police
department.
Discussion
Billy Lovelace Hauling is currently on our approved haulers list. However, a review of our
records indicate that the company has not paid the required infrastructure maintenance fee
since June 2008. Additionally, code enforcement has received numerous complaints of shoddy
equipment (improperly covered beds, etc) and vehicles/trailers abandoned at various places
around the City. In addition, citizens have filed police reports regarding the professionalism and
improper storage of hauling-related property at improper places and times (09-01845).
The cumulative case of a less than professional operation as noted by citizen complaints and
city observations constitute breach of the ordinance sufficient for removal from the list. The fact
that Lovelace has not paid the infrastructure fee in nearly two years further solidifies the need
for this action.
In January 2010, I contacted all of the approved solid waste haulers, reiterated the need for
compliance with the ordinance, and provided them with a copy of it (or advised them of the link
from the City website). Although the phone call was made to the telephone number Lovelace
was the only company that did not respond to my calls. Additionally, code enforcement
provided a notice of violation in February 10, 2010 to their address of record. They have not
responded to this either.
Funding and Fiscal Impact
Since they haven’t been paying the required fee anyway, there will be no financial impact.
Concurrent Review
Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager
RESOULTION NO.
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF FULTON
A RESOLUTION REMOVING BILLY LOVELACE HAULING FROM THE LIST OF
APPROVED HAULERS PURSUANT TO THE MILTON SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
The Mayor and Council of the city of Milton hereby resolves:
SECTION 1. That the City of Milton has properly enacted an ordinance to regulate solid
waste management within its corporate boundaries.
SECTION 2. Billy Lovelace Hauling, one of the approved haulers, is in breach of several
requirements of this ordinance.
SECTION 3. Billy Lovelace Hauling is removed from the list of approved haulers in the
City of Milton and is no longer allowed to provide solid waste service within Milton’s
corporate limits.
BE IT RESOLVED, on this 17th day of May, 2010 at 6:00 pm by the Mayor and Council of the
City of Milton, Georgia.
_______________________________
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Sudie Gordon, Interim City Clerk
(Seal)
City of Milton, Georgia
Fiscal Year 2010
Summary of Departmental Budget Amendments #1
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
2
The goal of the fiscal year 2010 budget amendment is to revise departmental budgets and interfund transfers based
on activity-to-date and future projections. The intent of the amendment is to capture the actual expenditures and
savings from the City’s transition to bringing services in-house.
GENERAL FUND
The General Fund is the principal operating fund of the government and is used to facilitate current year operations.
General Fund revenues have unrestricted use. Expenditure requests are categorized into two categories:
Salary/Benefits and Maintenance/Operating. Salary / benefits line items include salaries, overtime, vacation pay,
retirement and other associated payroll expenditures. The maintenance/ operating category includes expenditures
related to operational line items such as, supplies, professional fees, training, dues/fees, travel, utilities,
communications, machinery & equipment, etc.
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY:
Revenue Appropriation Increase 6,822,115
Expenditure Appropriation Increase 6,822,115
Net Revenue/(Expenditure) Requests:-
Revenue Amendments:
As noted above, a recommended increase of approximately $6.8 million is necessary to account for the City’s
revenue streams in the current fiscal year. This increase is deceiving in that it is truly accounting for prior year
property taxes that were not initially projected for FY 2010. As you recall, Fulton County was severely late in sending
the 2009 tax digest out to the City. This posed a great problem for Milton because the property taxes that are
normally billed at the end of our fiscal year on September 1 weren’t sent out until October 31, which was one month
after FY 2009 ended. As a result, the City could not meet FY 2009 projections for property taxes and was forced to
show a deficit of a little over $1.6 million. The City’s reserves were replenished in December 2009 when the property
tax bills became due. Please note the required amount the City should carry in reserves is equal to two months of
operating appropriations. This totals to approximately $2.58 million.
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
3
APPROVED
BUDGET
ACTUALS AS
OF 4/13/10
BUDGET
BALANCE
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FINAL
AMENDED
BUDGET
TAXES
Current Yr Property Taxes-Real $ 7,745,000 $ - $ 7,745,000 $ - $ 7,745,000
Current Yr Property Taxes-Ut ility 52,549 50,691 1,858 - 52,549
Prior Yr Property Taxes-Real 1,200,000 7,735,424 (6,535,424) 6,700,000 7,900,000
Current Yr Prop Taxes-Personal 140,000 - 140,000 - 140,000
Motor Vehicle Tax 500,000 190,270 309,730 (50,000) 450,000
Intangible Tax 190,000 66,032 123,968 - 190,000
Prior Yr Prop Taxes-Personal 40,000 162,746 (122,746) 122,746 162,746
Real Estate Transfer Tax 35,000 16,131 18,869 - 35,000
Franchise Fees 1,700,000 569,670 1,130,330 - 1,700,000
Local Option Sales Tax 3,400,000 1,550,095 1,849,905 - 3,400,000
Alcohol Beverage Excise Tax 254,000 111,256 142,744 23,000 277,000
Business & Occupation Tax 575,000 517,609 57,391 - 575,000
Insurance Premium Tax 850,000 - 850,000 - 850,000
Financial Institution Tax 23,000 26,158 (3,158) 3,158 26,158
Penalties & Interest-Real Prop 50,000 79,135 (29,135) 32,000 82,000
Penalties & Interest-Pers Prop 1,000 1,457 (457) 457 1,457
Penalties & Interest-Business Lic 2,000 126 1,874 - 2,000
Penalties & Interest-Other - 3,189 (3,189) 3,189 3,189
LICENSES & PERMITS
Alcohol Beverage Licenses 122,000 128,700 (6,700) 6,700 128,700
Advertising Fee 900 1,000 (100) 100 1,000
Pouring Permit 3,300 3,115 185 - 3,300
Solicitation Permit 390 1,950 (1,560) 1,560 1,950
Zoning & Land Use Permits 2,500 4,462 (1,962) 2,000 4,500
Land Disturbance 20,000 760 19,240 - 20,000
Modification 2,000 1,050 950 - 2,000
Variance 8,000 3,150 4,850 - 8,000
Seasonal & Special Events 120 170 (50) - 120
Sign Permits 7,000 3,719 3,281 - 7,000
Building Permits 50,000 29,928 20,072 - 50,000
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
Finance Admin Fee 70,000 56,425 13,575 (2,000) 68,000
Court Admin Fee 145,000 55,209 89,791 - 145,000
Maps & Cert Letters 500 100 400 - 500
Plan Review Fees 45,000 19,705 25,295 - 45,000
Open Records Fees 600 941 (341) - 600
Development Bond Fee 3,000 - 3,000 - 3,000
Accident Reports 5,000 3,216 1,784 - 5,000
Expungement Fees 300 400 (100) 200 500
Alarm Registration 5,000 4,125 875 - 5,000
False Alarms 15,000 7,350 7,650 - 15,000
Fire Plan Review 1,400 (10) 1,410 - 1,400
Fire Inspection 600 448 152 - 600
Background Check Fees 7,000 6,350 650 - 7,000
Facility Rental 2,500 - 2,500 - 2,500
Bad Check Fees 260 150 110 - 260
HYA Fees 25,000 - 25,000 (25,000) -
FINES & FORFEITURES
Fines & Forfeitures 450,000 257,803 192,197 - 450,000
Ordinance Fines 2,500 2,208 293 - 2,500
INVESTMENT INCOME
Interest Revenue 5,000 8,492 (3,492) - 5,000
Realized Gain/Loss on Investmt 15,000 1,978 13,022 - 15,000
CONTRIBUTIONS & DONATIONS
Donation Revenue-Pub Sfty - 1,000 (1,000) 1,000 1,000
Public Safety Fund - 2,370 (2,370) 2,370 2,370
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE
Insurance Proceeds-Pub Sfty - 635 (635) 635 635
Other Misc Revenue 37,802 - 37,802 - 37,802
Over/Short Cash Drawer - 6,126 (6,126) - -
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES
Operating Transfers In-Htl/Mtl Fd 7,000 - 7,000 - 7,000
TOTAL $ 17,817,221 $ 11,693,014 $ 6,124,207 $ 6,822,115 $ 24,639,336
FY 2010
REVENUE SOURCE
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
4
Expenditure Amendments:
The recommended expenditure amendments are presented on the following pages by department.
DEPARTMENT
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
FY 2010
FINAL
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 2010
Mayor & Council 555,565 193,296 157,189 10,425 167,614
City Clerk 535,812 650,477 572,785 (185,558) 387,227
City Manager 393,809 191,702 395,023 450 395,473
General Administration - - - 518,215 518,215
Finance 824,050 1,136,717 1,029,285 (258,924) 770,361
Legal 280,528 179,943 200,000 40,000 240,000
IT 682,064 975,986 1,073,453 (325,885) 747,568
Human Resources 358,832 337,410 334,251 (103,006) 231,245
Risk Management 158,445 171,175 195,252 (19,631) 175,621
General Govt Buildings 362,255 447,073 482,415 (482,415) -
Public Info & Marketing 175,236 499,884 493,811 (248,183) 245,628
Municipal Court 464,116 437,542 244,982 29,819 274,801
Public Safety:
Administration 1,494,742 678,648 - - -
Police 1,442,529 1,616,863 2,583,623 (116,381) 2,467,242
Fire 2,957,243 3,322,919 4,189,001 (128,082) 4,060,919
EMS Operations 33,062 132,250 132,250 - 132,250
Public Works 1,756,381 2,190,954 2,024,601 (30,371) 1,994,230
Parks & Recreation 159,413 158,457 140,339 2,696 143,035
Community Development 1,365,308 1,620,631 1,379,700 (492,130) 887,570
Debt Service 857,728 742,984 709,395 7,146 716,541
Other Financing Uses 1,963,410 4,421,644 1,479,866 8,603,930 10,083,796
Total Expenditures 16,820,529 20,106,554 17,817,221 6,822,115 24,639,336
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
5
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
REQUESTED
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ 109,278 $ 101,389 $ 101,000 $ - $ 101,000
Benefits 11,182 15,451 7,299 1,000 8,299
Stipend:
District 1 - - 2,720 - 2,720
District 2 2,000 2,720 2,720 - 2,720
District 3 - - 2,720 - 2,720
District 4 404 - 2,720 - 2,720
District 5 1,699 2,249 2,720 - 2,720
District 6 1,574 850 2,720 - 2,720
Mayor 1,299 2,733 3,720 - 3,720
Professional Fees 73,645 49,589 2,500 3,000 5,500
Professional Fees - Contracted 341,032 - - - -
Communications 98 - - - -
Advertising 400 475 600 - 600
Printing - - - 225 225
Travel 5,324 8,762 13,800 (300) 13,500
Dues & Fees 1,200 - - 5,000 5,000
Education & Training 4,785 4,710 8,000 - 8,000
General Supplies 816 1,860 1,500 - 1,500
Food/Meals 486 676 700 1,500 2,200
Promotional - 1,251 1,000 - 1,000
Non-recurring 343 581 750 - 750
TOTAL $ 555,565 $ 193,296 $ 157,189 $ 10,425 $ 167,614
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Benefits 1,000
2. Professional Fees Facilitators for council retreat 3,000
3. Printing Business cards for mayor and council 225
4. Dues and Fees Annual support for Greater North Fulton Chamber 5,000
5. Food/Meals 1,500
Total Increase 10,725$
DECREASE
6. Travel Travel not required for council retreat (300)
Total Decrease (300)$
TOTAL MAYOR & COUNCIL BUDGET AMENDMENTS 10,425$
To cover cost of citizen meeting food (previously paid
out of CH2M Hill contract)
To cover adjusted costs of workers comp based on
payroll audit
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
6
CITY CLERK
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ 82,462 $ 84,291 $ 42,980 $ 104,803 $ 147,783
Benefits 16,739 14,426 8,619 19,299 27,918
3 FTEs
Professional Fees 47,600 - 105,627 (57,553) 48,074
Professional Fees - Contracted 375,135 498,714 368,824 (266,534) 102,290
Communications 641 1,051 900 77 977
Advertising - - - 500 500
Printing - - - 150 150
Travel 395 1,698 1,500 - 1,500
Dues/Fees 234 152 235 150 385
Education/Training 1,428 1,331 1,600 - 1,600
Contract Labor - - - 14,000 14,000
Maintenance Contracts 1,140 - 41,300 - 41,300
General Supplies 652 348 600 (600) -
Food/Meals 168 139 600 - 600
Other Equipment - 48,327 - 150 150
Digital Recorder 9,217 - - - -
TOTAL $ 535,812 $ 650,477 $ 572,785 $ (185,558) $ 387,227
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
The following increases account for the costs that were previously covered in the CH2M Hill contract:
1. Salaries and Benefits 124,102
2. Communications Monthly cell phone expense for Deputy City Clerk 77
3. Advertising Public hearing ads 500
4. Printing Name plates and business cards 150
5. Dues/Fees 150
6. Contract Labor Temporary Receptionist 14,000
7. Other Equipment Cell phone for Deputy City Clerk 150
Total Increase 139,129$
DECREASE
8. Professional Fees Actual cost of election was lower than anticipated (57,553)
9. Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (266,534)
10.General Supplies Move supplies to General Administration department (600)
Total Decrease (324,687)$
TOTAL CITY CLERK BUDGET AMENDMENTS (185,558)$
Amendment Reason
Various membership dues
Deputy City Clerk, Records Clerk and Receptionist
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
7
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries and Wages $ 139,850 $ 147,177 $ 306,800 $ - $ 306,800
Benefits 22,863 30,823 65,448 1,200 66,648
3 FTEs
Professional Fees 6,076 97 3,500 - 3,500
Professional Fees - Contracted 204,619 - - - -
Communications 1,173 1,165 2,400 - 2,400
Advertising 1,366 - - - -
Printing - 93 200 - 200
Travel 8,617 5,184 3,500 - 3,500
Dues/Fees 7,187 3,764 7,825 - 7,825
Education/Training 990 2,270 2,500 - 2,500
General Supplies (78) 628 1,000 (1,000) -
Food/Meals 428 464 1,000 250 1,250
Promotional Items - - 300 - 300
Machinery 719 37 250 - 250
Non-Recurring - - 300 - 300
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 393,809 $ 191,702 $ 395,023 $ 450 $ 395,473
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Benefits 1,200
2. Food/Meals Business lunches 250
Total Increase 1,450$
DECREASE
3. General Supplies Move supplies to General Administration department (1,000)
Total Decrease (1,000)$
TOTAL CITY MANAGER BUDGET AMENDMENTS 450$
CITY MANAGER
Amendment Reason
To cover adjusted costs of workers comp based on
payroll audit
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
8
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Professional Fees - - - 150 150
Rental Land & Buildings - - - 456,015 456,015
Postage - - - 5,000 5,000
Maintenance Contracts - - - 5,650 5,650
Other Purchased Services - - - 26,400 26,400
General Supplies - - - 25,000 25,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ - $ - $ - $ 518,215 $ 518,215
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Professional Fees 150
2. Rental Land & Buildings Move City Hall lease expense from General Gov't Bldgs 456,015
3. Postage 5,000
4. Maintenance Contracts Shredding & coffee service-previously covered by CH2M 5,650
5. Other Purchased Services 26,400
6. General Supplies Supplies - previously covered in CH2M contract 25,000
Total Increase 518,215$
TOTAL GENERAL ADMIN BUDGET AMENDMENTS 518,215$
Postage - previously covered in CH2M contract
Additional expenses not covered by lease - moved from
General Gov't Bldgs department
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
Amendment Reason
Annual inspection of City Hall fire extinguishers
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
9
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ 27,038 $ 92,250 $ 151,301 $ 243,551
Benefits 2,899 3,469 18,023 39,854 54,877
5 FTEs
Administrative Fees 20,435 46,497 60,000 5,000 65,000
Professional Fees 36,000 50,806 46,449 (4,480) 41,969
Professional Fees - Contracted 754,131 1,004,354 792,543 (572,529) 220,014
Communications 197 312 2,000 (1,200) 800
Postage 4,252 - 4,500 5,000 9,500
Advertising 1,296 709 2,900 - 2,900
Printing 4,625 1,870 6,600 1,760 8,360
Travel - 1,017 1,500 - 1,500
Dues & Fees 215 50 370 205 575
Education & Training - 504 1,900 - 1,900
Maintenance Contracts - - - 116,415 116,415
General Supplies - 32 - - -
Food/Meals - - - - -
Furniture & Fixtures - - - - -
Machinery & Equipment - 59 250 (250) -
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 824,050 $ 1,136,717 $ 1,029,285 $ (258,924) $ 770,361
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Administrative Fees 5,000
2. Postage Postage for 2009 tax billing hit in FY 2010 5,000
3. Printing 1,760
The following increases account for the costs that were previously covered in the CH2M Hill contract:
4. Salaries and Benefits 191,155
5. Dues & Fees Membership dues for GGFOA 205
6. Maintenance Contracts Monthly maintenance cost for HTE software 116,415
Total Increase 319,535$
DECREASE
8. Professional Fees Appropriations for tax bill mailing fees not necessary (4,480)
9. Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (572,529)
10.Communications Bring monthly cell phone costs in line with actual exp (1,200)
11.Machinery & Equipment Cell phone purchase not necessary (250)
Total Decrease (578,459)$
TOTAL FINANCE BUDGET AMENDMENTS (258,924)$
Amendment Reason
Budget/Procurement Coord, Accountant, Revenue
Clerk, and Disbursement Specialist
Printing for 2009 tax billing hit in FY 2010
Credit card maintenance fees were higher than
anticipated due to the late billing of the property taxes
FINANCE
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
10
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Legal Fees 280,528 179,943 200,000 40,000 240,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 280,528 $ 179,943 $ 200,000 $ 40,000 $ 240,000
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Legal Fees 40,000
Total Increase 40,000$
TOTAL LEGAL BUDGET AMENDMENTS 40,000$
LEGAL
Amendment Reason
To cover costs of legal matters not anticipated
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
11
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ - $ 87,125 $ 98,189 $ 185,314
Benefits - - 18,391 16,886 35,277
3 FTEs
Professional Fees - 9,191 32,120 (32,120) -
Professional Fees-Contracted 682,064 966,795 927,067 (669,829) 257,238
Communications - - 1,000 64,627 65,627
Travel - - 1,500 (1,000) 500
Education & Training - - 500 1,000 1,500
Maintenance Contracts - - - 13,527 13,527
Food/Meals - - - 57 57
Computer/Software - - - 124,724 124,724
Computer/Hardware - - - 58,554 58,554
Machinery & Equipment - - 5,750 (500) 5,250
TOTAL $ 682,064 $ 975,986 $ 1,073,453 $ (325,885) $ 747,568
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
The following increases account for the costs that were previously covered in the CH2M Hill contract:
1. Salaries and Benefits 115,075
2. Communications 64,627
3. Education & Training Training classes for two employees 1,000
4. Maintenance Contracts Various maintenance for servers and software 13,527
5. Food/Meals Employee meeting 57
6. Computer/Software Various software costs 124,724
7. Computer/Hardware Various hardware costs 58,554
Total Increase 377,564$
DECREASE
8. Professional Fees Move bandwidth budget to Communications line item (32,120)
9. Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (669,829)
10.Travel Travel costs not anticipated for employee ed & training (1,000)
11.Machinery & Equipment Cut desktop printer (500)
Total Decrease (703,449)$
TOTAL IT BUDGET AMENDMENTS (325,885)$
Cost of monthly cell phone for two employees and cost
of City Hall external communications
IT Manager and GIS Analyst
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
12
HUMAN RESOURCES
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ - $ 140,000 $ (13,300) $ 126,700
Benefits - - 30,503 (9,903) 20,600
2 FTEs
Administrative Fees 16,506 7,705 27,996 (3,000) 24,996
Professional Fees 663 - 8,000 - 8,000
Professional Fees - Contracted 341,032 329,705 97,137 (70,203) 26,934
Communications - - 1,200 - 1,200
Advertising - - 3,500 - 3,500
Printing 631 - 10,000 - 10,000
Travel - - 1,500 - 1,500
Dues & Fees - - 615 - 615
Education & Training - - 1,500 - 1,500
Food/Meals - - 5,000 - 5,000
Furniture & Fixtures - - 4,000 (3,500) 500
Machinery & Equipment - - 3,300 (3,100) 200
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 358,832 $ 337,410 $ 334,251 $ (103,006) $ 231,245
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
DECREASE
1. Salaries & Benefits Bring in line with actual expenses (23,203)
2. Administrative Fees Performing retirement cost study in-house (3,000)
3. Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (70,203)
4. Furniture & Fixtures Office furniture not needed (3,500)
5. Machinery & Equipment Computer and printer not needed (3,100)
Total Decrease (103,006)$
TOTAL HR BUDGET AMENDMENTS (103,006)$
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
13
RISK MANAGEMENT
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Insurance: - - - - -
General Liability 35,866 36,393 54,608 (14,369) 40,239
Law Enforcement Liability 12,124 9,320 9,737 (450) 9,287
Public Officials Liabiltiy 61,433 68,977 70,609 (4,007) 66,602
Automobile Liability 20,402 25,978 26,592 (1,013) 25,579
Property & Equipment Liability 4,867 4,029 4,030 274 4,304
Fidelity Bond 41 - - - -
Automobile Physical Damage 9,096 10,615 10,839 (104) 10,735
Boiler & Machinery 829 733 740 60 800
Claims and Adjustments 12,497 12,098 15,000 - 15,000
Police Animal Mortality 525 1,234 1,260 (10) 1,250
Crime/Fidelity 765 1,799 1,837 (12) 1,825
Unallocated - - - - -
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 158,445 $ 171,175 $ 195,252 $ (19,631) $ 175,621
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
Bring budget in line with actual costs (19,631)
Total Decrease (19,631)$
