HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 08/20/2012 - MIN 08 20 12 REG (Migrated from Optiview)l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 1 of28
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 and video recorded
The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on August 20, 2012
at 6:00 PM, Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding.
INVOCATION
Reverend Rob Wood, St. Aidan's Episcopal Church, Alpharetta, Georgia
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Joe Lockwood called the meeting to order.
ROLLCALL
Councilmembers Present: Councilmember Thurman, Councilmember Kunz, Councilmember Large,
Councilmember Hewitt and Councilmember Longoria.
Councilmembers Absent: Councilmember Lusk
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by the Mayor.
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
(Agenda Item No. 12-197)
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve the Meeting Agenda \vith the following
changes:
• Add an Executive Session to discuss land acquisition.
Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0).
Councilmember Lusk was absent from the meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT (None)
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of the August 6, 2012 Regular Council Minutes.
(Agenda Item No. 12-198)
(Sudie Gordon, City Clerk)
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 2 of28
2. Approval of Financial Statements for the Period Ending July, 2012.
(Agenda Item No. 12-199)
(Stacey Inglis, Finance Director)
3. Approval of a Contract Renewal between the City of Milton and ADP for Payroll, Human
Resources Infonnation Systems, and Timekeeping Management.
(Agenda Item No. 12-200)
(Sam Trager, Human Resources Director)
4. Approval of a Change Order to the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton
and Precision Planning, Inc. to Provide Architectural Design Services for the City of Milton
Public Safety Facility.
(Agenda Item No. 12-201)
(Carter Lucas, Public Works Director)
5. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton, Georgia and
Universal Engineering Services, Inc. for Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for a
7.06 acre tract on Hopewell Road.
(Agenda Item No. 12-202)
(Carter Lucas, Public Works Director)
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to approve the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Large seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember
Lusk was absent from the meeting.
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
1. Proclamation Recognizing the Milton High School Future Business Leaders of America Chapter
1134.
(Presented by Mayor Joe Lockwood)
FIRST PRESENTATION (None)
PUBLIC HEARING (None)
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 3 of28
l ZONING AGENDA
1. RZ12-06NC12-03 -Deerfield Parkway by Crescent Resources, LLC to rezone from C
1 (Community Business) and 0-1 (Office Institutional) to A (Medium Density
Apartments) to develop a total of256 residential units at an overall density of 12 units per
acre. The applicant is also requesting the following concurrent variance: To encroach
into the 25 foot non-impervious setback by no more than 5,000 square feet [Section 20
426(2)].
(Agenda Item No. 12-141)
(First Presentation at June 4,2012 Regular Council Meeting)
(Deferred at June 18, 2012 Regular Council Meeting)
(Kathleen Field, Community Development Director)
L
Kathleen Field, Community Development Director:
You have before you RZ12-06 and VCI2-03.
The site contains 21.36 acres and it is undeveloped.
The applicant seeks to rezone to A Medium Density Apartment District for 256 apartment units.
The existing zoning is C-l Community Business for an Assisted Living Facility and Special School
pursuant to RZI 0-05-U 1 0-01 for the northern portion of the site.
In the southern portion of the site plan, the existing zoning is 0-1 Office Institutional at a density of
19,191 square feet per acre pursuant to Z99-11.
This was most recently approved pursuant to ZM 1 0-03 for a 40,500 data center.
The site is located within the Deerfield overlay district.
This item was deferred to August 20th , tonight, to allow staff to gather the following information.
There are six points of information.
I will list them then go through each one of them one by one.
The first item that was requested was occupancy rates for the existing multi-family developments within
the city.
Secondly, the vacancy rates for office uses within the city.
Third, city tax revenues for multi-family developments within the city.
Fourth, which schools are impacted by existing multi-family developments.
Five, what other parcels are currently zoned or land-use plan for multi-family development available for
development.
Six, a fiscal analysis as per the cost revenue model prepared by Dr. Jeffrey Dorfman.
In terms of the first one regarding occupancy rates for the existing multi-family developments within the
city, you see six apartment developments that total 2, 259 number of units and the average percent
occupied is 96.05%.
Second, the vacancy rates for office uses within the city, specifically, the North Fulton area.
We have identified different classes; Class A, Class B, Class C.
You can see that the total square footage totals 27,763,693 with a vacancy rate of 14.9%.
Next, city tax revenues from multi-family developments within the city.
Again, we are looking at six developments.
Again, the number of units 2,259 and the amount of city taxes in 2011 totaled $334,614.17.
In regard to the question on which schools are impacted by existing multi-family developments.
With the exception of the Camden Deerfield development, which is the second one on your listing, all
the other apartment developments, the schools impacted that are listed include Manning Oaks, Hopewell
and Alpharetta.
l
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 4 of28
In terms of Camden Deerfield, the schools impacted are Cogburn Woods, Hopewell, and Cambridge.
What other parcels are currently zoned or land-use plan for multi-family development, essentially the
current 2030 City of Milton Future Land-Use Plan map shows only one multi-family residential area
within the city and it is located in the 100 flood plain and not developable.
However, our zoning ordinance does allow for a use permit that can be obtained for senior housing;
owner occupied senior housing.
They are permits up to 20 units per acre within a multi-family zoning district.
Those are the TR, the R6 and the A zoning districts.
Or, 15 units per acre for areas that are zoned single-family residential with sewer service on the
property.
So, where our plan doesn't specifically show some, our use permit does allow senior housing if you
meet those conditions.
In regards to the fiscal impact for the 256 multi-family units, a cost revenue analysis was undertaken and
you can see the results of it here.
We based it on a value per unit of$115,000.
The estimated first year of permit revenue is $120,000 so that affects the first year worth of revenue.
So, you can see that as you look down below, for year 2012 the annual net fiscal impact would be a
minus 265,547 and that is because we had a plus of $120,000 that was impacting it which represents the
fees.
After that, the size of the revenue, the size of the shortfall increases.
