Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 11/14/2011 - WS Mins 11 14 11 (Migrated from Optiview)Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 1 of 11 This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to transcribe proceedings verbatim. Any reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted and heard by Council, but not quoted. This document includes limited presentation by Council and invited speakers in summary form. This is an official record of the Milton City Council Meeting proceedings. Official Meetings are audio recorded. The Work Session of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on November 14, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Lockwood presiding. Council Members Present: Councilmember Karen Thurman, Councilmember Zahner Bailey, Councilmember Bill Lusk, Councilmember Burt Hewitt, Councilmember Joe Longoria and Councilmember Tart. Mayor Lockwood: • Work Sessions are an informal setting to update Council on business items. • No votes will be taken during these sessions. • There are three (3) items on our Agenda tonight. • Public comment is allowed that is germane to an Agenda Item. • If you wish to speak you are required to fill out a comment card and turn it into the City Clerk staff. • Public comment will be allowed for a total of 10 minutes per agenda item and no more than 2 minutes per person. • Public comment will be heard at the beginning of each Item. • Once the item is called, no other comment cards will be accepted. Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #1. 1. Discussion of the Hopewell House Vision. (Presented by Lew Oliver) Lew Oliver: • I have two people here tonight from my team, John and David. • They did extensive measuring on the house and even surveyed under the house. • We have labeled the Hopewell House circa 1805. • The 1805 date is hearsay- there is documentation that dates the house back to the 1830's just after the gold rush. • There is even evidence that the house dates back to the 1820's. • The house has had a few renovations- some in the 1870's and changed the appearance a fair amount. • None of the upstairs part of the house is original. It was all finished in the 1970's. • I do have some restoration plans if you wish to restore the house back to the mid 1800's. • The chimney piece is a much earlier style than the actual house which would have been in the federal time period. • We have a photograph of what would have been the front porch. • The wood paneling was painted when we got in the house so we stripped the wood. • We found Cherokee names written on the wood from the early pioneers and Cherokee families. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 2 of 11 • There is a star of Bethlehem painted on the ceiling. • We believe that the central beam could have been another outside wall. • You could do a partial restoration to create more of a community building where there is a handicap accessible bathroom and a catering kitchen. David: • I went under the house and documented anything that looked original to the house. • I thought the kitchen had originally been separated from the main house because I found a beam. • Once I talked to Mr. Day, he stated there was never a separation. • I believe that beam was attached to a porch at some point that went across the back of the house. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • Do you have any sense of cost as to what the changes would cost? • When you looked at the building, did you do an assessment of any of the outbuildings? Lew Oliver: • The walls are insulated and the foundation is in. • The demolition cost to tear out the upstairs and to demolish what was done in the 1970's would probably cost close to $50,000. • The intact portion of the house is in great shape. • To do a combination of demolition and a partial restoration it might be close to $200,000 range. • There is a small shed out in the yard but it is in bad condition. Councilmember Lusk: • Is the square footage of the downstairs the square footage of the original house plus the additions? City Manager Lagerbloom: • Yes sir, it includes the additions. • I would like to figure out where we want to start with this project. • Kathy and I talked about is that we might be interested in exploring if this has any opportunity to qualify for some CDBG Funding for rehabilitation. • I would like to explore that option to find funding for this project. • Is it okay to go ahead and research that option? If not, we can figure another option. Mayor Lockwood: • I support that option. Coy-Uncilmember Zahner Bailey: • Are there also some funds through the Georgia DNR that we could also explore? • We can explore that in combination with the CDBG Funding. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 3 of 11 Interim City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #2. 2. RZ11-18 — To Create Article VI, Division 26 of the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 64 of the City Code) — H (Historic) District. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field: • The purpose of the new zoning district is to allow for a historic structure to be used, renovated, protected, and preserved based on its historic value to the community. • It would be implemented as a Community Unit Plan or a Mixed Use where the applicant would propose development standards for the subject site that provides flexibility to conform to grandfathered nonconforming sites. • The applicant shall provide to staff proof of the proposed use and the use must continue in the original structure. • The structure must be designated historic by the City of Milton's Historic Preservation Commission. • It must be completed prior to the city accepting the rezoning application for the structure unless otherwise determined by the Community Development Director. • The proposed text amendment was on the community zoning information meeting agenda on September 28, 2011. • The clean version of the proposed H -District is attached for your review. • A redline version that includes changes by the planning commission and the redlined version of the City Attorney's recommendations are also included. Councilmember Tart: • Where did we get the six month time period from provided it is changed to a historic zoning? • How many properties would meet this "prior use" category? • What all does the applicant have to do to provide proof? Is it just to provide a personal affidavit? Robyn MacDonald: • If you apply for a license and it ceases to exist, you would have to reapply after six months. • There are three candidates currently that would meet this "prior use" category. City Attorney Jarrard: • That is correct. Councilmember Tart: • Ken, was it your intent in 64-953D to be mandatory language? • I like your changes more than what the Planning Commission came up with. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • How will staff anticipate taking into consideration this historic district being proposed versus the importance and the precedence of our comprehensive land use plan? • What is put forth within that plan? • It does not seem to speak to the other documents that are important. • Can you touch on the process and the first step for when the item goes to the Historic Preservation Committee? Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 4 of 11 Kathleen Field: • The intent of this ordinance is to come up with a process by which the HPC and City Council can determine if the structure is worth saving. KODyr. MacDonald: • There is an application for the designation of the historic preservation. • Angela is the staff member that handles that department. • She will review it, and submit it to the HPC and they review it. • The HPC will then evaluate it and then it will go to the Council for your confirmation that it is a historic property. Councilmember Lusk: • I think that we need to move forward and preserve whatever we have left in Milton. Councilmember Longoria: • I think we have put a lot of work into this. • I trust that the thought that has gone into the commission and the structure. • There are enough checks and balances between the committee and the council for this to move forward. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • The HPC is very critical. • We can preserve the history within Milton without having to convert an AGI property to commercial within a non commercial area. • A lot of the structures were taken down illegally without appropriate permits. • As we go through the process, I think it is important to take others considerations into our spot zoning process. Councilmember Thurman: • We are not converting agricultural uses to commercial; we are allowing previous commercial uses to be able to use this as they originally were allowed when they were initially built. • For example, we are taking an old store and allowing it to be an old store again. Councilmember Lusk: • Not every historic structure will be converted to commercial. • I would hope that we would designate the Hopewell House historic here in Milton. • To infer that every historic property will be converted to commercial is misleading. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 5 of 11 City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #3. 3. Discussion with Eric Bosman Consultant from Urban Collage, Regarding LCI - Hwy. 9 Planning Study. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Eric Bosman: • A key piece of these LCI plans is how the process unfolds. • The way we structured this process comes in three phases. • The first phase is an inventory and assessment of existing conditions where we are providing an independent review of what we see on the ground. • We then hold two active work sessions to engage the public in the detailed planning for the future of the activity center. • The third is the action plan and prioritizing projects to move towards implementation. • We conducted stakeholder interviews in late September and early October to bring community leaders in. • We had a core team meeting on October 19, 2011. This is our primary focus group for the process. • We gave our draft presentations and slides that we are to give to the public. • Based on the feedback, we have made a few modest changes to the presentation and delivered that to the public on the evening of October 27, 2011. • The stakeholder meetings are to provide an introduction to the process, to provide an informational presentation, and is not be construed as recommendations. • We are trying to give good information to the public so the public can give us input. CONTINUED TYPING IS VERBATIM Councilmember Tart: I have provided Mr. Lagerbloom with questions prior to the meeting, and it is my understanding that he provided them to you, is that correct? Eric Bosman: Yes sir. Councilmember Tart: The first one has to do with the comment that was made both in the core team meeting on October 19th as well as the Public meeting on October 27th that said "86% residential property tax versus 14% commercial property tax is not sustainable." Do you remember making that comment? Eric Bosman: Yes sir. Councilmember Tart: My first question has to do with whether or not the RFP that was used to secure your contract, since that is a sweeping comment that would apply to the entire city, not just the study area, could you explain how your RFP contract came to that statement and how that statement has anything to do with the Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 6 of 11 specific area versus the entire city and why you needed to make that statement since you have been hired to look at only the study area? Eric Bosman: The RFP on page 18 outlines the project deliverables. The first piece is the LCI study document will result in a plan that will specifically address the following: A. the efficiency and feasibility of land uses and mixed appropriate for future growth. Based on that comment, our proposal, which I think is an addendum to the contract, outlines the scope of the market analysis. That says that we will involve in the overviews of the areas demographic and economic characteristics to