TOTAL RISK MGMT BUDGET AMENDMENTS (19,631)$
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
14
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Rental Land & Buildings 362,255 447,073 456,015 (456,015) -
Other Purchased Services - - 26,400 (26,400) -
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 362,255 $ 447,073 $ 482,415 $ (482,415) $ -
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
DECREASE
Transfer budget to General Administration department (482,415)
Total Decrease (482,415)$
TOTAL GEN GOVT BLDG BUDGET AMENDMENTS (482,415)$
GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
15
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ - $ - $ 63,100 $ 63,100
Benefits - - - 15,433 15,433
1 FTE
Professional Fees 540 - 1,000 10,780 11,780
Professional Fees - Contracted 170,516 494,558 482,151 (348,387) 133,764
Communications - - - 1,530 1,530
Postage 4,180 4,867 10,000 (6,267) 3,733
Advertising - 459 660 - 660
Printing - - - 14,608 14,608
General Supplies - - - - -
Furniture & Fixtures - - - - -
Other Equipment - - - 1,020 1,020
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 175,236 $ 499,884 $ 493,811 $ (248,183) $ 245,628
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
The following increases account for the costs that were previously covered in the CH2M Hill contract:
1. Salaries and Benefits 78,533
2. Professional Fees 10,780
3. Communications Monthly cell phone service 1,530
4. Printing Annual report printing 14,608
5. Other Equipment Camera equipment 1,020
Total Increase 106,471$
DECREASE
6. Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (348,387)
7. Postage Cut bi-annual report mailing (6,267)
Total Decrease (354,654)$
TOTAL PUBLIC INFO BUDGET AMENDMENTS (248,183)$
Website design
PUBLIC INFORMATION & MARKETING
Amendment Reason
Communications Manager
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
16
MUNICIPAL COURT
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Regular Employees $ 58,206 $ 70,302 $ 199,455 $ 15,614 $ 215,069
Benefits 8,206 16,106 19,777 14,705 34,182
4 FTEs
Professional Fees 13,547 11,085 15,000 - 15,000
Professional Fees - Contracted 375,135 332,476 - - -
Communications 4,567 4,061 5,000 (500) 4,500
Printing - - 1,500 - 1,500
Travel 2,621 1,116 2,000 - 2,000
Dues & Fees 555 125 175 - 175
Education & Training 952 900 800 - 800
Maintenance Contracts 200 289 270 - 270
General Supplies 103 197 - - -
Food/Meals 20 526 - - -
Uniforms - 351 250 - 250
Furniture & Fixtures - - 755 - 755
TOTAL $ 464,116 $ 437,542 $ 244,982 $ 29,819 $ 274,801
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Salaries 15,614
2. Benefits 14,705
Total Increase 30,319$
DECREASE
3. Communications GCIC Access costs were eliminated (500)
Total Decrease (500)$
TOTAL MUNICIPAL COURT BUDGET AMENDMENTS 29,819$
Bring budget in line with costs
Amendment Reason
To account for 1/2 payout of former City/Court Clerk
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
17
POLICE
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ 954,013 $ 1,086,508 $ 1,425,671 $ (75,000) $ 1,350,671
Benefits 371,838 - 615,565 (28,710) 586,855
30.5 FTEs
Professional Fees 5,703 5,103 29,775 - 29,775
Professional Fees-Investigations - - 1,500 - 1,500
Equipment R & M - - 6,300 - 6,300
Vehicle R & M - - 51,500 - 51,500
Communications 29,088 18,278 22,656 - 22,656
Printing - - 5,000 - 5,000
Travel 4,911 1,536 3,500 - 3,500
Dues & Fees 190 665 1,460 - 1,460
Education & Training 5,022 14,457 15,550 - 15,550
Maintenance Contracts 395 10,230 170,556 - 170,556
General Supplies 9,467 12,334 19,888 - 19,888
General Supplies-Investigations 1,249 - 100 - 100
Food/Meals - - 500 - 500
Gasoline/Diesel - - 125,000 (35,000) 90,000
Uniforms 19,099 19,269 31,000 - 31,000
Furniture & Fixtures 534 730 730 - 730
Computer Software 1,185 - 4,000 - 4,000
Other Equipment: - 7,997 14,225 - 14,225
Cell Phones (18) 256 500 - 500
Weaponry 8,309 23,024 4,200 - 4,200
Cameras 770 - 500 - 500
Motorola Radios 8,504 17,862 12,000 18,671 30,671
Hardware - - 6,300 3,658 9,958
Misc Equipment-Investigations 22,271 - 15,647 - 15,647
TOTAL $ 1,442,529 $ 1,616,863 $ 2,583,623 $ (116,381) $ 2,467,242
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Motorola Radios Budgeted with new vehicles in Cap Proj Fund 18,671
2. Hardware ICOP Digital-budgeted with new vehicles in Cap Proj Fd 3,658
Total Increase 22,329$
DECREASE
3. Salaries & Benefis (103,710)
4. Gasoline/Diesel Costs are lower than anticipated (35,000)
Total Decrease (138,710)$
TOTAL POLICE BUDGET AMENDMENTS (116,381)$
New personnel started later in the fiscal year than
anticipated
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
18
FIRE
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ 1,910,899 $ 2,164,674 $ 2,475,172 (38,500) $ 2,436,672
Benefits 649,877 743,160 961,097 (70,152) 890,945
51 FTEs
Professional Fees 33,149 23,681 37,950 (800) 37,150
Professional Fees/Contracted - - - - -
Equipment R & M 1,088 7,168 102,245 - 102,245
Facilities R & M 7,254 8,200 9,000 - 9,000
Vehicle R & M - - 700 - 700
Grounds R & M - - 6,000 - 6,000
Rental Land & Buildings 179,451 220,273 220,197 - 220,197
Rental Equip & Vehicles 573 761 800 - 800
Communications 21,834 22,487 25,702 - 25,702
Travel 3,542 1,603 3,000 - 3,000
Dues & Fees 3,371 439 5,025 - 5,025
Education & Training 6,769 10,628 23,543 - 23,543
Maintenance Contracts - 2,099 31,548 - 31,548
General Supplies-Suppression 19,303 25,365 33,525 - 33,525
General Supplies-Prevention - 4,027 25,010 (10,000) 15,010
Water/Sewage 5,441 5,070 4,200 - 4,200
Natural Gas 18,867 18,183 21,000 - 21,000
Electricity 25,177 25,488 22,000 - 22,000
Cable Service - 2,420 - - -
Gasoline/Diesel - - 78,000 (5,000) 73,000
Food/Meals - 40 200 - 200
Telecommunications 2,707 - 2,400 - 2,400
Uniforms 63,233 30,630 48,100 (3,630) 44,470
Machinery 3,133 - 3,600 - 3,600
Furniture & Fixtures-Prevention 1,242 2,000 2,557 - 2,557
Computer/Hardware-Prevention - - 445 - 445
Other Equipment - 3,807 45,585 - 45,585
Other Equipment-Cell Phones 334 717 400 - 400
TOTAL $ 2,957,243 $ 3,322,919 $ 4,189,001 $ (128,082) $ 4,060,919
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
DECREASE
1. Salaries and Benefits
(108,652)
2. Professional Fees Eliminated recruitment psych testing (800)
3. General Supplies-Prevention Cut costs of Heart Ready City supplies (10,000)
4. Gasoline/Diesel Costs are lower than anticipated (5,000)
5. Uniforms Costs are lower than anticipated (3,630)
Total Decrease (128,082)$
TOTAL FIRE BUDGET AMENDMENTS (128,082)$
There was a misunderstanding regarding personnel and
the requested positions. Bringing this budget in line
with actual expenses.
Amendment Reason
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
19
PUBLIC WORKS
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ - $ - $ 217,000 $ 217,000
Benefits - - - 66,050 66,050
4.5 FTEs
Professional Fees 56,780 50,867 93,800 - 93,800
Professional Fees-Contracted 1,364,128 1,813,267 1,503,261 (415,876) 1,087,385
Equipment R&M - 6,224 25,000 - 25,000
Vehicle R & M - - - 2,000 2,000
Grounds R & M - - 20,000 - 20,000
Road R & M 35,849 4,200 - 55,000 55,000
Communications - - - 2,200 2,200
Advertising - 162 - - -
Other Purchased Service 3,495 - - 6,000 6,000
Printing - - - 100 100
Dues & Fees - - - 300 300
Education & Training - - - 1,610 1,610
Maintenance Contracts - - 50,000 - 50,000
General Supplies 235 1,143 5,000 - 5,000
Electricity 295,893 305,040 307,540 - 307,540
Uniforms - - - 1,552 1,552
Other Equipment - 10,051 20,000 26,116 46,116
Motorola Radios - - - 7,577 7,577
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 1,756,381 $ 2,190,954 $ 2,024,601 $ (30,371) $ 1,994,230
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
The following increases account for the costs that were previously covered in the CH2M Hill contract:
1. Salaries and Benefits 283,050
2. Vehicle R & M 2,000
3. Road R & M Pothole repairs and maintenance 55,000
4. Communications Monthly cell phone/radio costs 2,200
5. Other Purchased Service Guardrail repair 6,000
6. Printing Business cards 100
7. Dues and Fees Membership dues 300
8. Education & Training Staff education and training 1,610
9. Uniforms Field staff uniforms 1,552
10.Other Equipment 26,116
11. Motorola Radios Radios for vehicles 7,577
Total Increase 385,505$
DECREASE
6. Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (415,876)
Total Decrease (415,876)$
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS BUDGET AMENDMENTS (30,371)$
Vehicle repairs and maintenance
After market vehicle supplies, sand spreaders and
various other small equipment
Amendment Reason
PW Director, PW Manager, Field Super., Citizen
Responder, part-time Equipment Operator
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
20
PARKS & RECREATION
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ - $ 77,500 $ (14,400) $ 63,100
Benefits - - 19,738 (3,004) 16,734
1 FTEs
Professional Fees 2,361 57,156 2,000 - 2,000
Professional Fees - Contracted 136,413 56,863 9,000 16,200 25,200
Facility R & M 875 16,734 2,650 - 2,650
Grounds R&M - 3,252 - 3,500 3,500
Communications - - 675 - 675
Printing - - - 100 100
Travel - - 1,000 - 1,000
Dues & Fees - - 525 - 525
Education & Training - - 500 300 800
Contract Labor - - 1,000 - 1,000
General Supplies - 596 2,000 - 2,000
Water Sewage 3,136 3,840 3,635 - 3,635
Natural Gas 1,549 1,375 1,466 - 1,466
Electricity 15,080 18,641 18,500 - 18,500
Food/Meals - - 150 - 150
Other Equipment - - - - -
TOTAL $ 159,413 $ 158,457 $ 140,339 $ 2,696 $ 143,035
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Professional Fees-Contracted 16,200
2. Grounds R & M 3,500
3. Printing Business cards 100
4. Education & Training Staff training required to maintain certifications 300
Total Increase 20,100$
DECREASE
5. Salaries & Benefits Parks and Rec Director hired 3 months after FY began (17,404)
Total Decrease (17,404)$
TOTAL PARKS & REC BUDGET AMENDMENTS 2,696$
Park grounds repair and maintenance
Amendment Reason
Parks & Rec contracted services
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
21
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Salaries $ - $ - $ - $ 343,246 $ 343,246
Benefits - - - 87,275 87,275
8 FTEs
Professional Fees - - 40,000 12,105 52,105
Professional Fees-Contracted 1,364,128 1,611,726 1,329,500 (960,591) 368,909
Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance - - - 5,000 5,000
Communications - - - 5,580 5,580
Advertising - - - 4,095 4,095
Printing - - - 500 500
Travel - - - 900 900
Dues & Fees 483 - 1,000 260 1,260
Education & Training - - 3,000 - 3,000
General Supplies 413 28 2,300 (2,300) -
Gasoline - - - 10,800 10,800
Food/Meals 284 316 400 - 400
Uniforms - - - 1,000 1,000
Furniture & Fixtures - 7,002 1,000 - 1,000
Other Equipment-NPDES - 1,559 2,500 - 2,500
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 1,365,308 $ 1,620,631 $ 1,379,700 $ (492,130) $ 887,570
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
The following increases account for the costs that were previously covered in the CH2M Hill contract:
1. Salaries and Benefits
430,521
2. Professional Fees 12,105
3. Vehicle Repairs Vehicle repairs and maintenance 5,000
4. Communications Monthly cell phone costs 5,580
5. Advertising Public notices 4,095
6. Printing Business cards and other printing costs 500
7. Travel Employee travel to training sessions 900
8. Dues & Fees Various membership dues 260
9. Gasoline/Diesel Gas for vehicles 10,800
10.Uniforms Uniforms for field staff 1,000
Total Increase 470,761$
DECREASE
11.Professional Fees-Contracted Terminate contract with CH2M Hill (960,591)
12.General Supplies Transfer supplies to General Admin department (2,300)
Total Decrease (962,891)$
TOTAL COMMUNITY DEV BUDGET AMENDMENTS (492,130)$
Cell tower application review
Amendment Reason
CD Director, 3 Planners, Plan Review Engineer,
Arborist, Construction Inspector, Code Enforcement
Officer
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
22
DEBT SERVICE
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Capital Lease Principal $ 594,161 $ 606,626 $ 630,831 $ 7,000 $ 637,831
Capital Lease Interest 115,233 102,768 78,564 146 78,710
Other Debt/TAN Interest 148,334 33,590 - -
TOTAL $ 857,728 $ 742,984 $ 709,395 $ 7,146 $ 716,541
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name
INCREASE
1. Capital Lease Principal Lease for police vehicle purchased at the end of FY 09 7,000
2. Capital Lease Interest 146
Total Increase 7,146$
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE BUDGET AMENDMENTS 7,146$
Lease for police vehicle purchased at the end of FY 09
Amendment Reason
OTHER FINANCING USES
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
Unallocated $ - $ - $ 163,630 $ 8,259,545 $ 8,423,175
Op Transfer Out to Cap Proj Fd 1,255,117 4,118,139 1,085,400 542,625 1,628,025
Op Transfer Out to Cap Grant Fd 699,300 290,662 178,240 (178,240) -
Op Transfer Out to Op Grant Fd 8,993 12,843 52,596 (20,000) 32,596
TOTAL $ 1,963,410 $ 4,421,644 $ 1,479,866 $ 8,603,930 $ 10,083,796
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Account Name Amendment Reason
INCREASE
1. Unallocated Amended revenues over expenditures 8,259,545
2. Op Transfer Out to Cap Proj 542,625
Total Increase 8,802,170$
DECREASE
3. Op Transfer Out to Cap Grant See Capital Grant Fund for explanation (178,240)
4. Op Transfer Out to Op Grant See Operating Grant Fund for explanation (20,000)
Total Decrease (198,240)$
TOTAL OFU BUDGET AMENDMENTS 8,603,930$
See Capital Projects Fund for explanation
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
23
CONFISCATED ASSETS FUND
This fund was created to account for the expenditures and revenues of seized drug funds. In FY 2009, the City was
awarded a portion of the funds seized in a drug raid. These funds must be expended according to strict regulations.
CONFISCATED ASSETS FUND
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
REVENUES:
Cash Confiscations $ - $ 43,763 $ - $ - $ -
Interest Earned - 47 - 85 85
Budgeted Fund Balance - - - 43,810 43,810
TOTAL REVENUES $ - $ 43,810 $ - $ 43,895 $ 43,895
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
EXPENDITURES:
Maintenance Contracts - - - 1,843 1,843
Other Equipment/Cameras - - - 1,880 1,880
Unallocated - 43,673 - 40,172 40,172
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ - $ 43,673 $ - $ 43,895 $ 43,895
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
Bring prior year budget forward to expend according to State regulations $ 43,895
TOTAL CONF ASSETS FD BUDGET AMENDMENTS 43,895$
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
24
OPERATING GRANT FUND
The Operating Grant Fund is used to account for certain budgeted items that receive funding from individual grants
and that aren’t classified as “capital”. These funds are appropriated on an annual basis.
OPERATING GRANT FUND
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
REVENUES:
SAFER Grant $ 23,263 $ 101,996 $ 85,934 $ - $ 85,934
Crabapple Master Plan 3,750 - - - -
GEMA (Flood Reimbursement) - - - 40,348 40,348
Crabapple Festival - 2,370 - 1,016 1,016
Interest Revenues 143 66 - - -
Op Transfer In from General Fd 8,993 12,843 52,596 (20,000) 32,596
Budgeted Fund Balance - - - - -
TOTAL REVENUES $ 36,150 $ 117,274 $ 138,530 $ 21,364 $ 159,894
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENT
FY 2010
FINAL
BUDGET
FY 2010
EXPENDITURES:
General Administration:
Professional Fees $ - $ 2,370 $ - $ 1,016 $ 1,016
Public Safety:
Salaries & Wages 29,757 106,906 118,530 - 118,530
Holiday Pay - - - -
401A (SS Match) - 4,009 - -
Pension - 3,496 - -
Public Works:
Professional Fees - - - 40,348 40,348
Community Development:
Crabapple Master Plan 19,000 - - - -
Liveable Centers Initiative - - 20,000 (20,000) -
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 48,757 $ 116,780 $ 138,530 $ 21,364 $ 159,894
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
1. Transfer flood expenses and reimbursement from General Fund 40,348$
2. Account for grant received from Fulton Arts Council for Crabapple Antique & Art Festival 1,016
3. LCI application has been postponed until FY 2011 (20,000)
TOTAL OP GRANT FD BUDGET AMENDMENTS 21,364$
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
25
Capital Projects Fund
The Capital Projects Fund is used to track revenues and expenditures associated with capital construction,
acquisition and maintenance. Appropriations in Capital Projects Fund are on a project-length basis and do not expire
until the project is complete. According to the City’s budgetary policies, a major capital project generally is defined as
an expenditure that has an expected useful life of more than 3 years with an estimated total cost of $50,000 or more,
or an improvement/addition to an existing capital asset. The amendments to this fund are explained below and is
followed by the budget spreadsheet on the next page:
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
REVENUES
1. Increase in Capital Lease Proceeds to account for capital lease of a police vehicle 20,500$
2. Adjusted Operating Transfers In for:
-Purchase new vehicles for departments that transitioned from the CH2M contract 212,300
-New software for Finance and Community Development 334,000
-Cut budget balance for color orthophotography (project is complete) (3,675)
3. Decreased Budgeted Fund Balance due to an invoice hitting FY 2009 after budget was rolled forward (10,000)
Total amendment to revenues 553,125
EXPENDITURES
1. Purchased new vehicles for General Admin, Community Development and Public Works 212,300
2. Replace current operating software with Incode and Energov 334,000
3. Decrease Color Orthophotography budget to bring in line with actual costs (3,675)
4. Account for capital lease received for new police vehicle purchased at the end of FY 2009 20,500
5. Transfer Sidewalks budget to Milton Trails line item -
6. Transfer Park Improvements budget to Land Acquisiton and Park Enhancements line item -
(10,000)
Total amendment to expenditure s 553,125
TOTAL CAP PROJECTS FD BUDGET AMENDMENTS 553,125$
7. Decrease total budget for Comp Plan to account for an invoice that was expensed to FY 2009 after the
budget was rolled forward
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
26
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
FY 2010
FINAL
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REVENUES:
Infrastructure Maintenance Fee $ 69,211 $ 74,266 65,000 - 65,000
Sidewalk Replacement 47,011 - 70,558 - 70,558
Tree Recompense - 12,800 12,800 - 12,800
Landfill Use Fees 243,133 138,264 185,000 - 185,000
Interest Revenue 16,470 2,840 2,000 - 2,000
Realized Gain on Investments 1,987 14,487 - - -
Capital Lease Proceeds - - - 20,500 20,500
Op Transfer In from General Fd 1,255,117 4,118,139 1,085,400 542,625 1,628,025
Budgeted Fund Balance - - 4,810,315 (10,000) 4,800,315
TOTAL REVENUES $ 1,632,929 $ 4,360,796 6,231,073 553,125 6,784,198
PROJECT #
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
BUDGET
BALANCE
FY 2008
BUDGET
BALANCE
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
FY 2010
FINAL
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 2010
EXPENDITURES:
City Council:
MC0901 City Hall Assessment $ - $ 2,231 2,231 - 2,231
General Administration:
New Vehicles - - - 12,300 12,300
Finance:
Financial Software - - - 161,000 161,000
IT:
IT1001 Color Orthophotography - - 35,000 (3,675) 31,325
Police:
PD0801 New Vehicles 97,237 37,412 89,012 20,500 109,512
PD0802 Vehicle Reserve - 55,966 55,966 - 55,966
PD0803 Police Record Mgmt Software - 3,599 3,599 - 3,599
Motorola Radios 3,106 - - - -
Fire:
FD0801 Fire Station Improvements 19,071 23,729 23,729 - 23,729
FD1001 Fire Apparatus - - 100,800 - 100,800
FD0701 Furniture & Fixtures 6,903 7,950 7,950 - 7,950
FD0901 Advanced Life Support Equip - 50,000 50,000 - 50,000
Fire Record Mgmt Software 7,382 - - - -
Fire Stations 179 - - - -
Public Works:
Bridges & Dams Inspection/Inv 2,250 - - - -
PW0901 Construction Inspectors - 69,698 69,698 - 69,698
PW0805 Gravel Roads Maintenance - 177,355 177,355 - 177,355
PW0804 Stormwater Maintenance 1,792 216,620 216,620 - 216,620
PW0905 NPDES Permit Compliance - 335,450 760,450 - 760,450
PW0801 Pavement Management - 1,415,036 1,915,036 - 1,915,036
PW0803 Traffic Calming 15,367 31,942 56,942 - 56,942
PW0806 Bridge Repairs-Landrum Rd - 242,868 242,868 - 242,868
PW0802 Re-Striping - 71,515 96,515 - 96,515
PW0902 Edge of Pavement Program - 50,000 50,000 - 50,000
PW0903 Bridge Replacement Program - 21,468 696,468 - 696,468
PW0904 Sidewalks - 100,000 100,000 (100,000) -
New Vehicles - - - 100,000 100,000
Parks & Recreation:
PR0901 Land Acquisition - 1,208,234 708,234 290,280 998,514
PR0801 Park Improvements 32,650 290,280 290,280 (290,280) -
PR0902 Milton Trails - 200,000 200,000 100,000 300,000
Community Development:
CD0701 Comprehensive Plan 59,972 119,520 119,520 (10,000) 109,520
CD0901 Arnold Mill Corridor Study - 150,000 150,000 - 150,000
CD0902 Tree Recompense - 12,800 12,800 - 12,800
0 New Vehicles - - - 100,000 100,000
Community Dev Software - - - 173,000 173,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 248,870 $ 4,893,673 6,231,073 553,125 6,784,198
Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Amendment #1
27
CAPITAL GRANT FUND
The Capital Grant Fund is considered to be a capital project fund that accounts for capital grants used to finance
major capital projects.