And, over 20 years, when we ran it for 20 years, the total net fiscal impact represented a loss of
$7,412,593.
We've talked a lot about fiscal impact and school impact but we haven't spent much time talking about
site building design specifically as it relates to the site plan.
Should the City Council decide tonight to approve this rezoning, you will be rezoning to a site plan.
Considering the fact that it is such a large undeveloped parcel within the city, as you know, we do have a
city architect under contract to us and I did ask him to review this site and to give to you tonight his
comments on the site.
So, I would like to introduce to you Bob Buscemi who is the City Architect.
He is going to come up and I am going to tum the microphone over to him for a few minutes and he is
going to review with you his comments as they relate to the site then I will come back to the podium
after that.
Robert Buscemi, City Architect:
Hello, I am Robert Buscemi, City Architect.
Kathy asked me to take a look at the site plan that was submitted.
I do want the board to know that I met with the applicant twice prior to this and we did go back and
forth with different schemes and solutions.
Based on what has been submitted here tonight, I have three issues or comments.
In keeping in tune with the LCI and the intent of the LCI block structure is a very important issue.
Block structure is basically the layout of the streets.
I think it is what makes the difference between what we consider a neighborhood versus a campus style
development.
So, if we take a look at what has been submitted here, there are two issues within the block structure that
I would like to highlight to you.
One would be to create roads versus drive aisles.
If you look at each side of the south, you can see the road that is coming in, this portion here is a parking
lot drive aisle instead of an actual road.
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 5 of28
And, the other point would be on the west side would be streets that come down.
With campus style development you can do cul-de-sacs or dead-ends.
With the neighborhood styles, with the LeI, really what they are looking for is more inter-connectivity,
more block structure, more connections.
So, on this side here, the road coming down, we would like to see this connect to Deerfield and this area
here.
The orange is showing you the actual block layout so it is easy to see.
And you can see the way it is set up here, this is the area where you have the drive by and this is the area
where you have the dead-end so we would like to see this come back into Deerfield at some point.
The next item would be building placement.
Right now, most of the structures that are being built in the site plan are the housing units themselves
which are the largest elements in the site plan.
Basically, they are showing where the side of the building is facing the street.
So, it is not running parallel with the street and, again, with the neighborhood design it is almost like
residential where you would want to see the front of the building face the street because that is the
prominent elevation and this way we can kind of get a better feel if someone is walking down the street
you kind of get a feel for all the units and what they look like.
So, I think the other one would be when you locate the buildings you can start to see how they face the
street and then, instead of combining the parking areas we suggest that the parking areas be independent
for each building so that they become smaller and this way we can camouflage them more and it doesn't
look like a large sea of parking.
Again, it's breaking it down into a neighborhood style versus a campus style.
Also, with the contours on the site, everything is shown right now as a very flat and sort of a flat plain,
but in reality it does have quite a topography to it so what I was hoping is when we turn the buildings to
face the street even though there is a sharp grade difference, topography difference, that you would be
able to split the elevation and have that elevation broken up.
If you look at the front fayade the regular buildings scale about 110 feet long and you can see the flat
which eventually slopes and you could possibly sheer these off and step the building down almost more
like a townhouse look rather than a dormitory.
And, the last one is the open building entry stairwells.
At present, right now, in garden style apartments it is very common to have kind of an open style entry
and the stairwell is all open.
Of course, one of the prominent elements if we were to enclose that I think it would give it a much more
residential style and look and appearance when people are walking by or driving by so it can camouflage
a little bit of that style.
I'm trying to break away from that apartment look from the street.
Do you have any questions?
Kathleen Field:
Back to the overview of the applicant's request, the request is to rezone to A Medium Density
Apartment District, 256 multi-family units, units to be one and two bedroom units, you should know that
the applicant deleted the three bedroom units per the August 9th plan.
The development is not gated but provides interconnectivity to adjacent properties.
Provides open space to preserve trees.
Provides pedestrian paths within development and interconnectivity with the existing sidewalk system.
Amenity areas are scattered on the site.
A Farmers Market near Deerfield Parkway is proposed for the general population and it provides some
residential buildings along central roads with parking behind with some on street parking.
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 60f28
Changes to the site plan and to the application since the June 18 th meeting include, as I just mentioned,
the units to be one and two bedroom units.
All three bedroom units are deleted.
Parking requirements were reduced from 406 to 390 spaces; however, the applicant is still providing 406
spaces.
The revised site plan of August 9th depicts actual placement of buildings based on engineered grading
plan which is not consistent with providing a block configuration that encourages walkable
neighborhoods.
The revised site plan of August 9th eliminates the right-in right-out curb cut on the north end of the site.
And here is the revised parking chart which shows the 390 required; however, they are still going to
provide the 406.
We also received comments from the Public Works Department and they are as follows:
The results of the traffic study indicate that in existing conditions the intersection of Morris Road at
Deerfield Parkway does not operate at an acceptable level of service in the peak hour based in part
because of the opening of Westside Parkway.
The project currently under design by the City of Milton for this intersection will improve the overall
operations in the base and design years.
This project would be needed regardless of this proposed development.
We also received comments from Fulton County Board of Education as related to this rezoning and you
can see on this chart that none of the three schools that would be impacted can meet the demand of these
students.
You have in front of you the revised site plan that was submitted on August 9th that we have referred to.
Just so you remember, there was a request for a concurrent variance to encroach into the 25 foot non
impervious set back by no more than 5,000 square feet; however, staff determined that the retention
facility, whether earthen or wall, is permitted within the 25 foot non-impervious set back; therefore, staff
recommended withdrawal of this concurrent variance application.
So that is still pending but I wanted you to remember what we said about that.
In terms of recommended conditions, the specific conditions are attached at the end of the staff report
pages 26-28.
The summary of the conditions include:
No more than 256 units at 12 units per acre.
One and two bedroom units only.
Height shall not exceed 45 feet.
To provide two bus shelters without signage as approved by the DRB.
There shall be internal multi-use trails to be constructed of pervious materials as approved by the
Community Development Department.