determine current market characteristics and future market potential. The analysis will evaluate the surrounding market area to help identify current and future demand for various markets and development. We think it is very important when we are looking at a study area that we consider the surrounding market area. Particularly for a commercial development, where those dollars are coming from ... you can't just plan the commercial area without considering the residential around it. We would also say that it is very much the same thing in terms of protecting single family neighborhoods. One problem that often comes up in the LCI plans is if we're talking about higher intensity development in activity centers, if that is appropriate. We haven't determined that in this area. That is part of the next phase. There is always a concern that what's going on next door may impact single family neighborhoods nearby. While our specific study area is mostly a commercial area, we are concerned with looking around the boundaries of that are and from a commercial standpoint, looking at the market area because those influence the supply and demand of land uses within that area. It is common in these studies that we not just focus on the study area as its geographically outlined but that we are also looking at the market area which not only includes other parts of Milton but also parts of Alpharetta, Johns Creek and even Forsyth County. We have to be conscious of those larger issues as we plan for the specifics here. Councilmember Tart: As far as the comment itself, 86% residential tax versus 14% commercial not being sustainable, when I met with you previously you explained that it wasn't necessarily a comment regarding financial sustainability, then what kind of sustainability was it? Eric Bosman: We were looking at the balance of residential and commercial areas and different types of those. We are also looking at transportation demand, parks and open space and infrastructure. To that extent, our economic consultants are looking at the overall view of the area and providing their independent expert opinion with the labeling and what the issues are with the strengths and weaknesses are. I think it is appropriate and important to point out during the information gathering stage, the data portion of that which is the 86% commercial and 14% residential. In going further and saying it's not sustainable, I think it was not intended to be definitive. It was poorly worded and it should have been more sensitively stated. What they are looking at is national planning and your adjacent communities. There is a lack of sensitivity for the appreciation of how unique Milton is. You're not Alpharetta, Johns Creek, or Roswell. You're dealing with a different set of numbers. Does the 14% commercial tax base raise a concern? I think for our market concerns, absolutely. I think they are saying that it is not sustainable but they should have been more sensitive. I think it is an important element as part of this planning process. You have to plan being conscious of all of those issues and challenges around us. Whether this plan is going to do anything about that or whether it's even necessary is a matter of public input and city policy. It's not our goal to change that, but it is our process to bring that forward as an issue if it is a flag to our Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 7 of 11 consultant center and have the public discussion as to whether that impacts what we do. That was the purpose behind it. Councilmember Tart: When they looked at that statement, the 86% and 14% statement, did they consider other surrounding municipalities and what works for them? I think that is what you said in your clarification memo. In addition to that, you took into account stakeholder interviews and specifically business owner stakeholder interviews. I think this is where you are going to tie in what you said earlier that those interviews are confidential. Is that what you're saying? Including who you interviewed? Eric Bosman: There are three different groups that we talked to. One was a set of stakeholder interviews that were set up by city staff that I and one of my colleagues from Urban Collage facilitated. There was the core team that we met with on the 19th that had the preview of all of the information and were our primary focus group. Councilmember Tart: I have a list of those 14 people. Eric Bosman: And there was the third set which were the land owner and developer and other interests that are market consultant interviewed. I neither have those contacts nor think it is appropriate to divulge who those people were. When the market consultant went out to those individuals, they stated that they would be confidential interviews and they would not share attributed information to individuals. To that extent, they are unwilling to give me that information. Councilmember Tart: Did you interview staff to do that in terms what our financial condition is or what our forecast is? From what I'm hearing so far, you looked at other cities around us to see what works for them. You interviewed business owners and large land owners to find their opinion. From that, you made a determination that an 86% and 14% ration was not sustainable. Eric Bosman: We also talked to other community members and stakeholders. We have had a meeting with staff and we have reviewed the proposed budget for next year, I'm not sure if that has been adopted or not yet. Again, I don't think it was intended to be a sweeping statement, I think it was intended to be an observation by our market consultant. Councilmember Tart: What cities did you use in that comparison? Eric Bosman: The only ones I have numbers for are your adjacent cities. They have conducted a number of fiscal analysis and they have seen everything from 30% to over 50%. They were seeing 14% and saying that raises a flag because it doesn't happen often. They have not done a detailed physical analysis in order to make that a definitive statement. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 8of11 Councilmember Tart: Did they look at any cities that were similarly situated? Arguably there are no other cities like us in the state of Georgia and maybe not even the southeast in terms of the ration of property tax that we do have and property values in terms of residential. Did they look at any cities in the country since they have this entire expert staff to be able to look at financial analysis? Did they look at any cities that were similarly situated anywhere? Eric Bosman: I don't have that information, I would have to ask them. Councilmember Tart: The statement in general, I'm wondering because it is a sweeping statement and I have already explained to you how sweeping it can and was and how it was politicized in this last election and how our staff doesn't agree with your statement. I'm wondering if making a statement like that could affect the market ability of our city in terms of either residents or business owners wanting to come here and if business owners are wanting to come here and need money to be able to develop here, a sweeping statement like that almost makes it sound like we aren't going to sustain or survive or we are going to go bankrupt. Does that affect the marketability of our city or ability for banks to lend money to business owners that might want to come here? Eric Bosman: Not in our opinion. This was two words out of a 40 minute informational presentation to which we compared Milton's homeownership, income, jobs and housing patterns to national and regional averages. I think it is fair for our market consultant to say this is far out of line from what the national average is. I think you are intimating that as well. I think this is a very unique situation. This is not average and it is not typical or traditional. It is very different. I believe they could have been more sensitive with the statement and I think we could have been more sensitive to the statement. Going through the process and outlining the presentation, we did hear that from folks in our stakeholder interviews as well. I would be remiss if I said our economic consultants came in and they came in with this bombshell that we didn't hear from anyone else. If we hadn't heard it from anyone else that we had interviewed or talked to, it would have raised a concern with us. It didn't raise a concern with us and it didn't raise a concern with the core team. We in no way intended for it to be a political statement. We are not involved in the political sphere. Our job is to report information. I think the two words in particular could have been more sensitive and I have to hold our consultants at fault for that. Councilmember Tart: My concern is that I would expect if you are using your stakeholder group which is confidential, if that stakeholder group is composed of business owners and people in the business community, large land owners. Were all of them in this study area or were you talking outside of the study area as well? I think that is very important to know. Eric Bosman: Our core team is folks that are all in the study area. It is not just commercial property owners and large land owners. These are our neighborhood residents, their community leaders, their parks and open space people. I think our core team to my understanding is a fairly good cross section of... Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 9 of 11 Councilmember Tart: I'm not talking about the core team, I'm talking about the stakeholder team that you interviewed. Eric Bosman: Again, there were two sets. There was one that we interviewed that the staff set up on a land use with much of the CPAC committee and folks that have been involved in the city for many years. The group that our real estate folks talk to were both internal and external, both folks that owned and developed property here in Milton and folks in the larger real estate community. I think it is valid for them to do so. It is important how this area is perceived within the larger market area if we are going to plan appropriately for its future. Councilmember Tart: I guess my concern is the statement that you made, and you have acknowledged several times that you could have been more sensitive to the statement, but I guess from a consulting point of view and the fact of how much money we are paying to Urban Collage for the study, I would hope that you would not only more sensitive to the statements that you make but more importantly that you would not apply a boiler plate in your analysis of our city. If you and our staff have acknowledged that our city is different, that it cannot be compared to cities around us, but when you come in and you're paid $100,000 to perform an analysis you perform an analysis based on similarities with other cities with a one size fits all approach, it seems to me like this is a failure in the cardinal rule of consulting that you should know your client. That is my concern, and I have expressed it to you before. It remains my concern and I also have the concern that staff didn't interfere that statement from being made even though staff doesn't agree with that statement and that statement was allowed to go forward. You're not all to blame for this, but I would ask that if your contract continues going forward, that you do not apply a boiler plate to this city. You're being paid to give us good work, not something that is one size fits all and that would work for everyone else. The comments and statements that led into this and that spoke to the financial sustainability to the city factored in things like the residential property tax evaluation and how different it was compared to other areas. I would have expected other things like that to factor into your determination before you make statements like that. That is all I have to say, Mayor. Thank you. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: I am perplexed by the comment that any of the interviews would be confidential. I would like the city attorney to speak to that. I do want to thank you for the work you have done, but I do agree that we need to make sure that we are analyzing our city based on our city because it is obviously a unique place that so many people want to see retain its characteristics. In terms of confidentiality, is there anything Mr. Jarrard, within the contract of Urban Collage that would allow interviews to be confidential? I didn't realize that we had anything that kept those confidential. City Attorney Jarrard: I have not reviewed the contract this evening with that specific question in mind, but given that you have asked me, I will answer with my knowledge of open records chat. I can tell you this, to the extent that this is a city contract and because the other participant is a government entity as well that is also funding it, it is subject to the open records act and any documentation generated from the contract will be subject to the open records act. To the extent that there are notes and other documentation, they will be subject to the act. I'm not sure upon what basis that this could keep this information hidden if there was an open records act. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 10 of 11 Councilmember Zahner Bailey: This is the first time that I heard that any interviews with stakeholders would be considered confidential. To me, it is kind of a global issue for us as a city. In particular, it is tax payers dollars that are helping to fund an outside consultant, whether it be urban collage or anyone I would hope that what we would get out of this work session, at least with the request of this councilmember, would be that we assess when we do anything, whether it be an LCI or the Crabapple master plan initiative, that we research whether or not as a city we are really allowed to keep interviews confidential that become the basis of an analysis and the basis of a recommendation. That is concerning to me. This is the first time that I have heard that interviews with stakeholders that become data points for our consultants would ever be considered confidential. I find that troubling and I think that we should all find it troubling because this should be an open and transparent process. Maybe that was just a generic statement and didn't mean that from a legal perspective... Eric Bosman: I specifically asked our market consultant exactly the question that I was asked by councilmember Tart via email and they refused to divulge that information. When they posted those interviews, they told the interviewees when they started that it was confidential and they are not willing to break that confidentiality. Councilmember Zahner Bailey: But is there anything in our contract that allows for confidentiality to be promised and/or if there is a subcontractor, if that is not part of the contract I don't understand how that would be considered confidential. I would hope our open records laws and everything else that applies to government would apply to this contract as it would to any contract. Can you speak to what our next step would be? City Manager Lagerbloom: We won't have an answer for you tonight on that. I am happy to look into that tomorrow to hopefully get you a better answer. END OF VERBATIM TYPING Councilmember Thurman: • I was one of the people that looked if the City of Milton was sustainable before we became a city. • I looked at it from one point of view to ask if we could deliver the same level of service that we were currently receiving under Fulton County and could we afford to do so? • That was the only point that we were looking at. • I appreciate that you are all willing to look at surrounding cities as well. • I believe the level of service is key here. • It has been my opinion based on what I've heard from residents is they want a higheefevel of service. • They want parks, intersections, roads paved, sidewalks, etc. • Based on what we have, the residents want a higher level of service. 0 Thank you for being willing to help us with this project. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, November 14, 2011 at 6:00 pm Page 11 of 11 Councilmember Zahner Bailey: • Is the LCI evaluating level of service for the entire city? • Does the LCI process determine what level of services are our citizens willing to accept versus what do they think that they might have to sacrifice in our community? • An increased level of service doesn't have to come at the exchange of residential for commercial. • I hope that we are all cautious that we do not sell our city out just because we don't provide a level of service. • Thank you for your professionalism and I hope we will hear more from you. Councilmember Longoria: • I was at the presentation that you held, Eric. • I thought it was well run, informative, and I believe that the information was well received. • I personally don't think the two words that you said are going to change the course of our city. • I hope you get a balanced view of opinions from that meeting. • I think we pay you for an opinion, not something that we want to hear. • I believe that confidentiality in getting the information we needed was important. • You shared the information with us and it is in the open records, but who it exactly came from I think is immaterial. Councilmember Tart: • I have a request, but more as a citizen and not as a councilmember, because this council hasn't had a good discussion on financial sustainability and level of service, it needs to be had. • Our citizens deserve an answer on that. • They were promised something when we became that city and now it is being morphed. • I believe that vision needs to be clearly articulated with input. Mayor Lockwood: • Urban Collage was hired to give us your opinion. • If you feel there is something you need to tell us, then that is your job to tell us. • We don't have to follow it or even believe it, but this conversation is getting out of hand. Councilmember Tart: • I just request that we have that discussion next month at our work session. After no further discussion, the Work Session adjourned at 7:36 p.m. Date Approved: November 21, 2011. Sudie AM Gordon, City, lerk Joe Lockw , Mayor No Text