CAPITAL GRANT FUND
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
ACTUALS
FY 2008
ACTUALS
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
FY 2010
FINAL
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REVENUES:
Transportation Master Plan $ - $ 270,531 $ 348,048 $ (226,307) $ 121,
GDOT HPP Funds - - - 1,265,184 1,265
AED Units 11,250 - - -
Bathroom Renovation - 17,500 - -
Interest Revenue 1,537 14 - -
Realized Gain on Investments 1,107 5,584 - -
Firemans Fund Grant - - - -
Op Transfer In from General Fd 699,300 290,662 178,240 (178,240)
Budgeted Fund Balance - - 1,132,410 (890,322) 242,
TOTAL REVENUES $ 713,194 $ 584,291 $ 1,658,698 $ (29,685) $ 1,629
PROJECT #
ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION
BUDGET
BALANCE
FY 2008
BUDGET
BALANCE
FY 2009
APPROVED
BUDGET
FY 2010
REQUESTED
BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
FY 2010
FINAL
AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 2010
EXPENDITURES:
Public Works: - - - -
CG0803 Transportation Master Plan - 77,218 77,218 (29,685) 47
CG0801 Birmingham @ Providence - 809,490 918,980 - 918
CG0802 Arnold Mill @ New Providence - 593,750 662,500 - 662
Parks & Recreation: - - - -
Bathroom Renovation 70,000 - - -
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 70,000 $ 1,480,458 $ 1,658,698 $ (29,685) $ 1,629
BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTES
REVENUES
1. The Transportation Master Plan project is complete (226,307)$
2. Account for 80% funding from GDOT HPP 1,265,184
3. Decreased Operating Transfer In from General Fund due to matching funds not being needed for FY 201
741
,184
-
-
-
-
-
-
088
,013
-
,533
,980
,500
-
-
,013
0 (178,240)
(890,322)
Total amendment to revenues (29,685)
EXPENDITURES
1. The Transportation Master Plan project is complete (29,685)
Total amendment to expenditures (29,685)
TOTAL CAPITAL GRANT FD BUDGET AMENDMENTS (29,685)$
4. Previously the GDOT HPP Funds were not accounted for. Decreasing budgeted fund balance to show
the GDOT HPP Funds separately
ORDINANCE NO._______
PETITION NO. RZ10-01
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF FULTON
AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE FROM C-1 (COMMUNITY BUSINESS) AND AG-1
(AGRICULTURAL) DISTRICTS TO C-1 (COMMUNITY BUSINESS) DISTRICT,
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3105 BETHANY BEND
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council for the City of Milton, Georgia while in regular session on
May 17, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. as follows:
SECTION 1. That the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Milton be amended, and the official
maps established in connection therewith be changed so that the following property located at 3105
Bethany Bend consisting of a total of approximately .871 acre, be changed from the C-1
(Community Business) and AG-1 (Agricultural) to C-1 (Community Business) District with
conditions attached hereto and made a part herein;
ALL THAT TRACT or parcel of land lying and being Land Lot 831 of the 2nd District 2nd Section,
Fulton County, Georgia by the attached legal description; and
SECTION 2. That the property shall be developed in compliance with the conditions of
approval as attached to this ordinance. Any conditions hereby approved (including any site plan) do
not authorize the violation of any district regulations; and
SECTION 3. That the official maps referred to, on file in the Office of the City Clerk, be
changed to conform with the terms of this ordinance; and
SECTION 4. That all ordinances or part of ordinances in conflict with the terms of this
ordinance are hereby repealed; and
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective upon adoption by the Mayor and City
Council and the signature of approval of the Mayor.
ORDAINED this 17th day of May, 2010.
Approved:
______________________
Joe Lockwood, Mayor
Attest:
________________________________
Sudie Gordon, Interim City Clerk
(Seal)
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 1 of 32
RZ10-01
PETITION NUMBER(S):
RZ10-01
PROJECT NAME
Gas Station
PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS 3105 Bethany Bend
DISTRICT, LAND LOT 2/2 831
OVERLAY DISTRICT State Route 9
EXISTING ZONING C-1 (Community Business), AG-1 (Agricultural)
PROPOSED ZONING C-1 (Community Business)
ACRES 0.871
EXISTING USE Undeveloped
PROPOSED USE Gas Station and Convenience Store
OWNER D Squared Development LLC, Mehdi Jannatkhah
ADDRESS 2489 Dallas Hwy
Marietta, GA 30064
PETITIONER/REPRESENTATIVE Nathan V. Hendricks III
PHONE 404-255-5161
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATION – FEBRUARY 23, 2010
RZ10-01 - DENIAL
VC10-01 – DENIAL
INTENT
To rezone from AG-1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1
(Community Business) to develop a 2,100 square foot building with 4 pump islands at
a density of 2,411 square feet per acre. *
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 2 of 32
RZ10-01
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION – FEBRUARY 23, 2010
RZ10-01 – DENIAL 6-0
VC10-01- DENIAL 6-0
After hearing many public concerns in the areas of traffic generation, public
loitering, availability of similar uses in the area, alcohol sales, and pedestrian
accessibility, the Planning Commission discussion included the following issues:
1) Number of times a week is fuel delivered per week: The applicant stated
that it would be 2 to 3 times a week during the slow times of the day.
2) Number of employees per shift: The applicant stated 2 to 3 with a total of
8-10 employees total.
3) Potential congestion conflicts onsite: Trash emptying and deliveries will be
tight according to the applicant’s engineer.
4) The need for the 5th pump: The applicant stated that it was increased
economic benefit.
5) Is it possible to design the site without the concurrent variance: The
applicant stated that they would consider eliminating the 5th pump and
submit a revised site plan but it may not be viable to build.
6) Some of the Commissioners expressed that although eventually the
parcel maybe rezoned to commercial, the proposed use is too intensive
for the size and shape of the property.
Since the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has
submitted to the Community Development Department a revised site plan
dated February 26, 2010. The revised site plan indicates a 20 foot landscape strip
along Bethany Bend and an official revised letter of intent to request withdrawal
of VC10-01 for the landscape strip. In addition, the site plan shows a reduction
in the size of the building from 2,400 square feet to 2,100 square feet and a
reduction of pumps from five (5) to four (4) pumps. Development per the revised
site plan would eliminate the need for any variances.
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING – MARCH 15, 2010
RZ10-01 – DEFERRAL TO MAY 17, 2010 7-0
VC10-01- DEFERRAL TO MAY 17, 2010 7-0
The Mayor and City Council voted to defer the item to the May 17, 2010 meeting
to allow Staff to evaluate the revised site plan, the Design Review Board to make
comments and the Planning Commission to make their recommendation of the
revised site plan on April 27, 2010.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 3 of 32
RZ10-01
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION – APRIL 27, 2010
RZ10-01 – APPROVAL CONDITIONAL
After the Mayor and City Council meeting on March 15, 2010 the applicant
submitted another revised site plan on April 20, 2010 based on meetings with
Community Development Department, Public Works Department and the Fire
Chief. The revised site plan indicates a 2,100 square foot convenience store and
four gas pumps. A concurrent variance to reduce the landscape strip is no
longer needed. Included in the Staff report is a preliminary colored rendering of
the building and canopy that was presented to the Design Review Board on
April 13, 2010.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION – APRIL 27, 2010
RZ10-01 – DENIAL 4-2
After hearing many public concerns in the areas of traffic generation,
availability of similar uses in the area, incompatibility with nearby residential u ses,
sale of alcohol and inappropriate literature, parking on the site, and hours of
operation, the Planning Commission discussion included the following issues:
1. Service station exclusion in condition 2.a. for the CVS development to the
north and its effect on recommendations for the subject site.
2. Change from right in, right out only access on Bethany Bend to a full
access driveway on the current site plan.
3. How the site will accommodate the tanker truck deliveries.
4. Number and time of gas deliveries; size, type, dispensing holes and
venting of underground gas storage tank.
5. Hours of operation and delivery times.
6. Traffic counts and signal timing of the intersection.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 4 of 32
RZ10-01
LOCATION MAP
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 5 of 32
RZ10-01
CURRENT ZONING MAP
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 6 of 32
RZ10-01
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MAP
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 7 of 32
RZ10-01
REVISED SITE PLAN SUBMITTED – APRIL 20, 2010
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 8 of 32
RZ10-01
Color Rendering of Revised Site Plan 4/20/10
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 9 of 32
RZ10-01
RENDERING SUBMITTED APRIL 19, 2010
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 10 of 32
RZ10-01
SUBJECT SITE LOOKING SOUTHEAST ON BETHANY BEND
SUBJECT SITE LOOKING NORTH ON HWY 9
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 11 of 32
RZ10-01
SUBJECT SITE:
The subject site contains 0.871 acre and is undeveloped. It is currently zoned C-1
(Community Business) unconditional and AG-1 (Agricultural). It is located at the
southeast corner of Bethany Bend and Hwy 9. The site is located within the
Neighborhood Living-Working Land Use designation on the City’s Future Land
Use Map.
Standards of Review
(Section 64-2104) Planning Staff shall, with respect to each zoning application,
investigate and make a recommendation with respect to factors 1 through 7,
below, as well as any other factors it may find relevant.
1. Whether or not the proposal will permit a use that is suitable in view of the
use and development of adjacent and nearby Property?
The proposed gas pumps and 2,100 square foot convenience store is
suitable based on other commercially zoned and developed sites in the
area. Directly south of the proposed development is a parcel zoned C-1
(Community Business) pursuant to RZ85-194 at a density of 8,627 square
feet per acre. Staff notes that the revised site plan shows future inter-
parcel access when the parcel to the south is developed. In addition,
there are commercial uses developed to the north, northwest, west and
southwest of the subject site ranging in densities from1,341 sq. ft./acre to
18,240 sq. ft./acre. Staff notes that although there are residentially
developed parcels nearby to the east and northeast, they are not
adjacent to the subject site and the required landscape strips and
additional buffering required for gas pumps will provide additional
screening.
2. Whether or not the proposal will adversely affect the existing use or
usability of adjacent or nearby property?
In Staff’s opinion, the proposed 2,100 square foot convenience store and
four gas pumps will not adversely affect the existing use or usability of
adjacent or nearby property if it is developed with the required
development standards of the Highway 9 Overlay District which includes
but are not limited to site lighting, architectural design of the building and
canopy. In addition, the applicant has indicated compliance with
transportation requirements such as deceleration lanes, turn lanes and
required right-of-way dedication.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 12 of 32
RZ10-01
3. Whether the property to be affected by the proposal has a reasonable
economic use as currently zoned?
The subject site does not have a reasonable use currently zoned primarily
AG-1 (Agricultural) with a small piece of C-1 (Community Business).
4. Whether the proposal will result in a use which will or could cause an
excessive or burdensome use of existing streets, transportation facilities,
utilities or schools?
Staff does not anticipate a significant impact on public services and
utilities as proposed. However the transient commercial use proposed for
this development may exacerbate a difficult intersection. The applicant
will provide the required transportation improvements as shown on the
revised site plan.
5. Whether the proposal is in conformity with the policies and intent of the
land use plan?
The subject site is a prominent corner of the City and is designated in the
Plan as Neighborhood Living-Working. The revised site plan provides a
more pedestrian friendly area based on the location of the sidewalks and
beauty strips along both frontages between the curb and the sidewalk as
well as the bike lane on Hwy 9. A brief description of the project is noted
below.
Future Land Use Plan Map: Neighborhood Living-Working
Proposed use/density:
Retail/Commercial – 2,411 square feet per acre
The Future Land Use Plan Map suggests Neighborhood Living-Working for
the subject site and the properties to the west, north, and south in a linear
fashion. Retail commercial is consistent with Neighborhood Living-Working
when developed near residential areas. The Plan Map suggests
Residential 3-5 units per acre to the east and further northeast and to the
northeast across Bethany Bend the Plan suggests Residential 1-2 units per
acre.
The Milton City Council adopted the Partial Plan Update to the City’s
Comprehensive Plan on December 21, 2009. The proposed development
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 13 of 32
RZ10-01
is consistent with the following Plan Policies if developed with the
recommended conditions:
We will encourage development that is sensitive to the overall
setting of the community and will contribute to our community’s
character and sense of place.
We will encourage development of a balanced network of
commercial activity centers to meet the service needs of our
citizens while avoiding unattractive and inefficient strip
development.
We will encourage new development to locate in suitable locations
close to transportation and infrastructure resources in order to
protect environmentally sensitive areas and valuable historic,
archaeological or cultural resources from encroachment.
b. Support development projects that provide increased
density close to Windward Parkway, GA 400, and SR 9
consistent with the land use and infrastructure development
policies of the City of Milton and the citizen and stakeholder
expectations.
In addition, the Milton Comprehensive Transportation Plan recommends
that the Bethany Bend and Hwy 9 intersection be improved with adding
an eastbound and westbound through lane along Bethany Bend which
will help with congestion at this intersection in the future.
6. Whether there are other existing or changed conditions affecting the use
and development of the property which gives supporting grounds for
either approval or disapproval of the proposal?
Although the site is small in size and is located within an acute triangle, the
revised site plan meets the development standards of the Hwy 9 Overlay
District, and development requirements for the site. The intersection is
transitioning in uses from AG-1 (Agricultural) and vacant properties to
commercial uses in varying densities. Staff is of the opinion that these
conditions support grounds for approval of the proposed gas station and
convenience store.
7. Whether the zoning proposal will permit a use which can be considered
environmentally adverse to the natural resources, environment and
citizens of the City of Milton?
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 14 of 32
RZ10-01
The proposed use will not be environmentally adverse to the natural
resources, environment and citizens of the City due to the required
development regulations as it pertains to detention/retention, aesthetics,
and underground gas tanks and gas pumps on the site.
Existing uses and zoning of nearby property
Location Parcel / Zoning
Petition
Zoning / Name Approved
Density/Min.
Heated Floor Area
North 1
RZ06-96
C-1 (Community Business)
CVS and Undeveloped Parcel
No Fast Food Restaurants
Permitted
5,690.91 sq.
ft./acre
North 2
RZ07-10
O-I (Office Institutional)
Undeveloped
5,332 sq. ft./acre
Further
North
3
RZ88-100
M-1 (Light Industrial)
Superior Air Conditioning
1,341 sq. ft./acre
Further
North
4
RZ88-23
C-2 (Commercial)
GLM Sod and Landscape
8,040 sq.ft./acre
Further
Northeast
5
N/A
AG-1 (Agricultural)
Bellemeade Farms Subdivision
1 unit/acre
(Est. 3,000 sq.ft.)
Further
Southeast
6
RZ96-19
North side of Bethany Bend is
R-4A (Residential) and South
side of Bethany Bend is R-5
(Residential)
Bethany Creek Subdivision
R-4A -1.76
units/acre
R-5 - 2.97
units/acre
South 7
RZ85-194
C-1 (Community Business)
Undeveloped
8,627 sq.ft./acre
South 8
AG-1 (Agricultural)
Undeveloped
N/A
Further
South
9
RZ01-08
C-1 (Community Business)
Loving Hands Animal Clinic
8,695.66
sq.ft./acre
2 stories
Further
South
10
RZ97-54
C-1 (Community Business)
Legacy Crossing Pavilion –
Montana’s Restaurant
8,249 sq.ft./acre
2 stories
Further
South
11
RZ95-085
C-1 (Community Business)
9 North Tire Center
3,937 sq.ft./acre
Further
Southwest
12
RZ99-44/U99-26
C-1 (Community Business) and
Use Permit for Self-Storage
Your Extra Attic Self
18,240 sq.ft./acre
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 15 of 32
RZ10-01
Storage/Retail Commercial
Strip
Further
Southwest
13
RZ98-012
C-1(Community Business)
Office Building
6,282.05
sq.ft./acre
Southwest 14
RZ03-118
C-1 (Community Business)
Sherwin Williams Paint Store
6,323.53
sq.ft./acre
West 15
RZ99-77
C-1 (Community Business)
Bethany Bend Village
Shopping Center
7,846.04
sq.ft./acre
2 Stories
Further
West
16
RZ05-115
CUP (Community Unit Plan)
Future Site of Fulton County
Board of Education High
School
2.81 units/acre
Northwest 17
RZ04-22
C-1 (Community Business)
Existing Retail Center
7,314.03 sq.
ft./acre
Further
Northwest
18
N/A
AG-1 (Agricultural)
Oakstone Glen Subdivision
1 unit per acre
Further
Northwest
19
RZ00-52
C-1 (Community Business)
Kids R Kids Day Care
4,771.25
sq.ft./acre
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 16 of 32
RZ10-01
EXISTING USES LOCATION MAP
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 17 of 32
RZ10-01
VIEW FROM SUBJECT SITE TO THE NORTHEAST ACROSS BETHANY BEND
VIEW FROM SUBJECT SITE TO THE WEST ACROSS HWY 9
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 18 of 32
RZ10-01
SITE PLAN ANALYSIS
Based on the applicant’s revised site plan submitted to the Community
Development Department on April 20, 2010, Staff offers the following
considerations:
State Route 9 Overlay District
BUILDING SETBACKS
Section 64.776 of the Zoning Ordinance requires the following building setbacks:
Front – 40 feet along Hwy 9
Front – 40 feet along Bethany Bend
Rear – 0 Feet along the south property line adjacent to C-1 (Community
Business)
The site plan indicates compliance with the setback requirements.
Staff notes that Section 64-77.2.a. addresses permitted encroachments into
yards. Nonresidential districts – “Canopies shall be allowed over walkways or
driveways to within 12 feet of the street right-of-way or right-of-way based on
the street’s functional classification, whichever is farther from the street’s
centerline. Fuel pumps and pump islands, when permitted, shall be setback as
stated in this subsection for canopies.” The proposed canopy is located 20 feet
from the proposed right-of-way along Highway 9 and Bethany Bend and is in
compliance with the required setback.
BUILDING HEIGHT
Section 64-1095(n) within the State Route 9 Overlay District requires there shall be
a maximum of two stories with a maximum height of 30 feet from average
finished grade to bottom of the roof eave. The applicant indicates that the
proposed building will be one story in height and will not exceed the maximum
height.