Two full access drives and one right-in right-out access on Deerfield Parkway shall be provided.
Conditions as they continue include:
Provide a 50 foot access easement along the southern driveway from the Deerfield Parkway right-of
way to the location on the south property line in order to provide inter-parcel access to the property to
the south.
To provide a 50 foot access easement free of any structures or utilities for vehicular and pedestrian inter
parcel access on the northwest property line.
Any site conditions as per Bob Buscemi's presentation relating to the site that you may want to add can
be included also at this time.
In conclusion, the proposed 256 multi-family development is consistent with the policies and intent of
the City of Milton Hwy. 9/GA 400 master plan if approved with staffs recommended conditions;
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 70f28
therefore, staff recommends that this request to rezone to A Medium Density Apartment District RZ12
06 be approved conditional.
Further, staff recommends withdrawal of VC 12-03.
And that concludes my presentation Mr. Mayor and I would certainly be willing to answer any
questions.
Mayor Lockwood:
Are there any questions of staff?
Mayor Lockwood:
I have one question. When you go back to your financial calculations on the costs, briefly, how is that
basically calculated with the cost of revenue from taxes minus the cost of services which include what?
Kathleen Field:
All services within the city. This was a program that Dr. Dorfman put together after analyzing what all
the cost of the services are based on particular land uses. So for this particular land use, the cost of
services, and it was basically Public Safety that was the most expensive service to be provided, as it
related to multi-family developments
Mayor Lockwood:
Are there any other questions?
Councilmember Large:
Just to clarifY, so Public Safety is one. Other services that we provide are Parks and Recreation, is that
correct? Is that factored into it? What are the services that we provide that were backed into this?
Kathleen Field:
It was all the services within the city and what the cost for each department to service a particular land
use. So they were quantified and put together into a program that Dr. Dorfman created so we can then
plug in a particular land use and based on the cost that he found as well as the revenues from the taxes
that we can plug in as well we can then analyze whether there is a plus or minus for a particular land
use.
Councilmember Large:
But this is basically a generic plan use for each category, correct?
Kathleen Field:
Yes, it would be for multi-family. That is right.
Mayor Lockwood:
My question would be that is generic versus if this was upscale, much higher rents, incomes, the
property values would be based on that which in return could bring in more tax revenue for the city.
Kathleen Field:
That's right.
Councilmember Thurman:
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 8 of28
The model does allow for a variance as to the revenue part of it based on what you project the revenue
as per value per unit. Correct?
Kathleen Field:
Yes, correct.
Councilmember Thurman:
But it assumes that the cost is pretty well standard.
Kathleen Field:
For each land use we quantify the cost based on each land use so the cost to service a single family
house, for instance, is going to be a lot less than the cost of servicing a multi-family complex.
Councilmember Thurman:
But the revenue side of it does take into account what is projected to be the value per unit that would be
generated.
Kathleen Field:
That is correct. We used here $115,000 per unit for value.
Mayor Lockwood:
I guess my question on that would be, would he have plugged in the value based on the rental income
from these projects because at $115,000 value, when you bring the rental on up to what we were
presented with or what the applicant had said, it should be worth a lot more than that. So, I am just
wondering, do you think that Dr. Dorfman plugged in anything special for this project?
Kathleen Field:
Robyn, maybe you could, Robyn actually did it for me but really just based on the tax revenue that is
generated, Robyn, go ahead.
Robyn MacDonald, City Planner:
Yea, the $115,000 was given to us by the applicant for the value per unit and this wouldn't, as far as I
know, consider any kind of rental because it actually also applies to townhomes, when we say multi
family, it is not just stacked flats or whatever, but it is also townhomes are lumped into that same
category in his modeL
Mayor Lockwood:
I'm just asking because it seems like maybe they have $115,000 for the cost of the construction but if
you have an asset that brings in $30,000 a year that value should raise the property value up to say
$300,000 per unit or $250,000 so I was just wondering if that would catch up and bring our revenue up.
Councilmember Large:
Does it take into account occupancy and the amount of disposable income of the people in the property
as far as spending disposable income in the area and the sales tax that would come back to the city?
Kathleen Field:
The value is just related to land use.
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 90f28
l
L
l
Councilmember Thurman:
The sales tax is calculated county wide so there is no way to look at the impact of it.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
I think, if we were to get back up at the high level of what this impact model is suppose to do, and that is
really to look more, not necessarily at, is it $265,547 or is it based on some assumptions. Are we getting
in the ballpark by suggesting that, yes, there is probably some subjectivity in any of these numbers and
once you put in is what is going to indicate what you get out. I think what you are looking at though
here more, and I don't think this would shock anybody, is that when you start to put fairly high density
housing together on a piece of property, it is going to cost more to serve that than it is other uses in
Milton. That is kind of the take away from this. Not that it is $547.00 but it would cost more to serve
this property developed this way than it would be to develop it in certain other ways. Now, that doesn't
mean that necessarily that's bad but that is just the reality. It is just one of a host of things that you
should use in your decision making process.
Mayor Lockwood:
I certainly agree with that. Those numbers stuck out to me as excessively high.
CounciImember Thurman:
Did we run a comparison as if you put 100,000 square feet of office on that same site what the numbers
would look like?
City Manager Lagerbloom:
We only ran this specific use not an assortment of what might be type pieces.
Pete Hendricks, 6085 Lake Forrest Drive, Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30320:
Mr. Mayor, before the time begins ifl could have a request ofy'all. We had benefit of opportunity to
review and analyze the staff report and recommendations. There was not a part of that, part of the
presentation that you had this evening on the site plan, the architecture. We would like to be able to
respond to that as we are responding to other questions that you all raised last time as you will see in a
few minutes. If we could have a few minutes more time we would appreciate that. We pretty well dove
tailed our program to the ten minutes we've got.
Mayor Lockwood:
I will leave that up to council but obviously we need to give both sides equal amount. So, it looks like
council is okay with that. We will add another five minutes.