LANDSCAPE STRIPS
Section 64-1090 of the State Route 9 Overlay District requires the following
landscape strips:
Hwy 9 – 20 foot landscape strip
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 19 of 32
RZ10-01
Bethany Bend- 20 foot landscape strip
South property line – 10 foot landscape strip
This section further states that for every thirty (30) linear feet of landscape strip, a
minimum of one 3” caliper hardwood shade tree is required to be planted in the
center of the landscape strip or as approved by the Director. The revised site
plan indicates compliance with the landscape strip requirements.
Section 64-1092 states that where a parking lot, parking structure or gas fueling
bay fronts directly on a public street, a continuous screen of evergreen plantings
shall be provided. Said screen shall be three feet in height at planting and four
(4) feet minimum height at maturity and three (3) feet to eight (8) feet in width
at maturity. This requirement shall be provided along Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend
Road based on the location of the fueling bays and parking on the site. It
appears that the site can accommodate this requirement to screen the pumps.
The air and vacuum structures are located on the east side of the building
outside of the landscape strip along the south property line.
OTHER SITE PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
The applicant has stated that the hours of operation will be from 5:30 a.m. to 12
midnight, Monday through Saturday and 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 pm. on Sundays and
plans to sell beer and wine on the premises. A total of 2 to 3 employees per shift
will be working on site. The applicant anticipates 2 to 3 loads of fuel per week
which will be delivered during off peak times within hours of operation. The
underground tank is located just north of the parking spaces adjacent to the
building. This location must be approved by the State Fire Marshal.
Staff notes that the dumpster is located adjacent to Hwy 9. Section 64-1092 (d)
states that receptacles shall be placed in the least visible location from public
streets. Staff notes that the dumpster should be enclosed in such a way as to
shield it from the street with acceptable architectural and landscap ing
materials. It is currently located away from residential areas and toward the
commercially developed corridor. In addition the ordinance requires the fourth
side shall be a self closing gate made from noncombustible materials. The
revised site plan and associated renderings indicate compliance with the
requirement of the ordinance. The dumpster is now within a structure that
appears to be a part of the main structure.
The Overlay District also requires a bicycle rack for the site. The site plan does
not indicate one but the applicant has stated that it will be provided.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 20 of 32
RZ10-01
Section 64-1095 (d) states that all buildings shall be oriented to face a street or
courtyard. Based on the fact that there are two frontages, this requirement
can’t be met. The applicant submitted revised architectural renderings to the
Community Development on April 19, 2010 which shows the building to have
360 degree architectural treatment.
The applicant indicates a four board black horse fence along both Bethany
Bend and Hwy 9 at the edge of the sidewalk. The City Arborist requests that the
fence be placed interior to the landscape strip to provide a more open feel. In
addition, all sidewalks shall have a color stamped pattern to simulate a
transverse double row brick paver pattern every 50 feet, to be approved by the
City of Milton Design Review Board. These two requirements have been the
policy of the Mayor and City Council in the State Route 9 Overlay District and
will be included in the Recommended Conditions.
Detention areas are located underground on the subject site.
Both the building and the site must comply with Section 64-1068, State Route 9
Overlay District, at the time of the Certificate of Occupancy. Staff notes that the
lighting requirements are more restrictive than the Night Sky Ordinance and
therefore, the more restrictive requirements will prevail. The applicant has stated
that recessed lighting will be installed in the canopy and that all site lighting will
meet or exceed the Hwy 9 Overlay District requirements.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
The following chart illustrates the parking required by Section 64-1410 for the
proposed use:
Proposed Use Minimum Requirement Spaces
Provided
Retail Service
Commercial
2,100 square feet*
5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of building
area
11 spaces
11 spaces
It also appears that the site plan is in compliance with the landscape and layout
requirements of Section 64-1096.
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ANALYSIS
The Environmental Site Analysis (ESA) report is sufficient and satisfies the
requirement of Section 64.2126. A field survey of the site was conducted by Staff
to verify areas addressed in the ESA report. The proposed site does not contain
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 21 of 32
RZ10-01
wetlands, floodplains, streams, steep slopes, historical sites or sensitive plant and
animal species. The City Arborist has determined that one oak, approximately
34” DBH (Diameter Breast Height) is in severe decline and is located on the site.
It is Staff’s opinion that the proposed development provides open space as
provided by the 20 foot landscape strip adjacent to Hwy 9, Bethany Bend and
the south property line totaling 17,768 square feet or 0.408 acre which is
approximately 47 percent of the total acreage (does include future right-of-way
dedication). Based on the compliance with the development regulations, there
will be minimal impact on adjacent and nearby properties from noise and
lighting.
ARBORIST COMMENTS
Site is heavily wooded with 95% young growth pines. No specimen quality trees
on site. One oak, around 34” is in severe state of decline…has been pruned
heavily over the years for utility clearing, and has significant decay about 15’ up
where tree has lost a major branch. There is no tree area worth preserving, per
this plan.
1. Landscape Strip along Hwy 9….no issues with L.S. however plan states
fence to be located at edge of sidewalk. Would rather see fence
located at the back of the landscape strip, would provide a more open
look along the road.
2. Landscape strip along Bethany…same issue as above in regard to fence
location.
3. Provide additional screening above and beyond landscape strip
requirements.
4. Parking Bay/Island Trees.....3 required
FULTON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
The Fulton County Department of Health and Wellness recommends that the
applicant be required to connect the proposed development to public water
and public sanitary sewer available to the site.
Since the proposed development constitutes a premise where people work, live
or congregate, onsite sanitary facilities will be mandatory, prior to use or
occupancy.
This facility must comply with the Georgia Smoke free Air Act of 2005.
This department is requiring that plans indicating the number and location of
outside refuse containers along with typical details of the pad and approach
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 22 of 32
RZ10-01
area for the refuse containers be submitted for review and approval prior to
land disturbance or building permit issuance.
CITY OF MILTON FIRE MARSHAL
Underground storage tanks will require separate approval from the State
Fire Marshal.
A fire flow report will be required.
Rules of Safety Fire Commissioner 120-3-11 – Flammable and Combustible
Liquids
o 120-3-11-.04
o NFPA 58
2006 International Fire Code with GA Amendments
Chapter 22 – Motor Fuel – Dispensing Facilities and Repair Garages
Location of Dispensing Devices – Section 2203
2006 International Building Code – Fire separation requirements
The Fire Department met with the applicant and it was determined that one
opening in the four board equestrian fencing shall be provided along both Hwy
9 and Bethany Bend for access by the Fire Department. The applicant has
stated that a new fire hydrant will be installed along Bethany Bend Road as
required by the Fire Department. Since that meeting, the Fire Department has
determined that an additional fire hydrant may be required depending on the
outcome of the engineering of the site. In addition, as necessary FDCs (Fire
Department Connection) will be installed along Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend and
additional breaks in the four board equestrian fencing. Staff will reflect these
requirements in the Recommended Conditions.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
Right-in, right-out driveway on SR 9 to be in coordination with GDOT
Entrance/site to accommodate design vehicle
Raised island to be concrete (partial concrete and striping as shown), may b e
adjusted in size to accommodate design vehicle
Allow for 4 ft of striping on all sides of island
Lane widths to accommodate design vehicle
Raised island to accommodate 5 ft wide pedestrian cut through
AutoTurn through site
Wheel path cuts into parking space next to landscape area
Wheel path appears to meet WB-50 standards
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 23 of 32
RZ10-01
Auto Turn exhibit of tanker tank delivery route submitted by applicant.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 24 of 32
RZ10-01
Below are various exhibits from the applicant’s traffic study submitted to the
Transportation Engineer.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 25 of 32
RZ10-01
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 26 of 32
RZ10-01
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 27 of 32
RZ10-01
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 28 of 32
RZ10-01
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
On January 27, 2010 the applicant was present at the Community Zoning
Information Meeting (CZIM) held at the Milton City Hall. There were 14 members
of the community in attendance. The applicant has also met with the Bethany
Creek Homeowners Association prior to the CZIM.
Public Comments – Staff has several e-mails regarding this development. They
are attached to this report.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REPORT
The applicant hosted a Public Participation Meeting on Friday, February 13, 2010
at the Windward Kroger Community Room. There were six citizens in
attendance. The public expressed the following:
Concern over truck turning movements in and out of the property as well
as within the property.
Discussion of the concurrent variance. (Since that time, the concurrent
variance has been eliminated.)
Use of the property as a gas station.
Concern over the lighting to be used on the property and a request that
a tree line or some sort of visual buffer planted along Bethany Bend to
block any light spillage.
Concern over the security of children in neighboring residential areas.
Staff notes that in addition to the CZIM and Public Participation meeting, the
applicant attended the Bethany Creek Homeowners Association’s Annual
Meeting on January 21, 2010.
CITY OF MILTON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD COURTESY REVIEW - FEBRUARY 2, 2010
Screening dumpster. Applicant states that he will extend the brick façade
wall to 8’ around the dumpster so it will parallel Highway 9.
Roof canopy over pump islands should be pitched. Applicant states that
might be difficult with a non symmetrical canopy.
Did you consider an alternate design? Applicant states that the canopy
does not have to adhere to building setback, but the building does. The
canopy would not fit into the setbacks.
CITY OF MILTON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD COURTESY REVIEW – APRIL 13, 2010*
3 parking spaces on the north end don’t function correctly for
maneuverability.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 29 of 32
RZ10-01
Sidewalk along Hwy 9 goes into the drive isle.
Additional treatment of the dumpster. Height should be the same as the
building and provide a garage-like door.
Match canopy style to the building.
Locate bicycle parking on the site.
Relocate air and vacuum
Provide the required 25% fenestration
Applicant addressed issue of the DRB from the last meeting and the traffic
flow has improved.
CONCLUSION
The proposed gas station and associated gas pumps are consistent with Plan
Policies. Although the site is small and located within an acute triangle with two
road frontages, the revised site plan submitted on April 20, 2010 meets the
development standards required by the City of Milton Zoning Ordinance which
ameliorates potential negative impacts on nearby residential uses. Therefore,
Staff recommends APPROVAL CONDITIONAL of RZ10-01 to rezone to C-1
(Community Business) to develop a gas station and convenience store. If the
Mayor and City Council recommends approval , Staff provides the following
Recommended Conditions.
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 30 of 32
RZ10-01
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
If this petition is approved by the Mayor and City Council, it should be
APPROVED C-1 (Community Business) CONDITIONAL subject to the owner’s
agreement to the following enumerated conditions. Where these conditions
conflict with the stipulations and offerings contained in the Letter of Intent, these
conditions shall supersede unless specifically stipulated by the Mayor and City
Council.
1) To the owner’s agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as
follows:
a) Retail Commercial and accessory uses, at a maximum density of
2,411 gross floor area per acre zoned or a total gross floor area of
2,100 square feet whichever is less and a maximum of 4 gasoline
pumps, whichever is less but excluding freestanding fast food
restaurants, commercial amusements (cinemas not included ),
package liquor sales, (restaurants may sell liquor by the drink),
motels, hotels, adult entertainment establishments including adult
bookstores, adult entertainment as defined in Section 64-1, check
cashing stores, pawn shops, coin operated laundries, video arcades
(video machines that are incidental to otherwise permitted
businesses are allowed), pool halls, massage parlors, nail salons,
stand alone beauty salons, stand alone barber shops, flea markets,
discount retail shops, roadside vending, roadside produce stands or
seasonal vending.
2) To the owner’s agreement to abide by the following:
a) To the revised site plan received by the Community Development
Department on April 20, 2010. Said site plan is conceptual only and
must meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, all
other applicable city ordinances and these conditions prior to the
approval of a Land Disturbance Permit. Unless otherwise noted
herein, compliance with all conditions shall be in place prior to the
issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.
3) To the owner’s agreement to the following site development considerations:
a) All new sidewalk installations along the rights-of-ways shall have a
color stamped pattern to simulate a transverse double row brick paver
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 31 of 32
RZ10-01
pattern every 50 feet, to be approved by the City of Milton Design
Review Board.
b) Provide a black four-board-equestrian-styled fence along all
sidewalks interior to the landscape strip or as approved by the Director
of Community Development.
c) Provide additional landscaping within the required landscape strip
along the south property line as approved by the City Arborist.
d) Provide new fire hydrant along Bethany Bend between the entrance
and the point where the 50 foot taper begins or as approved by the
Fire Marshal and Fire Chief.
e) Provide one fire department connection (FDC) along Hwy 9 near the
apex of the site and provide an additional FDC where pedestrian
access is shown on the site plan along Bethany Bend approximately
halfway between the two ends of Bethany Bend and the northern
apex of the site for fire department staging off site, or as approved by
the Fire Marshal and Fire Chief.
f) Provide Fire Department accesses along Bethany Bend and Hwy 9
where FDCs and fire hydrants are located with a minimum width
opening of the equestrian style fence of eight (8) feet or as approved
by the Fire Marshal and Fire Chief.
g) No outside speakers/intercoms permitted on the premises.
h) All canopy lighting must be recessed.
4) To the owner’s agreement to abide by the following requirements,
dedication, and improvements:
a) Dedicate at no cost to the City of Milton or Georgia Department of
Transportation (GDOT) prior to the approval of a Certificate of
Occupancy, sufficient land as necessary to provide the following:
i. Provide at least 30 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of
Bethany Bend
ii. Provide at least 12 feet of right-of-way from the back of curb of
all abutting road improvements, along the entire property
Prepared by the Community Development Department for the
Mayor and City Council Meeting on May 17, 2010
*Based on a revised site plan submitted April 20, 2010.
5/10/2010 Page 32 of 32
RZ10-01
frontage, as well as allow the necessary construction easements
while right-of-way is being improved.
iii. Provide bicycle and pedestrian improvements along entire
property frontage of HWY 9 and Bethany Bend according to
cross sections in Chapter 48 Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public
Places of the City of Milton Code of Ordinances and as
approved by Milton Public Works.
iv. Installation/modification of the following transportation
infrastructure according to GDOT Standards and Chapter 48
Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places of the City of Milton
Code of Ordinances :
a) NB Right Turn Lane on HWY 9 at new access drive
b) NB Right Turn Lane on HWY 9 at Bethany Bend
c) EB Right Turn Lane on Bethany Bend at new access
drive
b) Reserve for the City of Milton along the necessary property frontage of
the following roadways, prior to the approval of a Land Disturbance
Permit, sufficient land as necessary to provide for compliance with the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The location of the landscape
strip with the reserved right-of-way to be determined by the Director of
Community Development.
i. 55 feet from centerline of HWY 9 or as may be required by
GDOT
ii. 45 feet from centerline of Bethany Bend
a) Access to the site shall be subject to the approval of the
GDOT District 7 Access Management Engineer and Milton
Public Works, prior to the issuance of a Land Disturbance
Permit.
b) Provide a 30 foot wide cross-access easement free of any
structures or utilities for future vehicular and pedestrian inter-
parcel access on the south property line as approved by
Milton Public Works.
Robyn MacDonald
From: Heidi Sowder [hsatlanta@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 8:56 AM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: RZ10-01
Hello Robyn,
Please forward my comments regarding RZ10-01 to the Planning Commission Members.
Thank you,
Heidi Sowder
Dear Planning Commission Members,
As a Bethany Bend resident, I am writing to express my continued concern regarding the impact of the
proposed gas station, Petition RZ 10-0 1, at the corner of Hwy. 9 and Bethany Bend. As noted in Staff s report,
the applicant has worked to meet the required development standards. However, other issues of concern still
remain and warrant consideration.
The gas station does not compliment adjacent development. The site is across the street from Belle Meade
subdivision, a development of 2 acre estate lots. The site is also across the street from CVS, which was rezoned
in 2006 with conditions prohibiting fast food establishments and service stations - due to their intense vehicle
based dynamic which would further burden this problematic intersection.
The site is still too intense - navigation of delivery trucks, and large SUVs will be problematic. Pedestrians
from Hwy. 9 and Bethany Bend will be forced to access the convenience store by crossing the busiest areas of
the site.
The Bethany Bend/Hwy. 9 intersection is problematic. The issue of cut through traffic from Hwy -9 to Bethany
Bend and the change in vehicular travel patterns which will result from this development has not been
addressed.
This placement of a gas station at this intersection will have a negative impact for nearby residents and for all
who navigate this intersection on a regular basis. Therefore, I ask that the Planning Commission recommend
denial of RZ10-01.
Best regards,
Heidi Sowder
525 Sunflower Ct.
Milton
Robyn_MacDonald
From:
Sudie Gordon
Sent:
Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:55 AM
To:
Robyn MacDonald
Cc:
Lynn Tully
Subject:
FW: Rezoning
Importance: High
Robyn: Would this be your? Thanks.
From: Chris Lagerbloom
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 10:46 AM
To: Sudie Gordon
Subject: FW: Rezoning
Please forward as appropriate.
Chris
From: Tina DAversa [mailto:tdaversa@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 10:06 AM
To: Chris Lagerbloom; Elected Officials; ]oe Lockwood
Cc: sanjay.tiwari@sandyeast.com; Gary Hockwater; Stephen@martuccirandr.com; Jay Powell, HECTOR L (ATTCINW)
MONTERO
Subject: Rezoning
Good morning Mayor and City Council, Mr. City Manager:
I do not have an email for your planning commission and the other boards that need to receive my note.
Please forward this to any decision makers for rezoning requests in the city of Milton.
Re: http://www.cityofmiltonga.us/zoning/rezoning.html
Re: http:Hwww.citvofmiItonga.usfcityclerk/pcl20l0/04-27-2010_Packet.pdf
It is my understanding that the staff report that was issued has recommended conditional approval of the "gas
station" for the corner of Bethany Bend and Highway 9. This site is 100 feet from an established
residential area.
I understand that the applicant has met all development standards required by the City of Milton. The City of
Milton was founded so the people/tax paying citizens of Milton would have a local voice and local control.
Apparently, this is no longer the reason Milton exists. The residence of the established Highway 9 area, do not
want or need a gas station in this area. I am concerned that this would be allowed to happen in our city
knowing it is not needed or wanted.
I wrote a letter asking for denial of this rezoning that you should have on file per city legal requirements and
open records requirements for communication with the city. I ask that you refer to this request and that you
listen to the citizens of the residentially developed Highway 9 area of the City of Milton.
This gas station is an "unneeded" development. This community has been fighting for local control and
protection from over development or inappropriate development for many years. It is your responsibility to fulfill
the "needs" of this city. Milton does not need or want another empty retail facility or a gas station less than one
mile from other gas stations.
Milton needs appropriate and well planned development based on the comprehensive plan.
I ask that you look around at the empty facilities throughout the Highway 9 area and help those owners fill their
sites instead of allowing further unneeded developments.
Please take responsibility and make sure the needs or our city are met appropriately.
I am representing myself as a homeowner of three homes in Milton and a resident of the Highway 9
area. I live less than a quarter mile from the proposed site requesting rezoning for a gas station.
am copying my Homeowners Association on this note so that they are aware of my concerns as a
resident and homeowner in Fairmont. My previous letter stated the reasons I believe this gas station
use on this residentially located property should be denied.
Thank you for taking the time to consider all of the residence in the Highway 9 area.
Someday is here! Make it a great onel
Tina UAversa
td ave rsa (cD- bel Is o uth . net
678-457-0677
**********Email Confidentiality'`******'
Robyn MacDonald
From: Sandy Jones Donesl125@comcast.neti
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 3:51 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: Petition RZ10-01
Importance: High
Robyn,
Please forward my comments regarding RZ10-01 to the Planning Commission Members.
Thanks,
Sandy Jones
Dear Members of the CCM Planning Commission,
First let me state that I am a proponent of responsible development. I believe that quality and
sustainable commercial development is a necessary part of any successful community.
I am a resident of the Bethany Send area. I am writing to express my continued concern
regarding the impact of the proposed gas station, Petition RZI.O-01, at the corner of Hwy, 9 and
Bethany Bend. Although the applicant has worked to meet the required development standards
several issues of concern still remain and warrant consideration.
■ The proposed development continues to be too intense for the size of the property.
• The intersection is problematic and should not have additional uses added that will
exacerbate the situation. The CVS site which is located across the street on Bethany
Bend, was rezoned in 2006 with conditions prohibiting fast food establishments and
service stations - due to their intense vehicle based dynamic which would further
burden this problematic intersection.
.From COM Staff Report - "Whether the proposal will result in a use which will or could cause an
excessive or hurdensome use of existing streets, transportation facilities, utilities or schools?
Staff does not anticipate a significant impact on public services and utilities as proposed. However the
transient commercial use proposed for this development may exacerbate a difficult intersection."
• The site plan does not prevent or address the issue of cut through traffic from Hwy.9 to
Bethany Bend and the change in vehicular travel patterns which will result from this
development.
• The gas station does not compliment adjacent development; The site is across the street
from Belle Meade subdivision, a development of 2 acre estate lots.
■ The hours of proposed operation are not consistent with the retail commercial
establishments in the area. This a residential based commercial area and the businesses
in the area have hours of operation that support that.