Pete Hendricks:
That would be perfect. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Pete Hendricks, I practice law at 6085
Lake Forrest Drive, Sandy Springs. Kathy has been through the whole litany of the staff review analysis
compliance with the land plan particularly with a few of your adoption of the CID for Highway 9/ GA
400 Master Plan together with the unanimous approval of the Design Review Board and your Planning
Commission. What I would like quickly to hit on is you've got me making this presentation tonight but
also I was involved in part of the architectural team that back in 1996 put the entire 540 acres together
that constitutes Deerfield. Back at that point in time, we did not have a MIX zoning classification. All
we had was a full litany ofC-I, 0-1, T-R, A Apartment, so we had to sit down and best guestimate
where the market would take us with those different zoning classifications and those were the zoning to
which this property was put in 1996. The first re-visit that you all have had, professional review and
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 10 of28
analysis, has been the CID that yaH unanimously adopted and then has recommended this use for this
particular piece of property. Also, the market has come to this piece of property fairly recently within
the last couple of years. Some of you were on council; some of you were not on council. I brought
forward under the existing C-l zoning, the autistic center, under the existing 0-1 zoning, the office use
for the computer center. After a lot of time and a lot of money was spent in getting those entitlements,
the market was just not there. So, under those conditions, under those zonings that are in place right
now, that we are asking to rezone from, we have had the market come to it within the last two years
when there simply has not been a market for it. At this point in time, I would like for Ben Collins to
step up who heads up the multi-family for the southeast for Crescent. Thanks.
Ben Collins, 3443 Spencer Street, Charlotte, NC 28205:
Good Evening Mayor and City Council. We appreciate the opportunity to be here in front of you again
this evening. We have been hard at work since our last time in front of you. We have fully developed
our plans, four-sided architecture, we have gone through and spent the money on grading plans, tree
surveys, we are actually ready to submit water and sewer plans this week if we are successful this
evening. Since our last meeting, our company's committed another $100 million of equity to our
platform to fund this development and others. We believe very strongly that this is a core asset in our
portfolio and as recent as this morning I had a meeting with our CEO and CFO talking about the
importance of reoccurring income to the future viability of our company and this is very much a
property we want to see in our future portfolio. In addition to developing four-sided architecture, we've
worked hard with our award-winning architect, Historical Concepts, who is a master at place making.
We've won many awards across our company including Travel and Leisure's number one resort in the
United States that they designed for us in Palmetto Bluff. So, I would put this architecture firm up
against any architecture firm in the country as far as creating a place and really creating an exceptional
award-winning community. We've also been hard at work talking with local business leaders. In
addition to getting unanimous support by both the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission,
we've recruited very much support within the City of Milton. The Deerfield Association, many of its
members have come out in support of us. Sembler has sent a letter in to the city in support of what we
are doing and what we would do for their business. Hines is actually represented here tonight and is
very much in support of what we are proposing. Jim Pierce who represents the ownership at Windward
Plaza is here tonight and very much in support of what we are doing. Nearly every business here that
we have talked to in this community has supported what we are doing and that is part of the reason we
are here tonight. Dr. Phillips is here with us. She is a professor of housing studies at Georgia Tech and
the University of Georgia. She spent twenty-five years studying housing and really what the realities are
of multi-family housing are today. Before we go on to address some other questions, I wanted to take
just a couple minutes and let her make a short presentation.
Dr. Deborah Phillips, 245 Country Club Drive, Stockbridge, Georgia 30281:
I could take four days so I am going to try to three minutes real quick. The renter profile is changing
and I just wanted to share with you on your screen real quick that for the last fifty years married couples
with children drove America's housing industry, but today that only accounts for less than 22% of all
households and you can see that kind of the new news is that we have more singles, we have fewer
households with children. Today, it is important to note that 86% of all household growth over the next
30 years will be those without children. So, the two takeaways that I really want you to focus on tonight
is the young adults, the generation Y, we hear them called echo boomers, millennial, and also the empty
nesters in their 50's. Just real quick, I researched both on the supply side and the demand side.
Generation Y, they can't really afford to buy a home at the moment, nor do they want the responsibility
and they are kind of redefining the American dream. Also, really important to Generation Y is this
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 11 of28
whole notion of walkability. They want large community gathering spaces, they want smaller homes,
smaller living spaces and high connectivity. They were born with a laptop in their crib so they want
connectivity to shops, restaurants, and entertainment, but more importantly, they want to walk to work.
Empty nesters, let me go back just real quick, our empty nesters they really want to age in place. They
want freedom from mortgage payments but what is really driving this group is the sense of community.
They want to be near their grandkids but they don't want to live with them. Just real quick, on the
Generation Y, through 2017, 4.3 million will be turning age 22. So, the majority of Generation Y wants
to stay in the region that they grew up in and also they are leaving home later, they are leaving the nest
later, so this is going to make for pent up demand in the future. The three basic categories of renters
today are Generation Y, and then I refer to them in the articles I write, DINK's (Double Income No
Kids). These people are career focused. They travel for work so they want to come home and relax on
the weekend. They have large discretionary incomes. Our empty nesters, I refer to them in the articles
as Downshifting Boomers. Many of them are still working, and believe it or not, they use that third
bedroom for the office. So connectivity is still very very important for this profile as well. We have
high household incomes with in excess of$75,000 annually represented 115 of the increase over the last
five years. Generation Y, I do a lot of research about will Generation Y pay for walkability, will they
pay for sustainability, and 23% will pay a premium to live close to their job. 79% want a variety of
housing types, 2/3 say that living in a walkable community is very important, and even among families
with children they say that they were willing to trade a larger lot size or an ideal home for being close
and being in a live/work/play community. There are many financial impacts for multi.family. You
nailed it when you said that they stay here, they spend here, and it is important that they can shop and
dine and spend money on entertainment. They want to be close to where they work and play. Lastly,
just real quick, there's a lot of trending away from drivable, surburbanism, and we use the term
walkable, urbanism, and I applaud you for what you have done in Form Based Code. But, really,
importantly, these two groups, these two age cohorts, Generation Y and our Empty Nesters, they want
more parks, public spaces, focus on recreation, but really they are looking for cool places to live, work,
and retire. And the last slide, I just want to say that, you know, sustainable suburbs are vibrant and they
are attracting all users and citizens but more importantly it is the kind of talent that you are going to be
able to attract to your community in a live/work/play environment. So, that is a quick rundown.