Hours of operation
■ Proposed Gas Station - 5:30am - 12:00am Mon - Sat / 7am - 11 pm Sun
■ CVS - 7:00am-10:00pm Mon -Sun
■ Zaxbys 1 1:00am — 9:00pm Man -- Sun
■ Wendy's
Sun
■ Publix
■ Beverage Shop
10:30pm Fri -Sat
• Quantam Bank
■ Salon 9
1 1:00am -- 5:00pm Sun
■ Starbucks -
Sat 1 6:00am - 9pm Sun
10:30am - 10:00pm Mon - Sat 1 1 1:00am - 1 Opm
7:00am - 10:00pm Mon - Sun
10:30am - 9:30pm Mon - Thurs 1 10:30am -
9:00am-5:00pm Mon -- Fri
9:30am - 8:00pm Mon - Fri 19:00am - 7:00pm Sat 1
5:30am - l 0:00pm Mon - Fri l 6:00am - 10:00pm
Vision Statement for the City Of Milton:
Milton is a distinctive community embracing small-town life and heritage while preserving and
enhancing our rural character.
Within a 2-3 minute drive in either direction of this proposed location, there is an existing gas
station. We voted for the City of Milton in order to keep our small town distinctive community
feel. Please do not make our community like a Roswell Road in Sandy Springs and Roswell or
Peachtree Industrial Blvd. If I wanted to have every service and commercial retail offering
available in my immediate vicinity, I like many others would not have chosen to live in Milton.
This placement of a gas station at this intersection will have a negative impact for nearby
residents and for all who navigate this intersection on a regular basis. Therefore, I ask that the
Planning Commission recommend denial of RZ10-01.
Sincerely,
Sandy ]ones
1125 South Bethany Creek Drive
Milton, Georgia 30004
F4
March 11 20101 2010
Reference — Application RZ10-01
Rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1 (Community
Business) to develop a 2,000 square foot gas station/ convenience store with 4 pump
islands and emissions stall at a density of 2,296 square feet per acre.
Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members,
My name is Craig Kaufman and I reside in the Bethany Creek subdivision. I have lived in
this subdivision since 2000. I have watched this area change from a rural farm area to a
bustling retail zone. I enjoy the convenience that comes with being in walking distance of
most necessities.
My concern is that the development being carried out is turning my neighborhood into "just
another strip mall" in Atlanta. There seems very little diversity as within two miles I have
two of many things yet a very limited choice when it comes to anything that makes life
interesting. It is frustrating to me that we cannot seem to find anything to make our area a
destination such as downtown Roswell where people go out of choice.
Vele need interesting and unique shops and places for entertainment here in Aipharetta. We
do not need another Gas Station, Nail Salon or Burger joint. How about a park? Maybe a
Library?
The rezoning case presented by the applicant causes me great concern, and I oppose the
applicant's rezoning petition based on the following reasons:
• The proposal does not adhere to the requirements of the State Route 9 Overlay
Standards;
• The proposed development appears to be too intense for the size of the property;
• The Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend intersection is currently problematic. The addition and
modification of traffic flow caused by this proposed development will add to the
difficulty experienced by all who navigate this intersection and will increase safety
concerns;
• The CVS parcel directly across Bethany Bend was rezoned in November 2006. Due
to these very same pedestrian safety concerns and the problematic nature of the
intersection, conditions were approved excluding fast food restaurants and service
stations. (Petition 20062-0096)
• GDOT has identified Bethany Bend in their future road widening plan. When this
occurs, the widening will eliminate the bike lane, sidewalks, grass strip, and 500/0 of
the landscape strip;
The Focus Fulton 2025 plan has designated this area as a neighborhood live -work
area. As such, development in the area should not impact the pedestrian / bike
friendly nature of this community. If this development is constructed, it will have a
negative impact to the convenience and safety of pedestrians in this area.
As the property market thaws, I will be able to sell my house and I may consider relocating
to another part of the Atlanta metro area. My decision to stay or go will be based largely on
the quality of life that I will have. A gas station at this intersection will further erode the
quality of life here.
I request Mr. Mayor and members of City Council support the community's concerns and
deny the petitioner's rezoning request as presented.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Name
Address
Subdivision
cc: Chris Lagerbloom - City Manager
Lynn Tully - Community Development Director
Robyn MacDonald
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
For your files.
Thanks!
Lynn Tully
Friday, March 12, 2010 11:10 AM
Robyn Macdonald
FW: Rezoning petition RZ10-011VC10-01
image401.jpg
Lynn Tully, APCP
Community Development Director
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107F
Milton, GA 30044
Office — 578-242-2555
www.citvofmiltonqa.us
Want to stay on toga of what's going on in the City? Sign up for our e -Newsletter!
Have a problem, question, comment, complaint or compliment?
We want to hear about it! For prompt assistance, call 678.242.2500 or e-mail us at infoCa@c!tyofmiltonga.us.
From: HAVLICEK, DANA L (ATTSI) [mailto:DH6042@att.com]
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 11:08 AM
To: Chris Lagerbloom; Lynn Tully; Burt Hewitt; Bill Lusk; Karen Thurman; Julie ZahnerBailey; Joe Longoria; Alan Tart; Joe
Lockwood
Subject: Rezoning petition RZ10-01JVC10-01
Please consider our request:
We ask that you deny the petitioner's request to rezone the SE corner of Bethany Bend for a gas and
emissions testing station. It will further degrade travel at this problematic intersection, is not consistent
with Plan policies for this Neighborhood Live -Work area, and will not contribute to safe pedestrian travel.
From a very concerned neighbor living in the immediate area of the proposed station.
Dana Havlicek
100 Sunvalley Drive
Alpharetta, Ga 30004
Robyn MacDonald
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
For your files
Q y 01 MdW
Lynn Tully
Friday, March 12, 2010 3:47 PM
Robyn MacDonald
FW; Opposition to Application RZ10-01
irnage001.1pg
Lynn Tully; AICD
Cornniuniity Development Director
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107F
Milton, GA 30004
Office — 678-242-2555
www. cityofm i Itonga. us
Want to stay on top of what's going on in the City? Sign up for our e -Newsletter!
Have a problem, question, comment, complaint or compliment?
We avant to hear about it! For prompt assistance, call 678.242.2500 or e-mail us at infoQcityofmiltonga.us,
From: Erin Bowen [mailto:erinjbowen@gmail.com]
Sent; Friday, March 12, 2010 2:56 PM
To: Chris Lagerbloom; Lynn Tully; Burt Hewitt; Bill Lusk; Karen Thurman; Julie ZahnerBailey; Joe Longoria; Alan Tart; Joe
Lockwood
Subject: Opposition to Application RZ10-01
March 12, 2010
Reference - Application RZ10-01
Rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1
[Community Business] to develop a 2,000 square foot gas station/ convenience
store with 4 pump islands and emissions stall at a density of 2,296 square feet per
acre.
Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members,
My name is E.J. Bowen and I reside in the Bethany Creek subdivision.
First of all I would like to tell you how much I appreciate your service to our community. Your work is
invaluable to making our city a place we are proud of and very much appreciated. Second, I love living in this
Neighborhood Live Work area and frequently walk to Publix and Starbucks. It really is great having a
neighborhood center with services we utilize so close to home. Maintaining this type of safe community is very
important to me as we continue to develop Milton. For this reason I am very interested in the proposed
development on Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend and want to make sure a few things are considered before making a
ruling on this rezoning.
The rezoning case presented by the applicant causes me great concern, and I oppose
the applicant's rezoning petition based on the following reasons:
The proposal does not adhere to the requirements of the State Route 9 Overlay
Standards;
• The proposed development appears to be too intense for the size of the property;
• The Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend intersection is currently problematic. The addition
and modification of traffic flow caused by this proposed development will add to
the difficulty experienced by all who navigate this intersection and will increase
safety concerns;
• The CVS parcel directly across Bethany Bend was rezoned in November 2006.
Due to these very same pedestrian safety concerns and the problematic nature of
the intersection, conditions were approved excluding fast food restaurants and
service stations. (Petition 2006Z-0096)
• GDOT has identified Bethany Bend in their future road widening plan. When this
occurs, the widening will eliminate the bike lane, sidewalks, grass strip, and 500I6
of the landscape strip;
• The Focus Fulton 2025 plan has designated this area as a neighborhood live -work
area. As such, development in the area should not impact the pedestrian 1 bike
friendly nature of this community. If this development is constructed, it will have
a negative impact to the convenience and safety of pedestrians in this area.
As a final thought, the developer claims to be making our neighborhood safer by adding
a sidewalk where there is otherwise weeds. Unfortunately, this claim holds little water
since his proposed sidewalk will most likely go unused due to its connection with a large
weeded area (N200ft). This will force pedestrians to cross the street to walk on the fully
connected sidewalk and will not add any value to the safety of the community.
I request Mr. Mayor and members of City Council support the community's concerns and
deny the petitioner's rezoning request as presented.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
E.J. Bowen
1110 S. Bethany Creek Dr.
South Bethany Creek Subdivision
cc: Chris Lagerbloom - City Manager
Lynn Tully - Community Development Director
2
Robyn MacDonald
From: Lynn Tully
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 9:41 AM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: FW: Opposition of Gas Station Bethany Bend and Hwy 9
Attachments: image001.jpg
For your files.
Lynn Tully, AICP
Community Development Director
13000 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107F
Milton, OA 30004
Office — 678-242-2555
www. cityofm ilton ga. u s
Want to stay can top of what's going on in the City? Sign up for our e-Newsletterl
Have a problem, question, comment, complaint or compliment?
We want to hear about it! For prompt assistance, call 678.242.2500 or e-mail us at info@cityafmiltonga.us.
From: David and Leigh Morris[mailto:morrisdavidleigh@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 5:01 PM
To: Chris Lagerbloom; Lynn Tully; Burt Hewitt; Bill Lusk; Karen Thurman; Julie Zahner6ailey; Joe Longoria; Alan Tart; Joe
Lockwood
Subject: Opposition of Gas Station Bethany Bend and Hwy 9
March 14, 2010
Reference - Application RZI O-61
Rezone from AG -I (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1 (Community
Business) to develop a 2,000 square foot gas station/ convenience store with 4 pump
islands and emissions stall at a density of 2,296 square feet per acre.
Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members,
My name is David Morris and I reside in the Bethany Creek North subdivision. Thank you for taking this
opportunity to review my written letter of concern regarding the proposed gas station at the intersection
of Bethany Bend and Hwy. 9.
The rezoning case presented by the applicant causes me great concern, and I oppose the applicant's
rezoning petition based on the following reasons:
• The proposal does not adhere to the requirements of the State Route 9 Overlay Standards;
• The proposed development appears to be too intense for the size of the property;
• The Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend intersection is currently problematic. The addition and modification of
traffic flow caused by this proposed development will add to the difficulty experienced by all who
navigate this intersection and will increase safety concerns;
The CVS parcel directly across Bethany Bend was rezoned in November 2006. Due to these very
same pedestrian safety concerns and the problematic nature of the intersection, conditions were
approved excluding fast food restaurants and service stations. (Petition 2006Z-0096)
GDOT has identified Bethany Bend in their future road widening plan. When this occurs, the
widening will eliminate the bike lane, sidewalks, grass strip, and 500% of the landscape strip;
The Focus Fulton 2025 plan has designated this area as a neighborhood live -work area. As such,
development in the area should not impact the pedestrian / bike friendly nature of this
community. If this development is constructed, it will have a negative impact to the convenience
and safety of pedestrians in this area.
I request Mr. Mayor and members of City Council support the community's concerns and deny the
petitioner's rezoning request as presented.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
David F. Morris
740 Springbrook Ct.
Milton, GA
Bethan Creek North Subdivision
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
Phil Joseph 13800 0akmeade Trate Milton, GA 30004 404-519-1442
March 14, 201 D
Reference — Application RZ10-01: Rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1
(Community Business) to develop a 2,000 square foot gas station/ convenience store with 4 pump islands and
emissions stall at a density of 2,296 square feet per acre.
Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members,
My name is Phil Joseph. I live with my wife and children at 13806 Cakmeade Trace in the Bellmeade Farms
subdivision. My property starts at the comer of Bethany Bend and Dakmeade Trace, right across the street from the
entrance to the proposed gas station.
Because we are effectively adjacent property owners, we have become a natural focal point for input from friends and
neighbors. Speaking for the group, I can state without fear of contradiction the following two facts. First, we expect
and support development along Route 9. Second, we overwhelmingly oppose the proposed gas station.
We welcome development that is both useful to and respectful of the community. The Publix shopping center has
improved the quality of life for all of us. We frequent the businesses, and find the design standards pleasing and
consistent with what we all want Milton to be.
We like Milton! We like the spirit of the community that we all share. We like a place to live that is people -friendly and
attractive. if you come here you will see people walking to and from the Publix shopping center. We walk there
frequently: to Publix, to Starbucks, to Zaxby's. We even walk to the dentist. Besides that, people just like to walk for
exercise. .-or for their pets' exercise. Bethany Bend is a pretty place to walk when the trees turn color, thanks in part
to the Bethany Creek developer. Where will be even more pedestrian traffic when the new high school is built a couple
blocks away.
We are greatly concerned about placing a gas station on the subject property. It will create a more complex traffic
flow on an already problematic comer. The site itself will be crowded, with cars squeezing by each other and queuing
up at the entrance while people try to get out. We are sure you know that gas stations and drive-thru restaurants are
prohibited from the property across the street due to their impact on traffic. That property is not encumbered with a
narrow pie -slice shape. If traffic concerns were compelling for that property, how much more so for this one
Besides the inconvenience of a crowded intersection, there is also a safety issue. The pedestrian nature of the
community is negatively impacted by something as busy as a gas station on the corner. Besides the cars going in
and out there will be the tanker truck and delivery trucks. Imagine impatient drivers and rainy days crowded
conditions and people on foot and you start to see the problem. Add high school traffic to the mix and we really get
concerned.
There are over thirty uses for a commercially zoned property. We would like to see one that does not bring with it the
problems of a gas station. For these reasons we request that the Mayor and City Council deny this petitioner's
request as presented.
Respectfully,
Pd�, `
Phil and Sharon Joseph
13860 Qakmeade Trace
Milton, GA 30009
Bellemeade Farms subdivision
Robyn MacDonald
From: Lynn Tully
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 10:24 AM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: FW: Opposition to 8210-10 - Milton, Georgia
Attachments: image001.jpg
For your files... Note the time received.
Lynn Tully, ,AICD
Community Development Director
130003 Deerfield Parkway, Suite 107F
Milton, GA 30004
Office — 678-242-2555
www.cityofrniltonga.us
Want to stay on top of what's going on in the City? Sign up for our e -Newsletter!
Have a problem, question, comment, complaint or compliment?
We want to hear about it! For prompt assistance, call 678.242.2500 or e-mail us at info (cDcityofmiltonga.us.
From: Cindy mattie [mailto:Cindy—mattie@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 6:51 PM
To: Chris Lagerbloom; Lynn Tully; Burt Hewitt; Bill Lusk;
Lockwood
Cc: cfmattie@gmail.com
Subject: Opposition to RZ1.0-10 - Milton, Georgia
Milton City Council Members,
Karen Thurman; Julie ZahnerBailey; Joe Longoria; Alan Tart; Joe
We wish to go on record opposing the requested variances and proposed use for the property submitted to the
City of Milton on behalf of D Squared Development LLC to develop the southeast corner of Hwy 9 and
Bethany Bend. We believe that granting of these variances will have a negative impact on the surrounding
community and will
adversely affect the quality of life of the residents who live near the proposed gas station/convenience store. Our
opposition
is based on the following:
Over three years ago we voted to have local representation for decisions that impact the community we live in
thereby forming the new City of Milton. This city was founded, in part, due to our citizen's displeasure with the
lack of planning, identity and character that our neighborhoods were seeing under Fulton County control. One
just needs to take a drive up highway 9 from Alpharetta to see the results. We have very little land left to
develop in this area and now is the time to take a firm stance when determining if a business will truly enhance
our quality of life and support the unique quality of Milton and it's residents.
Adding another gas station to this area, especially one that borders on several quiet neighborhoods, does not fit
in the Milton we voted for and that we have had the pleasure of living in for nearly ten years. There are at least
eight gas stations within a 2 mile radius. This type of business brings with it, increased congestion in an area
that cannot support the current traffic levels. We will also have to suffer from an increase in noise pollution
(cars, delivery trucks, etc.), especially if the emissions stall is added. Even more damaging will be the effect
on air quality with ground level ozone and benzine that results from cars refueling as the evaporated gas is
replaced with fuel.
We have a duty as citizens of the great City of Milton to build and protect our city's character and quality of life
for it's residents. There are several other possible options for this parcel; both commercial and no -commercial.
One option would be for the city to secure this land as one of the first green space projects in the high density
highway 9 overlay area. Green space is something that all residents in our neighborhood and the surrounding
area would immediately benefit.
We are dangerously close to loosing the chance to define and enhance the character of Milton. People that visit
our city traveling from Alpharetta, Roswell or Cumming, should be able tell the difference, not just see the city
marker signs!
Respectfully yours,
Chris and Cindy Mattie
Bethany Creek Subdivision
Robyn MacDonald
From: Lynn Tully
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 4:59 PM
To: Robyn Macdonald
Subject: FW: Convenience Store and Gasoline Station RZ10-01NC10-001 - 3105 Bethany Bend
(Southeast corner of Bethany Bend and Hwy 9)
Attachments: image001.1pg
For your files
Lynn Tully, AICD
Community Development Director
13000 Deerfield Parkway; Suite 107F
Milton, GA 34004
Office — 678-242-2555
www.cityofmilton-ga.us
Want to stay on top of what's going on in the City? Sign asp for our e -Newsletter!
Have a problem, question, comment, complaint or compliment?
We want to hear about it! For prompt assistance; call 678.242.2500 or e -rail us at infoftcityofmiltonga.us.
From: Chris Lagerbloom
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2410 4:00 PM
To: Lynn Tully
Subject: FW: Convenience Store and Gasoline Station RZ10-01/VC10-001 - 3105 Bethany Bend (Southeast corner of
Bethany Bend and Hwy 9)
From: Tina DAversa [mailto:tdaversa@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 3:53 PM
To: Elected Officials
Cc: Chris Lagerbloom; tdaversa@bellsouth.net
Subject: Fw: Convenience Store and Gasoline Station RZ10-01/VC10-041 - 3105 Bethany Bend (Southeast corner of
Bethany Bend and Hwy 9)
Dear Mayor Lockwood and City Council Members:
My name is Tina D'Aversa and I live at 13568 Weycroft Circle, Milton, GA 30004. 1 also own two other
homes in this area of Milton.
I am writing today to ask that you deny the rezoning and variance request RZ10-01NC10--001 - 3105
Bethany Bend (Southeast corner of Bethany Bend and Hwy 9), D Squared Development, LLC to
rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1 (Community Business) to
develop a 2,400 square foot gas station with 5 pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square
feet per acre. The applicant is also requesting a concurrent' variance to reduce the 20 -foot
landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany Bend (Section 54-1090(a)).
The proposed use of this parcel is both inappropriate and unneeded. The City of Milton must protect established
residential areas like the Bethany Bend and Highway 9 area where this parcel is located. To allow a high traffic
convenience store or an environmentally dangerous gasoline facility in an established residential area would be
unconscionable.
Many of us have worked for many years to protect the uncontroled and eclectic development along
the gateway to Milton: Highway 9.
My family and I support appropriate growth and appropriate development in this area. We lok forward to the
redevelopment of the area and to having occupants in the 50% of the area's retail that is presently vacant.
I am asking that you recommend denial of the gas station use on this property and in this area of
Highway 9. There is no need for a gas station on this property. There are gas stations in every
direction from the proposed location within a one -mile radius. There are numerous environmental
issues that should cause you to recommend against this use on this property. The property is
adjacent to single family homes and subdivisions. There is no need to risk ground water
contamination in this residential area.
Please read my letter and enter it into the public comment appropriately. I am unable to attend in
person tonight Because I need to be at Hopewell Middle School.
Thank you for your service to the city of Milton residents and for ensuring appropriate growth and
development in Milton!
Tina D'Aversa
tdaversa@bellsouth.net
678-457-0577
My Business Plan
Ignite, Inc. Associate
http:lltp g i n c. ig n ite i n c. b iz
TPG Inc.
**********Email Confidentiality**********
This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and contain information intended for the specified individual(s) only. This
information is Confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received
this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based
on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This information is intended for
representatives of Ignite and Stream Energy and not as spam or for general distribution. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by returning this email to the
sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Tina DAversa rtdaversa@bellsouth.net>
To: electedofficials@cityofmiltonga.us; planningcommission@cityofmiltonga.us; chris.lagerbloom@cityofmiltonga.us;
Moore Paul -E11793 <paul.moore@motorola.com>
Cc: tdaversa@bellsouth.net
Sent: Tue, February 23, 2010 8:30:59 AM
Subject: Convenience Store and Gasoline Station RZ10-01/VC10-001 - 3105 Bethany Bend (Southeast corner of Bethany
Bend and Hwy 9)
Good morning, I understand that the planning commission will provide recommendations to the mayor
and city council on the following application tonight:
RZ10-Ol/VC10--991 - 3195 Bethany Bend (Southeast corner of Bethany Bend and Hwy 9), D Squared
Development, LLC to rezone from AG --1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1
(Community Business) to develop a 2,400 square foot gas station with 5 pump islands at a
density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre. The applicant is also requesting a concurrent
variance to reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 14 feet along Bethany Bend (Section 64-
1090(a)) -
Many of us have worked for many years to protect the uncontroled and eclectic development along
the gateway to Milton: Highway 9.