Ben Collins:
I know this is a difficult vote for yaH tonight. I know that you are concerned about giving up one of the
few commercial tracts that you have in Milton. I know that this is a risk. I know it is a risk that we
won't do what we say we are going to do even though we have full capital committed and our plan is to
start construction this year. I know it is a risk that this will be the same ole multi·family development
that we've seen in our community and I am telling you that is not going to be the case. I know it is a
risk that this won't attract the young professionals that we fully believe and are willing to invest that it
will attract those young professionals. And, I know that it is a risk that this is not one of the key
ingredients that the City of Milton needs in the future. I am here tonight to tell you why this is a risk
worth taking. A few short months ago, you adopted the Highway 9 / GA 400 Master Plan. One of the
reasons you undertook this effort, presumably, is because you care very deeply about the future of the
City of Milton, so do we. We have been a major land owner here for nearly ten years. We have 450,000
square feet of entitled office space outside of this site, about half of which is in the City of Milton. And,
we very much want to develop that property. That market is not here today. Communities are complex
recopies. Too much of one thing or not enough of another means that you won't have the thriving
community that you hope for. Kind of like grandma'S apple pie, right? Too much butter, too little
brown sugar and it doesn't tum out quite right. Communities are the very same thing. There isn't a
single additional site in the City of Milton that could be developed for multi·family housing. Not only
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 12 of28
now, but even with this site being considered, there isn't a single other site in the LCI that was
contemplated for multi-family housing. There hasn't been a multi-family site developed in this city for
ten years and there likely won't be for the next twenty years. This is your opportunity. We are not
asking you to approve this rezoning because your planned LCI calls for it. We are asking you to
approve it because we believe it is a key ingredient for your future. It is a key ingredient to attract
young professionals. It is a key ingredient to attract executive housing, provide executive housing for
relocating businesses. It is a key ingredient to show other developers exactly what you mean by
preserving the rural and equestrian nature of your city. It is a key ingredient to recruit new office
investment, the pad ready office sites that are in the market today both Hines and us own those sites and
Hines has sent a letter to you all saying how much they would support this development and how much
we need this type of housing. It is a key ingredient to support local retailers. Our residents will have an
average household income of upward $70,000 to $80,000 a year. Based on disposable income
calculations, that means $6 million of additional disposable income will be spent at your local
businesses. It is a key ingredient to tell the business community that the City of Milton is open for
business. It has been seven years since a major investment of this size has been made in the City of
Milton. We are proposing to begin a $30 million development this year that will have institutional
capital, big banks, JP Morgan Chase, Capital One, and Regions Bank are some of our key lenders. One
of those lenders is going to make a $23 million construction loan in your community and that is a big
deal. Bringing institutional capital to this market will give the nod to other institutional investors that
they can invest in Milton as well. We are not asking you to vote for just another multi-family
development. We are asking you to support the future vibrancy and sustainability of the City of Milton.
With that, I want to turn it over to John Bell for a few closing remarks.
John Bell, Senior Regional Vice President, Crescent Resources 1366 Ragley Hall Road, Atlanta,
Georgia 30319
I appreciate your time here tonight. As Ben mentioned, the office market is desperate for this type of
walkable product. We are losing tenants to other submarkets and other cities. By example, in Nashville,
our multi-family team executed a development just like what we are talking about and it was a key
ingredient for us to attract Jackson National Life regional headquarters total of 160,000 square feet.
Their young professionals are occupying 25% of that 400 bedroom multi-family housing. We are
invested. We have 35 acres, a portion which is in Alpharetta and a portion which is in Milton. I develop
office buildings. We've developed two in Deerfield and we want to develop a lot more and we need this
type of walk able community. We are desperate for it. Thank you.
Pete Hendricks:
I would just like to make a confirmation as per staffs suggestion. We have asked that the concurrent
variance be withdrawn so we are all on the same page with that. And we respectively request your
approval of the application. Thank you.
Councilmember Longoria:
First of all, I appreciate the presentation by the applicant. It was informative but I also liked the follow
up from the staff so, Kathy, there you are. That was good information as welL And, I have no doubt
that given the opportunity the applicant will do exactly what they say they are going to do. I have no
doubt whatsoever, and, unfortunately that is not the issue that is foremost in my mind regarding the
request that has been made to the City Council. I am much more concerned with what I would call, well
it's the other side of the equation, to have a walkable neighborhood, a walkable community, you need
both parts of it. You need the place for people to live, you need the place for people to work. And, you
know, I would say that we are sort of balanced. Well, maybe not completely balanced, but we certainly
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 13 of28
have plenty of places to live on Deerfield. We also have places to work on Deerfield. And, so, the
responsibility comes back to what does Milton need as a city. And, not only just in this small area, but
city wide. Milton has a lot of area to deal with. And, unfortunately, there is not a lot of commercial
space in the city. The majority of the city is made up of residential or parcels that would be zoned for
primarily the land use is residentiaL We need to balance that out. Our challenge here is taking
something that is very finite, which is the commercial property, and managing it in a way that provides
us with the options that we need moving forward. So, my concern right now is that if we change the
zoning here it is something that we can't get back. And, I agree that there is nobody rushing to build
additional commercial property right now and that's unfortunate. I certainly don't wish anybody a
burden of having to deal with property they can't develop for its stated purpose right now, but at the
same time, it won't always be this way. There will be a point in time in the hopefully not too distant
future where this type of property in its current zoning is going to be very important. So, I just have
concerns about that. I'll stop there but that's really what my thought process is right now.