I am asking that you recommend denial of the gas station use on this property and in this area of
Highway 9. There is no need for a gas station can this property. There are gas stations in every
direction from the proposed location within a one -mile radius. There are numerous environmental
issues that should cause you to recommend against this use on this property. The property is
adjacent to single family homes and subdivisions. There is no need to risk ground water
contamination in this residential area.
I could go on but I know that l am writing to a group that is knowledgeable and that you will listen to
your citizens and make the appropriate recommendations so the Mayor and City Council can deny
the use of this property for a gas station.
Please read my letter or enter it into the public comment appropriately. I am unable to attend in
person tonight because I teach college at night.
Thank you for your service to the city of Milton residents!
Tina D'Aversa
Someday is here? Make it a great one!
Tina D'Aversa
tdavers@Qbellsouth.net
678-457-0677
**********Email Confidentiality******-"**
This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and contain information intended for the specified individual(s) only. This
information is Confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received
this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based
on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This information is intended for
representatives of Ignite and Stream Energy and not as spam or for general distribution. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by returning this email to the
sender. Please consider the environment before printing this email
OPPOSITION TO PETITION NUMBERS RZ10-011VC10-01
http://www.i petitions.com/patiti otilbetha ny benda nd hwy9gasstatio nl
The residents of the Bend Bend area support and are a proponent of responsible development in the Hwy 9
area. We believe that quality and sustainable commercial development is a necessary part of any successful
community.
A rezoning a variance application has been submitted to the City of Milton to develop the southeast corner of
Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend. The proposed development consists of gas station and 2,400 square foot
convenience store. The applicant has requested the following rezoning and variance in order to construct the
gas station:
RZ10-01 - rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1 (Community Business) to
develop a 2,400 square foot gas station with 5
pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre; and con -current variance
VC10-01 - To reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany Bend (Section 64-1090(a)
Information on the proposed gas station can be reviewed at:
http://www.c'[tyofmiltgng.aL.us/cityclerk/czinV2010/01-27-201 0-CZ1 M-Packet-pdf
We the residents of the Bethany Bend area oppose the proposed rezoning and variance request due its
technical feasibility, viability, and desirability.
Feasibility:
The proposed use is too intensive on such a small site, including the gas pumps, parking, and area for gas
tankers to deliver fuel.
There is concern with potential spillover of lighting to nearby single family residences to the east and north
during the evening hours.
The proposed gas station and 2,400 square foot convenience store is not suitable based on the small size of
the parcel,
There is potential for cut through traffic on the site between Bethany Bend and Hwy 9.
The intersection of Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend is problematic and accessing the subject site will be challenging.
The applicant is requesting a concurrent variance to reduce the landscape strip along Bethany Bend based on
the lack of area to develop the gas station and associated convenience store.
The subject site may have a reasonable use as currently zoned, with a smaller building and circulation
footprint.
The dumpster is located adjacent to Hwy 9. Section 64-1092 (d) states that receptacles shall be placed in the
least visible location from public
streets -
Con cern
treets.Concern Over Future Traffic Impacts: Com pletion of Westside Parkway;New Proposed High School
(vehiclelpedestrianlbike),Sir! ck[and / Bethany Bend proposed gas station; Union Hill Multi -Use Development
Widening of Bethany Bend to 4 Ianes;Widening of Hwy 9 to 4 lanes
Viability:
-Poor/difficult accessability has been shown to result in failure of service station (site examples like Haynes
Bridge/Old Milton site and McFarland/Hwy. 9 BP site)
-Future widening of Bethany and Hwy. 9 will exacerbate existing access difficulties.
-No market studies provided by applicant to show station will be sustainable.
Desirability:
The subject site is a prominent corner of the City and is designated in the Plan as Neighborhood Living -
Working. The proposed development will not contribute toward a safe pedestrian friendly area based on the
lack of space to provide a beauty strip along Hwy 9 between the curb and the sidewalk.
Reducing the landscape strip is not desired shows a disregard for the value of trees and landscaping to
promote the neighborhood setting of wanting to maintain the look and feel of the residential area for Bethany
Bend.
Adherence to City of Milton Zoning Ordinances:
The City of Milton has developed a set of ordinances and standards to provide a level of development that
adds and maintains our City's character.
For these ordinances and standards to be effective, they must be implemented and adhered to for
developments in the City of Milton. This provides the framework to develop a site such that it reflects the
unique characteristics of Milton. The proposed development is not appropriate as i can not be constructed in
adherence of the City of Milton Ordinances.
One thing developers look at is precedent if a landscape reduction is granted for this corner, odds are the
developer for the remaining undeveloped propety will ask for a similar variance.
The Bethany Creek and other Bethany Bend communities live in the higher density area of Milton (this is
because large parts of Milton have no sewer which helps protect those areas from higher density
development). Therefore, we have to rely on our City's staff and elected officials to, at the very least, enforce
our existing zoning laws, development standards, and development overlay ordinances. Without enforcement,
why have them.
BY SIGNING BELOW YOU ARE ACKNOWLEDGING YOUR OPPOSITION TO:
Request filed by:
OWNER: ❑ Squared Development LLC, Mehdi dannatkhah
ADDRESS: 2490 Dallas Hwy, Marietta, GA 30054
PETITIONER/REPRESENTATIVE: Nathan V. Hendricks III
To rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1 (Community Business) to develop a
2,400 square foot building wits 5 pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre.
Concurrent variance to reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany Bend (Section 541090(a)
# Name
Comments
1 E.J. Bowen
I am a resident of Bethany Creek
2 Ashley Bowen
3 Lar! Palocsik
I am a resident of Bethany Creek Subdivision. I am completely opposed to this gas station or any type of business
occupyingthis little piece of wooded property. Now many gas stations do we need within a mile radius both north
and south of us? Costco, BP, Kroger, Shell plus another gas station that already closed a few years back. It's
ridiculous!
4 Michael McMullin
5 Leigh Morris
This site is simply too small for the proposed development. There is no way to "control" the traffic flow of the site
and the "one way" around the pump solution offered by the developer is not enforceable_ The access for tanker
truck fuel delivery is also a huge concern. This is simply too small of a land area for the proposed plan. Please do
not offer variances for this development as it will certainly set a precedent for future development. We are aware
that this is commercial property, but it would be better suited for a smaller operation.
b Matthew Jonsson
7 Jorge Godoy
8 philip gerber
9 Craig kaufman
1 have Ilved in Bethany Creek South for 10 years. I have watched route 9 go from a suburban feeder road to a
painfully typical Atlanta strip mall slum. We need more real variety, not just a repeating sequence of
s u perm a rkets, ha 1 r sa I o ns, chains of fast food and gas stations. It is actually possible to get lost 1n Atlanta's suburbs
because one strip mail looks so much like another. While these stores create a few jobs, they are not jobs any of us
wish for ourselves or our relatives.
10 Scott Kilgore
11 Rob Stilwell
12 Joel S. Kummins
I totally agree with the paints mentioned in this petition.
13 Julie White
14 Dodie Hamrick
I live in Bethany Creek
My Address_ 1080 S. Bethany Creek Drive
Milton, GA 30404
15 Gabriela Stoecker
NORTH BETHANY CREEK SUBDIVISION
2605 N. SETHANY CREEK DR
15 Jack Hopkins
17 Lisa Bishop
18 Phil Joseph
13800 0akmeade Trace
Milton, GA 30004
19 Heidi Sow der
As an 11 year Bethany Bend resident, I have seen much growth in our area. My family enjoys walking along
Bethany Bend to Starbucks, CVS and Starbucks. We are not adverse to responsible commercial growth along State
Route 9. However, asthe petition states this gas station is just not the right option for this site. It is undesirable
and unsafe for the Bethany Bend community and Milton as a whole.
20 Joel & Carma Kummins
We live in Bethany Creek Sub-division and we oppose the zoning request For the reasons enumerated in the above
petition
21 Ann Marie Gerber
address = 1235 S. Bethany Creek Dr.
Milton, GA 30004
22 Michel Amjadi
I am in opposition to this gas station application near to our residential Area.
Michel Amjadi
720 Springbrook Ct
Milton, CA 34404
23 Gitte Iversen
720 Springbrook CT
Milton, GA 30004
24 CarySchlenke
2S Joan eorzilleri
26 Todd Harkleroad
The point of toning is to ADHERE to it. Variances are, by their very nature, a DEVIATION from the plan for an area..
As stated, variances open up the potential for more and more of them- if the City were to decide at a future date to
strictly adhere to its zoning, it would lack the legal standing to do so.
27 Daryl Sloter
28 Kimberley Kourtis
_
29 Erol AKBAS
3251 Serenade Ct. Alpharetta, GA 30004
30 Megan Magnuson
32 Rosemary Wiyda
225 Cadence Ct
Milton, ga
32 Martha Shaw
# Name
Comments
33 Laura Wysong
This is absolutely the wrong type of development for this corner. Until the City of Milton and the State of Georgia
can improve this intersection, no building should occur. It is an extremely unsafe corner without development.
Adding a gas station will increase the possibility of more accidents at this intersection. Additiomally, we don't need
a gas station at this corner. There is a Chevron less than a mile up the road on Deerfield Parkway- The economy
can not sustain two gas stations within one mile of one another. Additionally there are two gas stations 1.5 miles
north on Highway 9 and McFarland_ We do not need an empty gas station.
The most economic and beneficial use forthis corner would be a Doctor's office which would be acrossthe street
from the CVS. This makes much more sense from a use perspective and would fit in with the overall aesthetics of
the neighborhood. There is a need for additional medical facilities in this area.
Let's not make the same mistakes that Fulton County has already made to the Highway 9 area. It is time to improve
this area. The citizens of Milton elected the current City Council to retain the look and feel of the Milton area. This
is not consistent with that objective.
Regards,
Laura Wysong
34 tiffany Allen
35 Kelly Woodward
No gas station
36 Diane Palmer
3300 Bethany Bend, Milton, GA 30004
37 JeanneSehrmg
38 Greg Sowder
39 Tim and Laura Wyman
40 Laura Steele
41 Joni Vance
Ido NOT wantthe gas station! STQP developingl There are Snail salons and 4 major grocery stores in a 1/2 mile
stretch. When is enough, enough? We already can't breathe because of smog in Atlanta -do you not realize that
we are going to develop ourselves into no clean air? Then only the development will be left beca use anything living
will have died from the pollution.
42 Nikki Haslett
This is a totally inappropriate development for this site,
43 Chris Steele
44 Dana Havlicek
45 Frederick D. Bland
46 Heidi King
47 Tina Sheridan
This proposal is not parry of the responsible development our city leaders have promised usl
48 Bnanne Stienecker
Please stop the new construction on Hwy 9. We do not need another gas station. It is bath undesirable and unsafe
for the residents of Betha ny Bend community and Milton as a whole. Please stopH
Regency at Windward Square
Milton, Ga
49 Abbe Laboda
Absolutlely notl! Please stop decreasing buffers and changing varience for individual cases! No gas stations!
50 Debra Hendricks
I definately oppose any more gas stations! ll
51 Gary J. Condon
52 Paul Havlicek
100 Sunvalley Drive
Alpharetta, GA 30004
53 Tammi Kimsey
I totally oppose this rezoning. ! bought my house 13 years ago when there wasn't even a Deerfield Parkway, and
there were no building on Windward Parkway. The growth up in this area needs to be stopped and limited. Traffic
is already bad enough. This is not the same area I thought I was moving into 13 years ago. Enough is enough.
54 Patrick McAreavey
55 Beth Simpson
1 strongly oppose the Highway 9/Bethany Bend gas station's rezoning and variance application.
56 Shannon Pickerel
57 Richard King
58 Val Martin
59 Charles G. Bethel
1025 South Bethany Creek Dr.
Milton, Ga. 30004
60 Diane godby
61 roger metcalf
We have enough gas stations already!
62 Joan Tarosky
63 Laura Wright
64 Dale Pavcik
Please, I do not wish to see a gas station at this site which is totally unnecessary with all the other options for
purchasing gasoline so near this plan site. Itis just not needed. Thank you, Dale Pavcik
65 Lynn Gregory
33805onata Lane
Milton, GA 30004
# Name
Comments
65 Roger & Micheline Hunter
67 Jacque & Chris House
735 Springbrook Ct
Alpharetta, GA 30004
BethanyCreek North
68 Betty Ann Blake
I appose the building of a gas station atthis location.
69 Mary Connell
70 William Barge
Bethany Creek Homeowner
71 Michael Leon
I am not in agreement ...
To rezone from AG-1(Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1(Community Business) to develop a 2,400
square foot building with 5 pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre.
-Concurrentvariance to reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany Bend (Section 64-1090(a)
This is not the right location for something of this nature.
72 Mike Mandato
I oppose this variance
73 carrie siege)
74 Ray Stiles
75 Kay Norvell
76 Robert Chanin
77 Brenda Ames
1090 S Bethany Creek Or Milton, GA 30004
Please do not build the gas station in this location.
78 Frances Radomskl
79 Patrick & Carole McAreavey
80 Charles Godfrey
NO GAS STATI0NI!1! 1!1! I!! WE HAVE TO MANY ALREADY
81 audrey goolnrk
Toa much traffic already ----area too congested --plenty of available gas stations.
Stop dumping commercial usage into our once "rural' area.
82 Sarah K. Allen
I am glad you are sending this out. We did the same for the proposed site at Deerfield and Hwy 9 and it worked
well. Please send out an email on the proposed planning meeting, so we can all attend.
83 Erin Carter
84 Vickie neary
85 Maryanne Hayes
86 GCE Properties LLC
87 Wes Favors
1 feel that it sets a bad precedent to change the toning laws that exist today. They are in place for a reason and
should be adhered to. If they are over turned here, it will set precedent for them to not use them in other locations.
If that is the case, why have them.
88 Imke Pfennig
The intersection is very crowded and narrow (turning from Hwy9 nothbound onto Bethany Bend), A Gas station
would make the situation much worse. The landscape already changed dramatically when the CVS was built.
Loosing more landscaping space would be terrible.
89 Shelley Lail
I live around the corner from this site. We have plenty of gas stations in our area. No need for anymore.
90 Alan B. Shouse
91 Brian E. Durst
NOW
92 Ginny Durst
No, No and NOW
93 Karen Howard
There are better locations for this type of business further north along Highway 9-
94 Melissa Pavcik
95 Regina Brooks
I do not NEED or WANT a gas station at this intersection. We already have several gas station/convenience stores
just slightly south and north of the proposed site --same of which have closed due to the -over proliferation of such
stores in the area. Also, this site is too close to existing homes.
96 Jennifer Favors
1 am in opposition of the proposed gas stations.
2020 North Bethany Creek Drive,
Alpharetta, GA 30004
97 Byron Amstutz
98 Connie Abbott
I agree with the reasons For opposing the above requested rezoning - we do not need another gas station... have
over 5 within a 3 mile radius.,.
99 Isaiah Yancy
100 Leslie Harper
# Name
Comments
101 Sharon Holton
This is unneeded and will create traffic problems, as well as undesirable business.
102 Paul J Heigl
103 Alice Glenn
104 Walter Glenn
105 Yana Zidarov
106 Donald E. Holton
As a concerned neighbor I strongly oppose the zoning request for the reason stated in the above petit ian.
107 Carolyn Long
That whale area is already too congested to include another structure much less a gas station!
108 Elisabeth Malone
109 Michael
I concur with all that is said above - This site is not somewhere a gas station should be!
110 Hirai Lavania
111 Christine Daigre
112 margie chenggis
113 Kass Wilson
That intersection is already dangerous. Asa result, motorists are utilizing the Publix parking lot as a cut through to
avoid it. Access to a gas station which would be immediately located where these 2 street intersect. That would
create more chaos and therefore more accidents.
114 Cassandra Prepetit
115 David Pastore
116 John Paulo$
Harmony U.
Milton, Ga
117 Pam Thompson
119 Lucy Holmes
119 jessle phillips
120 Dennis Easter
121 Jim Simpson
! oppose rezoning and the concurrent variance on this site. The lot size is less than one acre and is not suitable for a
gas station or similar development. There 1s certainly no need for this type of facility when there are at least 7 gas
stationjconvenience stores, that I can think of, within a 2 ora mile radius of this site!
122 Rob Luxton
123 Jodi Luxton
124 Lisa Santangelo
125 Joy Pelaez
126 Jeff Wright
Definitely opposed to a gas station on this corner.
127 Amy Whittall
128 Jerome Wilson
2060 N. Bethany Creek Drive, Alpharetta, GA 30004 -
Bethany Creek Subdivision
129 Dana Wilson
2060 N. Beth an Creek Drive, Alpharetta, GA 30004, Bethany Creek Subdivision
130 teresaleonard
131 Lee Ghannam
132 Kim Keller
We already have plenty of gas stations and convenience stores. Not necessary!!
133 Kimberly Sanet
1 oppose the use of this parcel or a gas station and convenience store.
134 Yvonne Tokos
I oppose the proposed new rezoning for a gas station
one Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend
135 William Hosmer
136 Jim Lomenick
137 Kelly Grady
South Bethany
1225 S Bethany Creek
138 Faye McNulty
139 Chris Bradley
I am oppose to the gas station at the intersection of Bethany and hwy9.
3241 Serenade Court
Alpharetta, GA
140 Howard Lichtman
141 Dan & Katherine Azzarella
Address: 1005 South Bethany Creek Drive
Sub Division! Bethany Creek
142 Dan Warner
I oppose the proposed gas station.
143 Matt Haywood
144 Lrusso
145 ChadjDan Warner
Bethany Creek
1065 5 Bethany Creek Dr
Alpharetta, GA 30004
146 William E Davis -Ir
# Name
Comments
147 Sandra Chapin
I am opposed to this zoning variance. Its construction will detrimentally impact neighbors in this area - not to
mention more traffic issues and congestion.
148 Linda Henry
I definitely do not want a gas station on the corner of Bethany Bend and Hwy 9. The 2 12n hwy is already overused
and causes many traffic issues.
149 mary mills
156 Lance Large
I am opposed to the intensity of site improvement on this small and oddly shaped site, and do not think it warrants
a buffer variance. I am not opposed to responsible development or to the fact thatthls is proposed as a
ccnveniencejgas facility.
Lance Large
13770 Belleterre Drive
Milton GA 30004
151 KIM HORNE
152 Rod & Bettye Kovach
We are counting on our city representatives to do the right thing. We firm Ey oppose this development as neither
suitable for site, zoning, & usage; nor is it economically viable for an already saturated market.
There are at least (6) GAS STATIONS WITHIN 1+/- MILE of this site! There are much better uses for this parcel that
would fit the existing zoning AND be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods.
153 Nara 2elaya
154 Matthew Stout
155 Inger Fields
1135 South Bethany Creek Drive
Alpharetta, Ga 30004
156 Jason Fields
157 Megan McFarland
I think we have enough gas stations on every corner, why build another one just because you have vacant land?
158 John and Katy Henry
13400 avensong crossing milton ga 30004
154 Janet Sweet
160 Julianne Hansen
Concur area is too small for stated purpose.
161 Rachel Howard
Neighborhood 5ubdivis!on :
Bethany Creek
2010 North Bethany Creek Drive
A1pharetta, GA 30004
162 Sidney S. Morgrey
163 Vic Jones
I am opposed to the gas station on this small, cramped site. This development will have a negative impact o�ti the
pedestrian friendly, residential area in which it's located.
164 anne valgoi
16S Arthi Mani
166 5ridhar Manickam
167 Kevin T. Richardson
I oppose this re -zoning.
Avensong Subdivision
3401 Serenade Ct
Milton, GA 30004
168 David Welch
169 ashley baer
I oppose this.
170 Cindy Mattie
1060 S. Bethany Creek Drive
Mi!ton, GA 30004
Bethany Creek South Subdivision
171 T A Pacer
172 angela lindsay
173 Mark Kubik
174 Mark Van0eWater
2040 North Bethany Creek Drive
175 Brian Vicknair
Too small of a lot for the requested use
176 Eve Pull
Bethany Creek
177 Amy Van ❑e Water
2040 N Bethany Creek Dr
# Name
Comments
178 Chris Mattie
Address; 106D South Bethany Creek Dr.
Milton, GA
I am opposed to the rezoning request and said variances as well as the idea of adding yet another gas station to the
landscape of aur community. This type of business wili have a definite negative impact on the surrounding
residents with the addition of increased ground level ozone, potential increased risk of Leukemia for our children
from benzine in the surrounding air, and increased crime.