Councilmember Large:
The first thing is that I live in this district that this property resides in. My distinguished colleague here
in the adjacent district although we serve the city at large as all councilmembers do. I chose to live in
this area when we moved here and one thing we like are the conveniences that we have available to us in
this area. My wife enjoys that and I do as well. I hear what councilmember Longoria has to say;
however, I do hear the fact that we have commercial property but we have to make it attractive in order
to market it. And, if we don't have a mix to the entire area, what I hear from Crescent and correct me if
I am wrong, and verify it please, what you are saying for your purposes too that you would tie this
development to the remaining property and the existing properties you have in this area right now. And,
you probably have a good number, and I heard this from Al Nash with Progress Partners and other folks
with the Chamber that we have a lot of people that work here, there has been a reverse trend, that work
up here that want to live down closer to the city where there is more walkability and more conveniences,
may be coming from Buckhead and working up here and going back to Buckhead. And, one of the
successes, we talk about economic development in this city, well, it takes more than just building office
buildings, or building flex buildings. And, what we are going to have professional up here. We are not
going to have light industrial like Forsyth has. We don't have property for that and, frankly, I don't
think anyone wants that here in Milton. And, I have heard a lot about the DINKS, I'm an empty nester.
I moved my nest and came here. The empty nesters, the DINKS, the Generation Y, the fact that
different things motivate these individuals in work and in their choice of housing. Flexibility is one of
the things that is a key factor here. And, people, part of the problem we have right now is that people
are trapped in their houses that can't move. We talk about unemployment but also there are positions
available and some people can't move because they are upside down in their houses. They may come to
an area, have the flexibility to come here but move or be more mobile. We are a much more mobile
society. Plus, there are a good number of people who work out of their houses. There are a lot of
people in the City of Milton that work out of their homes. I'm working out of my home now. I think
Mr. Longoria here has done the same thing. There is not the traditional office environment item. So,
frankly, I feel that, sure we are giving up land that could be built as office, but I can tell you it won't get
built in office anytime soon based on the market that we have. But, if we create the right environment, it
may make it more marketable, able to market the other properties that we do have for commercial here
in the city and, therefore, we can get that type of product here. Those individuals working here and
living here and spending money here and helping the businesses, I am a big supporter of the Milton
Business Alliance, I go to all their meetings, my wife's a member of it, all of that. So, you do have to
create that mix. I've looked at Crescent, I've looked at their websites, I've looked at their products.
One thing I want to make sure that if this thing is approved, that you guys build this thing. There have
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 14 of28
been developments that I have seen where entitlements are done then the next thing you know the
property is sold with the entitlement. I have no doubt that Crescent will be the one developing this
property in the same quality they have done in the past. I know there is really no way of tying you down
but I would say that's what I want to see happen with this development. As far as some of the other
comments that are made through staff, I don't know how working through some of that because you are
at a much farther point along in terms of site circulation. Some ofthe comments that the city architect
made, I don't know how we would resolve that or what but for someone to step up and make the $30
million investment in our community at this point you don't see it happening very often. You really
don't. Not in these days. Sure it is a risk but my feeling on this, again, is the marketability of the entire
area, the Deerfield activity center, the Highway 9 corridor and the other properties adjacent to that. So,
that is basically where I stand.
Councilmember Thurman:
In order to really have the live/work/play that we keep hearing about, you've got to have live, work, and
play. And I believe, right now, we have an awful lot of live and what we really need is more work areas.
Ifwe had a bunch of vacant land, if this wasn't a key piece for this area, and there were other vacant
areas where we could put in the office, then I could very easily support this. The fact that we are taking
our last key piece of property that had previously been reflected as being office and taking it off the
market, I know right now there may not be a need for additional office, we will get to the point one of
these days we will, and I am going to think long term. I am not going to make any decision based on
what is happening right now. I want to make a decision based on what is best for Milton in the long run
and the fact that this kind of development will take away a key piece of property that could be an office
building, it could be a great opportunity for some of the professionals who live in the area to work, the
fact that it will cost the city significantly, $7 million over the next 20 years, the fact that it will
overburden the schools that are already at capacity, I just can't think short term and approve something
like this that long term is not really in the best interest of the city. Like I said, I believe we have a lot of
"live". If you look at the number of houses and multi-family that we have right in this area, it is
significant. There are plenty of places for people who would really like to live in the area to live in the
area. There are a lot of people living in this area who do not have a place to work in the area and they
are driving elsewhere. What we really need are some places for people to work in the area. So, I really
can't support taking a piece of property that could fulfill and really make this live/work/play, what I
believe it should be which is some more work in there and put it for something that is going to cost the
city that much and cost all of our residents that much in the long term and also overburden our schools
even more than they already are.
Councilmember Large:
One thing as far as schools are concerned, I have been to several seminars, continuing education,
whatever, there is a, supporting what the young lady there from Georgia Tech and the University of
Georgia, which is really quite a contrast there, that there is a reverse trend in terms of school aged
children in that, the trend that we have been seeing where schools are opening and we are putting
portables out there, I've done as a lot of the folks on this city board knows that I've done a lot of schools
in the past, not here, in Virginia, but there is a reverse trend. Actually, there is a trend that some of
these schools there is going to be less demand for secondary education. And, so, as far as the thought
that there is burden on the schools, I really have no problem with that as being an issue. Economic
analysis, again, plug it into a computer, that's great. What comes out of a computer and what is reality
are two different things. You can do all sorts of accounting, and I am not meaning this against the
accountant down at the other end of the table there but, you know, with statistics and accounting you can
almost prove anything depending on especially statistics, you know, give them a point and they can
L
Regular Meeting ofthe Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 15 of28
prove with statistics. So, again, I think it is a risk, somewhat, but some of the things that have been
brought up I just have to take some of that with a grain of salt at this point.