We have a duty as citizens of this community to protect the character of our community by carefully choosing the
types and number of businesses we support, as well as, considering how they impact the quality of life for our
resideatsthat live in and pay taxes in our city.
We are also in serious danger of losing the chance to secure green space in the highway 9 overlay section of Milton.
Milton should endeavorto become a model for others to follow.
179 Himanshu Pandya
1 oppose the gas station.
180 Russell Olsen
181 Michael Palocsik
I am a resident of South Bethany Creek Subd. 545 ParkbrookTrace and I strongly oppose the placing of a gas station
at Bethany Bend and Hwy 9.
182 Bob Beckham
183 Nichola Clay
Site is simply too small
184 Maria Becerra
We have enough gas stations close by. Why do we need another one?
185 Lori Ovington
186 Sandy Jones
1125 South Bethany Creek. I do not supportthe rezoning and variance request for the proposed gas station as it
does not meet current CoM ordinances and design standards. The site location is inappropriate due to the
extremely small site size and shape,significant concerns of sustainability of the business, and does not fit in with the
pedestrian friendly live -work -play vision for the City of Miiton_
187 Ka renlee Oreo
13779 Belleterre Drive
188 Arrington Family
189 Jay C Powell
As president of the fairmont hoa I oppose granting;hese requested variances, but do not oppose of site
development for other use.
190 Candice E. Poor
191 Robert Crystal
192 Scott Morgan
I am completely against the gas station as all of my neighbors are. We are already affected by the noise pollution
and light pollution that is currently against our neighborhood. This is a residential neighborhood not a commercial
neighborhood.
193 Judith Hogg
I agree with the comments by Chris Mattle. I am apposed to a gas station at this location. I would be willing to pay
more taxes fnr more parks. 1 would like Milton to have a village community... not a runway where humans are at
risk or even at best just a tax source.
194 Ronna Sabino
No to gas station
195 Carol Neal
196 Brittany Atkinson
197 Erin Hannaford
198 Marilea Welhouse
I'm a resident of Bethany Creek subdivision.
199 Lori Wynne
1 live in the Croaked Creek area.
Robvn MacDonald
From: dmgarri@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2410 11:00 AM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: Panning Comm Item RZ 10 011 VC 10-01
This is regarding the request to build a gas station on the SE corner of Hwy 9 and Bethany. It is on the agenda for
tonight's meeting. Please pass this email on to the proper person on that Commitee.
Please vote "no" to the rezoning of this lot for a gas station. This intersection is one of the main intersections within the
City of Milton and especially the east side of the city. It should be consistent with the quality image we want to promote
vs. low end retail. Other issues:
--Traffic concerns which will only get worse as the new high school opens in 2012.
--Questionable need. There are gas stations about two miles away at Windward. Kroger just opened a gas facility. One
of the two gas stations at McFarland and Hwy 9 closed. This is the type of business that cannot be modified easily if it
does not succeed.
--Pollution-
--Attractive nuisance. This type of business attracts loitering see other similar businesses north of spot also on Hwy 9)
--Questionable merchandise. Do we really need more liquor and cigarettes sold about a mile from a new high school's
Please vote "NO". Thank you.
Denise Garrigan
410 Majestic Cove
Milton, GA 30004
Crooked Creek Subdivision
The subject site may have a reasonable use as currently zoned, with a
smaller building and circulation footprint.
The dumpster is located adjacent to Hwy 9. Section 54-1092 (d) states that
receptacles shall be placed in the least visible location from public
streets.
Concern Over Future Traffic Impacts:
Completion of Westside Parkway
New Proposed High School (vehicle/pedestrian/bike)
Strickland / Bethany Bend proposed gas station
Union Hill Multi -Use Development.
Widening of Bethany Bend to 4 lanes
Widening of Hwy 9 to 4 lanes
Due to the small site footprint and traffic flow patterns it is concerning as
how public safety equipment will be able to access the building.
'!liability:
-Poor/difficult accessability has been shown to result in failure of service
station (site examples like Haynes Bridge/Old Milton site and McFarland/Hwy.
9 BP site)
-Future widening of Bethany and Hwy. 9 will exacerbate existing access
difficulties.
-No market studies provided by applicant to show station will succeed.
Desirability:
The subject site is a prominent corner of the City and is designated in the
Plan as Neighborhood Living -Working. The proposed development will not
contribute toward a safe pedestrian friendly area based on the lack of space
to provide a beauty strip along Hwy 9 between the curb and the sidewalk.
Reducing the landscape strip is not desired shows a disregard for the value of
trees and landscaping to promote the neighborhood setting of wanting to
maintain the look and feel of the residential area for Bethany Send.
The hydrocarbons that are emitted from a gasoline are known carcinogenic.
Although environmental agencies require implementation of safety devices
and monitoring, a failure of any of these has serious and concerning impact
potential on the families and children in the area.
Adherence to City of Milton Zoning Ordinances:
The City of Milton has developed a set of ordinances and standards to
provide a level of development that adds and maintains our City's character.
For these ordinances and standards to be effective, they must be
implemented and adhered to for developments in the City of Milton. This
provides the framework to develop a site such that it reflects the unique
characteristics of Milton. The proposed development is not appropriate as it
can not be constructed in adherence of the City of Milton Ordinances.
One thing developers look at is precedent. If a landscape reduction is
granted for this corner, odds are the developer for the remaining
undeveloped property will ask for a similar variance.
The Bethany Creek and other Bethany Bend communities five in the higher
density area of Milton (this is because large parts of Milton have no sewer
which helps protect those areas from higher density development).
Therefore, we have to rely on our City's staff and elected officials to, at the
very least, enforce our existing zoning laws, development standards, and
development overlay ordinances. Without enforcement, why have them.
BY SIGNING BELOW YOU ARE ACKNOWLEDGING YOUR
OPPOSITION TO:
Request filed by:
OWNER: ❑ Squared Development LLC, Mehdi Jannatkhah
ADDRESS: 2490 Dallas Hwy, Marietta, GA 35054
PETITIONER/REPRESENTATIVE: Nathan V. Hendricks III
To rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and G-1 (Community Business) to C-1
(Community Business) to develop a 2,400 square foot building with 5 pump
islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre.
Concurrent variance to reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along
Bethany Bend (Section 64-1590(a)
Craig Kaufman
555 Parkbrook Trace
Milton Ga. 30004
The residents of the Bend Bend area support and are a proponent of
responsible development in the Hwy 9 area. We believe that quality and
sustainable commercial development is a necessary part of any successful
community.
A rezoning a variance application has been submitted to the City of Milton to
develop the southeast corner of Hwy 9 and Bethany Send. The proposed
development consists of gas station and 2,400 square foot convenience
store. The applicant has requested the following rezoning and variance in
order to construct the gas station:
RZ10-01 - rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to
C-1 (Community Business) to develop a 2,400 square foot gas station with 5
pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre; and con -current
variance
VC10-01 - To reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany
Bend (Section 64-1090(a)
information on the proposed gas station can be reviewed at:
ht# www.cit ofmilton Q a.us cit clerk czim 2010/01-27-201 O -C Z I M- P a c ket. p df
We the residents of the Bethany Bend area oppose the proposed gas station
due its technical feasibility, viability, and desirability.
Feasibility:
The proposed use is too intensive on such a small site, including the gas
pumps, parking, and area for gas tankers to deliver fuel.
There is concern with potential spillover of lighting to nearby single family
residences to the east and north during the evening hours.
The proposed gas station and 2,400 square foot convenience store is not
suitable based on the small size of the parcel,
There is potential for cut through traffic on the site between Bethany Bend
and Hwy 9.
The intersection of Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend is problematic and accessing the
subject site will be challenging.
The applicant is requesting a concurrent variance to reduce the landscape
strip along Bethany Bend based on the lacy of area to develop the gas
station and associated convenience store.
Robyn MacDonald
From: Judith Hogg UiAthhogg@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2x14 12:39 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: Case RZI0-01NC10-0 1
I am contacting you in opposition to the rezoning of the lot at Bethany Bend and Hwy 9 as
this in no way improves the quality of life for the residents of Milton. I can appreciate
the possibility of tax dollars this would appropriate; however, I would certainly pay more
taxes if this could be a park or something that would add value to a village atmosphere to
the city of Milton.
Please include in the record and forward to the members of the Planning Commission for their
review in consideration of case RZ1@-@IIVCIO-01. Thank you Judith Hoggg
@judithhogg@gmail.com
1
Robyn MacDonald
From: Cindy mattie Idndy_mattie@belisouth.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 5:21 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: Please include in the record and forward to the members of the Planning Commission for their
review in consideration of case RZ10-01fVC10-D1
Robyn,
Please include in the record and forward to the members of the Planning Commission for their
review in consideration of case RZ10-d1/VC1d-01.
We are opposed to the rezoning request and said variances as well as the idea of adding yet another gas
station to the landscape of our community. This type of business will have a definite negative impact on
the surrounding residents with the addition of increased ground level ozone, potential increased risk of
Leukemia for our children from benzine in the surrounding air, and increased crime.
We have a duty as citizens of this community to protect the character of our community by carefully
choosing the types and number of businesses we support, as well as, considering how they impact the
quality of life for our residents that live in and pay taxes in our city. We are also in serious danger of
losing the chance to secure green space in the highway 9 overlay section of Milton. We would actually like
to see this land turned into a "pocket park" since it is so small for most other uses. Eventually the
adjoining land could be purchased and the park could be expanded to include walking trails as well. Milton
should endeavor to become a model for others to follow.
Chris & Cindy Mattie
1050 S. Bethany Creek Drive
Milton, GA 30004
Bethany Creek South Subdivision
Robyn MacDonald
From: micheline hunter [micheline.hunter a@tavern[ercapital.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 5:38 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: RZ10--011VC 10-01
Attachments: Is it safe to live near a gas station. PDF
Dear Ms. MacDonald,
I found the attached article that I wanted to share with you
The vision of the City of Milton is that it is committed to maintaining a unique quality of life for its constituents. Embracing
small town life and preserving rural character. We love living in the City of Milton. We enjoy walking to Publix, Starbucks,
walking our dogs, and our children ride their bikes and walk with their parents.
The gas station is not a good fit far aur neighborhood. We would love to see a playground for children or a nice restaurant
that people can walk to and gather.
If you take a look at the intersection of Bethany Bend and Windward Parkway, we have two carwash places across from
each other,
Tire stores across from each other and an auto service station. Gas stations pose a hazard to neighborhoods from
gasoline fumes, groundwater hazard from possible leaking of underground storage tanks. Ozone pollution found in
gasoline vapors and carbon monoxide that come from car exhaust lead to respiratory problems, asthma, and not to forget
that benzene causes cancer. The other negative is the potential loss of value to our homes.
Cherokee County has a 400Ft. limit on how near a gas station and underground fuel storage tanks can be from residential
neighborhoods and public right of way.
I could not find anything from the City of Milton zoning and planning.
Thank you for your time.
Micheline bunter
_060 N. Bethany Creel Driv w
Milton, GA a0004
Phone: (7-'O) 740-965'
Is It Safe to Live Near a Gas Stt_-,n?'. Scientific Ainelrican
Page I of Z
+polia.2109i'— -r3.
Is It Safe to Live Near a Gas Station?
Th s health C.OM e: ns ro r } j V. e r your fa m i ly w ith li:•i ng ;, th P. pu top
tae erarim. wn aaa:."F.. " nasamr rpn Mr
re.neenra. Go—e he pera h, We gr d:—1
omae ids Sar- cQ ¢+haunt 9rpun¢ a[n port fan
horn ell e M V. tee W,@ Irl. the y r—A ar Ir
tae HM u. Jeeprduid 5[e/e0e lenki eM expea—
DearEarthTalk: I am 10oking atpossibly
'buying a house that is very dost to a
gas aline sta tilon. Is it Safe to live so close to a
gas station? What Wncer is should IItave? I
bav a tod411 er an d infant babies.
— Ronfeato, tlorrstor, T.1
D,Cgg
Ovspite all the modern health and safety grid Eli nes
they In list Faliaw_ gas s Atians can still ease
subeng
signili(sinthar.ards to neighbors, espee3ally-
Choi dren- So mcoFiii eperi IaInciudegFnund-level
Like V
ozone caused in pan by gas 011 ne fumes,
T-_ *r v_F
groundwater hazards from petroleum Products
leaking into the ground, and expo_=rrre hazards From
other chemicals that might be used at the station if.rtu
it's also a repair sho P.
W. I.-- Lhrren—ehrheinyh+ceu=._ir Ozone.poilutioniseausedbyamixturedvcaaliteorganle
ne em rlm la sho arepeir A:ep- compannds. so m e of whlch are Fo ural in gasvli no va pars. and ethers,
like cnrhon mo:loxie1c, that Conte From car ehhaust..'dost s pir;aps
today m rrst h a-ae g av er nm en t -regal rated .•alwr-FMw ry bow is o n Buie n orales, wh ich 11 in it the, release of gas
'alxirs while you're refuel Ing yro ur car. A similar system is its ed by the sta tl on when a tanker art ices t rerill the
underg mend tan ks. But if those boots area t wu rk ing prop erl y; the n ear] v odorles s hyd roc arbo in f i mea, wh ich
m ntain ha rm fug chemicals l i ke ben zene, can be released into the air.
Fl ig':rcro�ae levels can 3eaU yb respiratory prvllems and asthma, �ihile brmene ssP known ren,-�-�rau,ting
chemical, according to rhe Natian al €n Wlu [es of T•lea lth (NTH j. The :guest to reduce oxo ne levels has leri the state
9 F Cali fo rryw to i on pls•m ent A in o re 3enrigen It vap CK -recover;• la w, CK FUive Apri I 12009, ah ich requ Irc s €h ar a fl
gasoline pumps Ila VE. a ne .I no CC, e€ftuttVeYallor-MCOWI}' nozzle,
underground gasoline stop4e tank can also be a pmblem. The L' -.S. Eri%nronmenral Protection Agen C: (CPA)
estimatesthat there are some 66o,000 of them born wast•to•roos. M env a lawsuit 1185 been Ned agalnst oil Arms
in Communities acrads the country by people •,-hose 5oifl grid groondivatern•ars Fouled by a gas sb[tiun's leakirg
rrnde rg ru unci sio Page tan k-Inthepant, moss tar, kb were m Ode bf L!Wiated 5 tQO1 wh ich %Y ill r List ei v, ti in v-A6,O,
pipes leading.o the tanks can be accidentally mptuuA_
Whin the ora oda of gal Eons of gasalirre enter Ibe. sail, ch am icals travel to grow ndwa ber, whidi the EPA says is the
so«rce of drink! R& wg rr for nearly half the U,S. Tf bavinc a home, consider its poLe nti al loss in'ai ue if a nearby
underg mund stv rage rank were to leak Gasclin a add it ires such as methyl tertiary -butyl ether lM TBE). which hrs
been cudi wed in some stases.make the wnter nn0.rn$able--and that 15 only one of 1."o chem icaiv in gam 11 rat.
Rope ated high expos ore to gp st, in e, ••,-s ether in €i q u id or vapa r form, can causa hu•.g brain And kid ray' da rn age,
R=crding b the N€Ii's National Lib try a"Medirine•
Spif;ecl ar vaporised gasoiine ie oat be o irly chemical hazy nl iFthe station is also aFella ie shop. N4echan3ts star
solven es, an di freeze and lend pradaety, and may wo r€: n .'ch.Oes tar at have asbestos In br8 kes or dii tche s. Auto
ren. is hrrs marl paint ohojx use are. more p.L-tial ty harm Ful rhe mivml s.
in today's ciirx rtri c wvrid, ,vr c ant escape expos ure co mplct a Ir, , Because tiwzL t ah emit Al s a re in oc v ai r j r i st
about ere ryich ere. 6ii I by c ho using w here we i s ve, keepi ng an cautfor:pi.' ls, an d press ori ng the orl cern ponies
to do the righ t th in g'or th e m m mun it ies they acuspy we ea n mint In i x our expusu res.
CU N'.T L-A CT'S:L=S. E[IA ,_ryam; Narip na I In sciei tes c F Hai i€h,x W'0h. r.:v.
tiarthTalk s s p rn du ce d by Eahe Envi ran ni enta I N a gaxin e. 5 END YOUR E VTR0itiIIy-I ENTAL
SCUTS TIi3:v S TQ: T u d hT n ik, P.t). 66x Soo r LYrs tpo r:, CT a 68 Si; .r Cis.' r:;_::'.i o -;r -[:s'_ -.iii;. Rc a:j ; ;1 st
r:01u in ns a[: i*�. _ .:j:2, �.;'i;;=i�';i iia,'r.:-e.� ;'ea.Ear€h Tal L is no ry x b3ak I Dena l s a nd v rder
inform acids at: ."_-;!y:, ton.", 23n in an Ira I'•_h, tr;'n^r..aL•:
http-1/ww,,v.scientifiicarnerican.coi-n/articIe.cfm?id=is-it-safe-to-live-near-gas-station ?.17312010
Robyn Macdonald
From: Rachel Howard [rachel.m_howard@hotmaii.comj
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 1:47 PM
To: Alan Tart; Bill Lusk; Burt Hewitt; Julie ZahnerBailey; Karen Thurman; Joe Longoria
Cc: Robyn MacDonald; Angela Rambeau; info@bethanycreek.net; jones1125@comcast.net;
rachel.m.howard@hotmail.com
Subject: Application Number RZ10-O1NC10-01, 3105 Bethany Bend
Attachments: Gas Station Proposal.pdf
Dear City of Milton Council Members:
I understand the owner of the property and developer "D Squared Development LLC' has recently filed an application
for rezoning the lot located on the corner of Bethany Bend and Highway 9, and is seeking approval to build a gas
station, and convenience store.
As owner of a home in the North Bethany Creek development, I am writing to express my opposition to the building of
a gas station and convenience store adjacent to our residences. Please see the attached letter to explain
my position regarding this. Please feel free to contact me if you need further information.
Your time and consideration is deeply appreciated.
Best Regards,
Rachel M. Howard
2010 North Bethany Creek Drive,
Alpharetta, GA 30004
Cell: 561-655-0324
.................
Your E-mail and More On -the -Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now.
1
Is It Safe to Live Near a Gas Stu. n?: Scientific American
cu M'giit Also Uke
Diswss This Artide
Ads by G."N
Unbranded Retail Fuel
Wtionw kis Rola it Fuel Supply
Un rn atch 6d 3Wvica &SuPoo,
my w-0.4an ah elddi. ca in
Retail Fueling solutions
Use o ll ate st technolcgy in
in slagstion nl ftmlgng pumps
wvrw. in to rsta le pu m pan d is nu.ca m
Stop Fuel Theft
r]iasel F. 3es Pump Alarm 8ysierns
AWIlions $ saved since 2008
:rr x-E'ntlo cnm
Ta nk Re m ova
storaga Tank Remoral3 Clasure
Environmental Assessment& Claanup
ur •x.nefi-us
s "P' Could Food Slwrtages Hring Down
' CiOlxatiuO
Potlutions To]! on the Brain
s.:
saving the Disadvantaged ream Pollution
Ai—n—, a cre— ci; Is81A Anter_ s- I -t A.: k:W!- s 4aser•.a .
Some airborne particles vase more.
dangers than others
X;;F- scrennec
File t[si Science
us inYourinbw
16C I.!lFtzr xi4j� 'S �aYt;g
Page 2 of 2
http:llwvvtiv.scientiticaiiierlcan.cotn/articIe.cfm?id=is-it-safe-to-live-near-gas-station 2/23/2010
kllt; r43ments Tarn int- Tgns aF fir
poldutanr3 at Schools
Fixi ng tale GI obol_`l itra gen Problc ui
seien[lots Find •BalPiing' Link
bdwr n tiutlinl and Vinyl Flooring
.
As NanohTh's Prumisa Grow., WO
:
Pnny Particles Present Sig Health
ffi
Frpblems7
Diswss This Artide
Ads by G."N
Unbranded Retail Fuel
Wtionw kis Rola it Fuel Supply
Un rn atch 6d 3Wvica &SuPoo,
my w-0.4an ah elddi. ca in
Retail Fueling solutions
Use o ll ate st technolcgy in
in slagstion nl ftmlgng pumps
wvrw. in to rsta le pu m pan d is nu.ca m
Stop Fuel Theft
r]iasel F. 3es Pump Alarm 8ysierns
AWIlions $ saved since 2008
:rr x-E'ntlo cnm
Ta nk Re m ova
storaga Tank Remoral3 Clasure
Environmental Assessment& Claanup
ur •x.nefi-us
s "P' Could Food Slwrtages Hring Down
' CiOlxatiuO
Potlutions To]! on the Brain
s.:
saving the Disadvantaged ream Pollution
Ai—n—, a cre— ci; Is81A Anter_ s- I -t A.: k:W!- s 4aser•.a .
Some airborne particles vase more.
dangers than others
X;;F- scrennec
File t[si Science
us inYourinbw
16C I.!lFtzr xi4j� 'S �aYt;g
Page 2 of 2
http:llwvvtiv.scientiticaiiierlcan.cotn/articIe.cfm?id=is-it-safe-to-live-near-gas-station 2/23/2010
Rachel M. Howard
2010 N Bethany Creek Drive, Alpharetta, GR 30004 Cell: S61 --d55-0324
February 19, 2010
13000 Deerfield Pkwy,
Building 100, Suite 1070
Milton, GA 30004
RE: Application Number RZ10-Ol/VC10-01, 3105 Bethany Bend
Dear City of Milton Council Members:
I understand the owner of the property and developer "❑ Squared Development LLC' has recently filed
an application for rezoning the lot located on the corner of Bethany Bend and Highway 9, and is
seeking approval to build a gas station, and convenience store.
As owner of a home in the North Bethany Creek development, I am writing to express my opposition
to the building of a gas station and convenience store adjacent to our development..
Although the building of a gas station appears to be a decision with little consequence, this is an
extremely important issue for our residents. Most of the residents continue to oppose the building of
the gas station and rezoning.
Use of the property to build a gas station should not be considered for the following reasons:
It is in direct conflict and contrary to the City of Milton's Mission & Vision Statement in that it will not
maintain quality of life, nor will it preserve and enhance our rural character.
Mission Statement: The City of Milton is committed to maintaining the unique quality of life for our
constituents while efficiently delivering essential services to residents and businesses in a commuity
interactive environment.
Vision Statement: Milton is a distinctive community embracing small-town life and heritage while
preserving and enhancing our rural character.
By far, the most important reasons against rezoning and building a gas station are these safety
Issues:
Building a gas station would increase traffic congestion on the public streets and decrease traffic
flow. Traffic congestion is already a concern at peak hours on this section of Bethany Bend & Highway
9.
Since there are major changes soon to occur in our area, include the building of a High School, these
developments need to be taken into account when planning,
• Bethany Bend will be the main access road to the future High School, a large student body who
attend the school must commute each day. This greatly adds to the congestion. Tanker trucks
delivering gas affects the safety of the vehicles and the pedestrians & the shape of the lot will inhibit
tanker truck maneuverability.
Another consideration is Underground Storage Tanks which sometime release contents stored
petroleum, such as gasoline, diesel, used oil, heating oil, or ethanol into the environment and our
creeks.
• Bethany Creek, Belle Terre, Oak Meade, Deer Valley, are all "land -locked" neighborhoods. Bethany
Bend is the only access road to these neighborhoods. Already, at peak traffic times, traffic is backed
up on both sides of Bethany Bend prohibiting entry to the homes. Additional traffic may even further
prevent police, fire, and other emergency vehicles from gaining access to the citizens in the event of
an emergency. These facts demonstrate that to build a gas station would be to disregard the safety
and wellbeing of the residents.
• Another safety concern is that a new High School will be in close proximity to the property, and most
of the students in our neighborhood will walk to school. Additional traffic would endanger the students
who need to walk to and from school daily. At lunch-time and after school, many of these same
students would walk to and from home, with Bethany Bend being the only street accessing our
neighborhood.
• Adjoining property values would be diminished by the building of a gas station - it would not be in
the public interest, but instead would be solely in the interest of the applicant.
It is vital that the property remain as it is currently zoned for many additional reasons:
§ The property is at the main entrance to many residential developments. Changing the property to he
zoned for the building of a gas station would after the image of and undermine the character of our
neighborhood.
§ There are already many other spaces available. Therefore, there is no need for this space to be used
for this purpose.
I would completely support a business at the location, if thru due process, the surrounding residents
were in agreement, and it were found to be in the best interest of the community.
However, as I have demonstrated, there are absolutely no compelling reasons to consider a zoning
change or building of a gas station on this lot. In fact, there is substantial evidence that to rebuild the
property would be unconscionable.
I strongly urge you to do what is best for the citizens of the City of Milton, by opposing the building of
a gas station and rezoning of this property, thus preserving the character of our neighborhood and the
safety of our residents. Thank you very much for your time.
Sincerely,
Rachel M Howard
2010 N Bethany Creek Drive
Alpharetta, GA 30004
Robyn MacDonald •
From: Bowen, E.J. [ej_bowen@merck.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2014 5:23 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: RZ10-01NC10-01
Robyn,
Please include in the record and forward to the members of the Planning Commission for their review in consideration of
case RZ10-01NCIO-01.
Unfortunately, I am out of town and will not be able to attend tonight's meeting but I wanted to reach out and make you
aware of my apportion of RZ10-a11VC10-01:
• The rezoning from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1 (Community Business) to develop a
2,400 square foot building with 5 pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre.
• Concurrent variance to reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany Bend (Section 64-1090(a)
I feel this way due to lack of feasibility based on the following:
• The proposed use is too intensive on such a small site, including the gas pumps, parking, and area for gas
tankers to deliver fuel.
There is concern with potential spillover of lighting to nearby single family residences to the east and north during
the evening hours.
■ The proposed gas station and 2,400 square foot convenience store is not suitable based on the small size of the
parcel,
■ There is potential for cut through traffic on the site between Bethany Bend and Hwy 9.
• The intersection of Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend is problematic and accessing the subject site will be challenging.
• The applicant is requesting a concurrent variance to reduce the landscape strip along Bethany Bend based on the
lack of area to develop the gas station and associated convenience store.
■ The subject site may have a reasonable use as currently zoned, with a smaller building and circulation footprint.
• The dumpster is located adjacent to Hwy 9. Section 64-1092 (d) states that receptacles shall be placed in the
least visible location from public
• streets.
• Concern Over Future Traffic Impacts -.Completion of Westside Parkway;New Proposed High School
(vehicle1pedestrianlbike);Strickland 1 Bethany Bend proposed gas station;Union Hill Multi -Use Development
Widening of Bethany Bend to 4 lanes -Widening of Hwy 9 to 4 lanes
Please take my thoughts into consideration while discussing RZ10-011VC10-01 tonight.
Thanks!
E.J. Bowen
Solutions Consultant
Customer Strategies & Solutions
Merck & Co.. Inc.
Office: 770-676-0712
Mobile: 770-508-625.2
Robyn MacDonald
Frorn: Cindy mattie [cindy_mattie@bellsouth.net]
Sent. Tuesday, February 23, 2010 5:21 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: Please include in the record and forward to the rnembers of the Planning Commission for their
review in consideration of case RZ'10-01NCI 0-01
Robyn,
Please include in the record and forward to the members of the Planning Commission for their
review in consideration of case RZ10-Ol/VCIO-41.
We are opposed to the rezoning request and said variances as well as the idea of adding yet another gas
station to the landscape of our community. This type of business will have a definite negative impact on
the surrounding residents with the addition of increased ground level ozone, potential increased risk of
Leukemia for our children from benzine in the surrounding air, and increased crime.
We have a duty as citizens of this community to protect the character of our community by carefully
choosing the types and number of businesses we support, as well as, considering how they impact the
quality of life for our residents that live in and pay taxes in our city. We are also in serious danger of
losing the chance to secure green space in the highway 9 overlay section of Milton. We would actually like
to see this land turned into a "pocket park" since it is so small for most other uses. Eventually the
adjoining land could he purchased and the park could be expanded to include walking trails as well. Milton
should endeavor to become a model for others to follow.
Chris & Cindy Mattie
1060 S. Bethany Creek Drive
Milton, GA 30004
Bethany Creek South Subdivision
Robvzz MacDonald
From: drngarri@aol.com
Seat: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:00 AM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: Panning Comm Item RZ 10 01! VC 10-01
This is regarding the request to build a gas station on the 5E corner of Hwy 9 and Bethany. it is on the agenda for
tonight's meeting. Please pass this email on to the proper person on that Commitee.
Please vote "no" to the rezoning of this lot for a gas station. This intersection is one of the main intersections within the
City of Milton and especially the east side of the city. It should be consistent with the quality image we want to promote
vs. low end retail. Other issues:
--Traffic concerns which will only get worse as the new high school opens in 2012.
—Questionable need. There are gas stations about two miles away at Windward. Kroger just opened a gas facility. One
of the two gas stations at McFarland and Hwy 9 closed, This is the type of business that cannot be modified easily if it
does not succeed.
—Pollution.
--Attractive nuisance. This type of business attracts loitering (see other similar businesses north of spot also on Hwy 9)
--Questionable merchandise. Do we really need more liquor and cigarettes sold about a mile from a new high school?
Please vote "NO". Thank you.
Denise Garrigan
410 Majestic Cove
Milton, GA 30004
Crooked Creek Subdivision
The residents of the Bend Bend area support and are a proponent of
responsible development in the Hwy 9 area. We believe that quality and
sustainable commercial development is a necessary part of any successful
community.
A rezoning a variance application has been submitted to the City of Milton to
develop the southeast corner of Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend. The proposed
development consists of gas station and 2,400 square foot convenience
store. The applicant has requested the following rezoning and variance in
order to construct the gas station:
RZ10-01 - rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to
C-1 (Community Business) to develop a 2.400 square foot gas station with 5
pump islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre; and con -current
variance
VC10-01 -- To reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along Bethany
Bend (Section 64-1090(a)
Information on the proposed gas station can be reviewed at:
httQ://www.cityof mi [to n ga. us cit clerk czim /2010/01-27-201 O -C Z I M -Pa c ket. p df
We the residents of the Bethany Bend area oppose the proposed gas station
due its technical feasibility, viability, and desirability.
Feasibility:
The proposed use is too intensive on such a small site, including the gas
pumps, parking, and area for gas tankers to deliver fuel.
There is concern with potential spillover of lighting to nearby single family
residences to the east and north during the evening hours.
The proposed gas station and 2,400 square foot convenience store is not
suitable based on the small size of the parcel,
There is potential for cut through traffic on the site between Bethany Bend
and Hwy 9.
The intersection of Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend is problematic and accessing the
subject site will be challenging.
The applicant is requesting a concurrent variance to reduce the landscape
strip along Bethany Bend based on the lack of area to develop the gas
station and associated convenience store.
The subject site may have a reasonable use as currently zoned, with a
smaller building and Circulation footprint.
The dumpster is located adjacent to Hwy 9. Section 64--1992 (d) states that
receptacles shall be placed in the least visible location from public
streets.
Concern Over Future Traffic Impacts:
Completion of Westside Parkway
New Proposed High School (vehicle/pedestrian/bike)
Strickland / Bethany Bend proposed gas station
Union Hill Multi -Use Development
Widening of Bethany Bend to 4 lanes
Widening of Hwy 9 to 4 lanes
Due to the small site footprint and traffic flow patterns it is concerning as
how public safety equipment will be able to access the building.
Viability:
-Poor/difficult accessability has been shown to result in failure of service
station (site examples like Haynes Bridge/Old Milton site and McFarland/Hwy.
9 BP site)
-Future widening of Bethany and Hwy. 9 will exacerbate existing access
difficulties.
-No market studies provided by applicant to show station will succeed.
Desirability:
The subject site is a prominent corner of the City and is designated in the
Plan as Neighborhood Living -Working. The proposed development will not
contribute toward a safe pedestrian friendly area based on the lack of space
to provide a beauty strip along Hwy 9 between the curb and the sidewalk.
Reducing the landscape strip is not desired shows a disregard for the value of
trees and landscaping to promote the neighborhood setting of wanting to
maintain the look and feel of the residential area for Bethany Bend.
The hydrocarbons that are emitted from a gasoline are known carcinogenic.
Although environmental agencies require implementation of safety devices
and monitoring, a failure of any of these has serious and concerning impact
potential on the families and children in the area.
Adherence to City of Milton Zoning Ordinances:
The City of Milton has developed a set of ordinances and standards to
provide a level of development that adds and maintains our City's character.
For these ordinances and standards to be effective, they must be
implemented and adhered to for developments in the City of Milton. This
provides the framework to develop a site such that it reflects the unique
characteristics of Milton. The proposed development is not appropriate as it
can not be constructed in adherence of the City of Milton Ordinances.
One thing developers look at is precedent_ If a landscape reduction is
granted for this corner, odds are the developer for the remaining
undeveloped property will ask for a similar variance.
The Bethany Creek and other Bethany Bend communities live in the higher
density area of Milton (this is because large parts of Milton have no sewer
which helps protect those areas from higher density development).
Therefore, we have to rely on our City's staff and elected officials to, at the
very least, enforce our existing zoning laws, development standards, and
development overlay ordinances. Without enforcement, why have them.
BY SIGNING BELOW YOU ARE ACKNOWLE❑GING YOUR
OPPOSITION TO:
Request filed by:
OWNER: ❑ Squared Development LLC, Mehdi Jannatkhah
ADDRESS: 2490 Dallas Hwy, Marietta, GA 30064
PETITIDNERfREPRESENTATIVE: Nathan V. Hendricks III
To rezone from AG -1 (Agricultural) and C-1 (Community Business) to C-1
(Community Business) to develop a 2,400 square foot building with 5 pump
islands at a density of 2,755.45 square feet per acre.
Concurrent variance to reduce the 20 -foot landscape strip to 10 feet along
Bethany Bend (Section 64-1090(x)
Craig Kaufman
555 Parkbrock Trace
Milton Ga. 30004
Robyn MacDonald
From: Michel Amjadi [michel_amjadi@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 6:22 PM
To: Alan Tart; Bi 11 Lusk; Burt Hewitt; Julie ZahnerBailey; Karen Thurman; Joe Longoria
Cc: Robyn MacDonald; Angela Rambeau; info@bethanycreek- net; Jones1125@comcast.net;
rachel.m.howard@hotmail.com; iversen_gitte@yahoo.00m
Subject: Case# RZ10-01/VC10-01: Gas Station adjust to residentional areas in Bethany Bend
Dear Milton City Council member,
It has been an honor to visit you in several Milton city hall community meetings where one of the promised
high priority items was setting standards for Milton's future developments.
I want to inform you of our frustration having found out for the plan for construction of a gas station adjust to
several residential subdivisions.
We beseech you, the council, who have families of your own to empathize with us on this issue and to prevent
construction of this gas station.
It's one thing for there to be stores, hair salons and coffee shops in the area; these businesses can build a
sense of community byway of providing gathering points and in moderation a convenience.
These can add to our quality of life.
A gas station on the other hand is something that bring uncontrolled traffic, encourage loitering, noise,
pollution, Sale of Alcoholic items, toxins, improper lighting for a residential area, malodorous smells and more,
in an area that at one point encouraged families to set roots down.
My family and I love living in Milton.
Please ask yourselves if you would want your children exposed to what a gas station would bring to near your
home.
If Milton wanted gas stations in a residential area, there should have been a disclaimer before allowing a
single person to move in.
There are other locations for gas stations that would in no way diminish the quality of life for a group of
residents.
We leave the decision in your hands and hope you support us by rejecting the application with case RZ10-
01/VC10-01 set for meeting on Feb 23.
I appreciate your time, consideration and support.
Best regards,
Michel Amjadi
720 5pringbrook Ct
Milton, GA 30004
770.753.3230
Roman MacDonald
From: Angela Rambeau
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 2:53 PM
To: Robyn MacDonald
Subject: FW: Proposed Gas Station
Attachments: DRB Letter.doc
tt3
From: Adkins, Lauren[mailto:AdkinsLCalfultonschools.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 1:59 PM
To: Angela Rambeau
Subject: Proposed Gas Station
Dear Angela,
As a homeowner less than 1 mile away from the site of this proposed gas station, I must voice my disgust
with the new plan. I see no need to add another gas station in this area when there are 2 in proximity. I
have attached a letter for your review, please include it in the record and forward to the members of the DRB
for their review in consideration of case RZ10-01/VC10-01.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter,
T-hW c,rade Teacker
Cogbu►-vi,woods Eiev�ewtar�
A° +,S L-Cic rosse C i r k
�dl�iv�,sl.@ fuitov�.sclnooLs.org
�f�eu s�eot fer t%re meax an�miss, feu ��Ist-ill,6e a�nen�y tie 8turs... �Gir�aurn
February 2, 2010
Re: RZ10-01/VC10-01
Courtesy Review by Design Review Board
Estate
Dear Members of Design Review Board,
My name is Charles G. Bethel and I reside at 1025 S. Bethany Creek Dr.,
Milton in the Bethany Creek subdivision, on the south side of the
development, behind the property being considered for development. I
would like to include the following comments into the public record and for
your consideration as part of your review.
First let me state that I am a proponent of responsible development. I
believe that quality and sustainable commercial development is a necessary
part of any successful community.
The City of Milton has developed a set of ordinances and standards to
provide a level of development that adds and maintains our City's character.
For these ordinances and standards to be effective, they must be
implemented and adhered to for developments in the City of Milton. This
provides the framework to develop a site such that it reflects the unique
characteristics of Milton.
Bethany Bend is a residential road lined by numerous residential single family
neighborhoods. Directly across the street from the proposed development is
the Belle Meade subdivision with 2 acre estates. Many residents use Bethany
Bend as a venue for walking and jogging. Also, many residents walk to the
business establishments at the intersection of Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend.
In your review, I am requesting that you require the applicant to adhere to
the requirements of the State Route 9 Overlay Standards and the Highway 9
Design Standards with special attention to the following:
This area is Pedestrian friendly as it is used for fitness walking and
patronizing existing businesses in the area. Pedestrian circulation should be
an integral part of the overall development of the site,
* Incorporate the elements of the CoM Access Management Plan for the
Highway 9 area: proposed and existing driveways should align on Highway 9
and Bethany Bend.
• Inter -parcel connection is encouraged in the Hwy 9 corridor and should be
taken into consideration in the site design of this project.
• Provide a 20 -fool- wide landscape strip on Hwy 9 and Bethany Bend.
• Minimize paving 1 maximize pervious pavement.
• Provide 5idewaIks that are: b' wide with 2'(min)- 5' (preferred) grass strip
between sidewalk and back of curb.
• Provide 3 feet grass strip between equestrian fence and sidewalk
• One bike parking rack must be provided on each non-residential development
site.
• The dumpster should have a vegetative screen between it and Hwy 9.
• The Detention Pond should be underground or designed to create a natural
look.
• Can the pond be used to create an attractive site feature?
• Lights should be architecturally decorative with a historic style.
• Pedestrian 5treetscape lighting should be provided on Hwy 9
■
Signage should follow the sign ordinance
■ 519nage should be externally illuminated and downward facing
• How will the canopy of this gas station comply with the requirements for
exterior materials? What will the developer do to make it fit in?
■
Examples of exterior materials and colors should be provided for review and
consideration in order to maintain the "look and feel" of other businesses in
the area.
• ❑ue to the prominence of the street intersection of Hwy 9 and Bethany
Rend this intersection should be distinguished by special landscape
treatments (i.e. trees and shrubs, flower beds) including the planting of an
American Elm (Ulmus Americana) with the size and specific location to be
determined by the City Arborist and an Architectural Element such as public
art or statuary?
Thank you for your consideration,
Respectfully,
Charles and Leigh Bethel
1025 South Bethany Creek Dr.
Milton, GA. 30004
Bethany Creek Subdivision
cc: CoM Zoning File
ORDINANCE NO.
STATE OF GEORGIA
FULTON COUNTY
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILTON,
GEORGIA, TO ADOPT AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL 2010 BUDGET FOR
EACH FUND OF THE CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA AMENDING THE
AMOUNTS SHOWN IN EACH BUDGET AS EXPENDITURES, AMENDING
THE SEVERAL ITEMS OF REVENUE ANTICIPATIONS, PROHIBITING
EXPENDITURES TO EXCEED APPROPRIATIONS, AND PROHIBITING
EXPENDITURES TO EXCEED ACTUAL FUNDING AVAILABLE.
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Milton, GA while in a
council meeting on May 17, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Milton has presented
amendments to the fiscal year 2010 budget to the City Council on each of the
various funds of the City; and
WHEREAS, each of these budget amendments results in a balanced
budget, so that anticipated revenues equal proposed expenditures for each fund;
and
WHEREAS, the amended fiscal year 2010 budget provides a financial
plan for the government, establishing appropriations for each operating
department in order to extend services;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED that this budget amendment,
“Exhibit A” attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof this
ordinance shall be the City of Milton’s amended fiscal year 2010 budget; and
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this budget be and is hereby approved
and the several items of revenues shown in the budget for each fund in the
amounts anticipated are adopted and that the several amounts shown in the
budget for each fund as proposed expenditures are hereby appropriated to the
departments named in each fund; and,
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the expenditures shall not exceed the
appropriations authorized by this budget or amendments thereto provided; that
expenditures for the fiscal year shall not exceed actual funding available.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of May, 2010.
CITY OF MILTON, GEORGIA
By: ________________________
Mayor Joe Lockwood
_________________________ ________________________
Councilmember Karen Thurman Councilmember Joe Longoria
_________________________ ________________________
Councilmember Julie Zahner-Bailey Councilmember Burt Hewitt
_________________________ ________________________
Councilmember Bill Lusk Councilmember Alan Tart
(SEAL)
Attest:
_______________________________
City Clerk