Councilmember Hewitt:
The $7 million over 20 years, that's a big number, if you look at the other 2500 units we have, if you
take that out, that's $70 million for those as well. That's a big number over 20 years. Ifthis was to get
approved with these conditions that the staff is recommending, how will adding the right-in right-out
driveway at Deerfield, I guess it would be the one closest to us here, how will that change the site plan
or is it simply just go on to that parking lot there and come out of that or how is that going to affect
things?
Ben Collins:
We have been debating this with staff really since the beginning. We feel like that it doesn't create a
dead-end connection at the end. We would ask council to consider not having that right-in right-out.
Really, the purpose of that is that we have done a full tree survey on the site, we have surveyed every
tree eight inches and larger, and we are saving actually 512 trees across the site. That right-in right-out
preserves this entire area where we have some of our larger specimen trees and we feel like the traffic
engineer hasn't indicated that we really need the additional entrance because of traffic purposes and we
feel like creating sort of a tum around here and going back out really sets up for a better site design quite
honestly. We have another plan that shows the right-in right-out here. It does begin to impact the
culvert over the creek and so that creates an issue where we would have to go get an army corp. permit
l
and we would not be able to start construction this year. It would kick in the first quarter of next year.
But, really the driving factor is we felt like as you can see we have created this giant amenity area all
along Deerfield Parkway a lot of which is open to the public and that particular area is where we are
trying to save the trees.
Councilmember Hewitt:
So, it would shift those two buildings that way and the drive would go in between the retention pond and
that smaller bUilding. And, how about any of the other comments that our city architect made? Is there
any, you really didn't address those.
Ben Collins:
Sure, I'll be happy to address in more detail. In fact, we have Jim Strickland here. He is the principal of
Historical Concepts and really was the visionary behind this plan. Jim, would you like to say a couple
of words. Catch him on the spot. We have taken all the information into consideration. Really we tried
to break down the scale, the development, by moving buildings further back, working with grade, this is
all based on final engineer drawings and what you don't see is a big drop in grade across the back in
several key locations and the majority of these buildings really split the grade. You will see grade split
on four stories on this side and three stories on that side. We felt based on our conversation with Bob
that this being the primary future connection that we did reorient these buildings to create that block
structure along this future connection. We did feel like those connections were important as important
as the back of the property. You can see if we moved these buildings this way we would loose this
whole tree save area and loose this whole tree save area which we felt like were more important in
creating the special place we wanted to create than simply turning the buildings along this property and
provide parking all along the back of it. It works great in 2D but not when you are trying to work with
the land and create the best plan possible.
Councilmember Hewitt:
L
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 16 of28
You mentioned the future connection that going to the Fry's parking lot. Are they willing to connect?
Ben Collins:
We have not begun conversations on that. They did indicate that would be receptive from their
ownership and that having the additional cross direction would support their retail development. We
haven't finalized that yet.
Councilmember Hewitt:
And is your plan, if you were to build this, to go and do the whole, not phase it?
Ben Collins:
We will build it all. We have equity in place and financing in place to start in three months. Our team
of architects and engineers are here tonight and ready to start drawing first thing tomorrow.
Councilmember Hewitt:
Is Carter still here? Oh, he's right there. What are your thoughts on the right in right out drive?
Carter Lucas, Public Works Director:
It is probably more important from an internal circulation than an access standpoint. The other two
driveways will serve primarily as full access than that right in right out would just enhance internal
circulation.
Jim Strickland, Architect Crescent Properties:
I think yaIl have done a great job with your town and with this particular road. When I first came here
and I looked at it, I could not believe the offices and the office parks that were so beautiful. And, when
I first looked at it, then I got out and I walked the site. There is a very challenging thing which is this
wall behind the existing commercial which goes up to almost 40 feet. The topo is also very exciting and
very beautiful, but this entire area right here is wooded and as you come down the hill you can look
across the lower area which is where the lake that they are looking at doing where the little old shed and
old farm is which is your heritage. And, then by turning the buildings this way, we actually did not want
to present the big elevation, we wanted to present the smaller elevation to this particular road that came
in and went down. This is a very small building. These are small buildings which are also apartments.
You've never heard of an apartment company doing this. And, then to come in and create the old barn
for the gym, create the clubhouse as the old original farmhouse with an orchard. Coming back in, and
this is for the market. And, what you did, yall have done it so well, with your drives and your walks that
go down with certainty, it is so picturesque but it is going to come off on to this which could be a
Saturday sales. You could have someone selling fruit or whatever else is going to be in there. They are
really for real. This young man is unusuaL I think you really have somebody that will serve you very
very well.
Mayor Lockwood:
I know there are a lot of tough decisions here and I certainly understand and respect everybody's point.
I have a hard time while I certainly realize that office use there would possibly bring in more revenue or
cost the city less, I also realize there is time versus money and right now vacant land doesn't bring any
income into the city or a very small amount. I also think that with the values of this property it is going
be much more than the model looks at so I can't agree with those numbers of it costing us that much. I
think if we look at the whole picture and add in not only the sales tax, I understand the sales tax is
countywide but it is still generates sales tax that the city would see, but also the additional retail, the help
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 17 of28
for our existing businesses around it that will be affected both by walk and traffic. You know, when you
have that many more people living there they will be buying a whole lot more stuff. As we know, our
developments over there on Highway 9 are hurting, so I think that could spur some growth there. I also
think it could spur some growth with potential new office buildings around the office land. A lot of
companies, that is one thing they look for is somewhere that their employees can live. If you talk to
people at Verizon and some of these other big corporations, very few of their actual employees have a
place to live here in Milton. The other thing I, you know, I certainly understand zoning for office we
could put more office in there, you know, the majority of Milton is residential but to me, if we put more
office there it is the same old thing, we've got more office, we've got more people getting in their cars,
and if it is the executives they can spend $600,000 -$800,000 on a house on the other side of Milton, but
the majority of the workers can't. I know we just did a project down in Brookhaven and they've got real
upscale apartment homes and they are full and it's vibrant and I just see this as kind of being a heartbeat
that might turn this area around, have a place to draw the City of Milton, help our businesses, help our
retail. Again, it will open up some housing for both young people who grew up here and move out of
their parent's house and can't live there or vice versa. Give people options to live in as they are older
and want to scale back. I just certainly think it would be a good thing for the city and our area here so,
again, I support it because I think over the, when you consider it is a project that starts now, brings in
more citizens, more people, gives our folks more opportunity for our businesses and retail and all that. I
think it is a good fit here so I certainly want to step out and say that I do support this development.
Councilmember Kunz:
This is something I have weighed back and forth quite heavily and we have a great opportunity here, not
just looking at this land itself, but also the statement that we are making. In one hand we have a great
developer that does good work that I know is going to build a great product from that standpoint. I
know our DRB likes it, I know our Planning Commission likes it. Attracting quality tenants is a good
example. We want to have a good relationship with good developers. The problem, though, is that what
is it that we want to be as a city and it is higher than that. We sit here and we try to decide whether or
not we want to be a sustainable community and I can't see us being sustainable without the commercial
property that we have. I just don't see that. Ifwe give that away we are not going to get that back.
Possibly if the Arnold Mill development comes along, well that may not happen for thirty years, and as a
city where we are I cannot say that this particular piece of property is going to bring in more revenue for
the City of Milton. Ifwe get quality tenants, I don't see us having those tenants shop in Milton. I see
them walking down the streets of Alpharetta. It used to be, it could have been our property, I just don't
see that. I don't see them walking over to, if they are walking around here they are not spending money
in Milton. I just don't see that. I see them being here living and I see this being a drain on our city until
such time that we can attract the commercial development that comes. I sit here and I want to see us as
a city decide that we can be the best we can be, that we can attract a vibrant community that we can have
a mixed development right next door where people can go shopping where people can go to restaurants
where people can walk in this community and I don't want to take it from the standpoint anymore that
we are just going to accept things because the market is bad. We are better than that. We are much
better than that. And I know that it is tough and I know it is difficult but it will come back and when it
does come back we have every opportunity to be the best that we are able to be. This is tough. I want to
see a developer. I want to have a good relationship with a developer that is very good but who are we as
Milton and in my mind I see us being a talented group of people that can get things done despite the
odds and in my mind how we vote on this is going to decide what statement we are going to make to the
region, to Alpharetta, to John's Creek, to Canton, to Roswell that we are open for business. That we are
not going to just sit by and say we are just going to take residential properties anymore. This vote is that
statement. So, from my standpoint, I can't support this philosophically. I believe economically that we
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 18 of28
can do great things. I believe this property will be great but I believe it will serve the citizens that we
will come and spend money on that property and those tax dollars will go to provide other services,
other things for this community. And, it is a tough decision, but I can't walking away saying that we
just gave in. I can't so I don't support it.
Mayor Lockwood:
Could you please address the financial feasibility of a project per zoning?
City Attorney Jarrard:
Mayor, to the extent that the question is can the financial feasibility from the standpoint of will the
development from a tax base standpoint support the services necessary to provide services to that
development. It can be one factor but, I believe, the law does not tolerate it being a single factor
because if it were as easy as the government being able to say that we think that we cannot provide the
infrastructure to that development and therefore, we are going to deny it, for that singular reason, well
that would be a very easy way for a lot of jurisdictions to deny everything because simply there would
be no incentive to ever build out to increase roads, increase sewer, increase things of that nature so I
don't think the law anticipates that can be the sole reason but it can be a reason among many others.
Councilmember Large:
One thing regarding what Matt had to say and, of course, Matt and I are newbies on the council and we
usually agree but sometimes we disagree. One of the statements he made regarding people walking
down to Alpharetta to shop. We get a percent of those taxes. Regardless of where you shop in Fulton
County, the tax is collected, unless they are drinking, well, they might want to drink within walkable
distance so they don't have to have a designated driver and they can just kind of stagger home. We get
the most revenue from that but as far as general retail and any of that it is going to be proportionate. We
are going through that right now with the negotiations with Fulton County so using that is not really a
reason. I don't really think it can hold water. Again, agreeing to disagree, I feel you have to be a little
more visionary sometimes too and part of that is taking some risk and that is what developers do every
day. We had it during the campaign where vilifying developers, not me or you, but we said there are the
ones that build cities, we don't do it. Again, I really think the strong connection, the LCI, showed multi
family on this, we approved the LCI, you approved the LCI.
Councilmember Thurman:
The LCI shows mixed use ofthe entire area. It does not show multi-family.
Councilmember Large:
My last question is, as far as this concept, we were going to approve an Autism Center, which is housing
and again looking at that what kind of revenue versus services was that going to generate on this piece
of property. And, we had a data center and I'm big on data centers as far as but low number of people
associated with a data center assets high but, you know, we've already been there, but what would we
have to do to this project to make it more palpable to maybe have more mixed use and design it more in
the way ofthe LCI envisioned it so we don't just throw out the baby with the bath water.
Councilmember Kunz:
I would love to have mixed use. I was here at the LCI meeting and put the blocks on that piece of land
for mixed use. It was from that standpoint. And, that is the compromise. You know, we understand
that times are tough as it is. I'm not against any family being there but, you know, we are trying to
make this a live/work/play community and as Karen said, we need all facets of that not just the live
----------------~------
l
[
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 19 of28
aspect. We need all facets of that. My vision is that when we go down to Savannah and we see that
little area by the hotel where we were staying where everyone was walking and shopping eating and
seeing things then they had, you know, complexes nearby where they can live and all that. That is what
I envision for that area. That is my vision for Deerfield because we already have a 95% occupied rate
where people that need somewhere to walk in Milton. I just don't see that place right now. I want to see
that as a vision. I would love to see that kind of area with a connect through that goes through to Fry's
and one where kids aren't throwing baseballs in the middle of the road as people are driving through.
That is my concern. I really see this as a statement of what do we want to be. And, I want to work with
a good developer as such but at the same time we already owe it to our citizens to use the land that is
currently zoned for something with an intent to be some type of commercial land to have that continue
to go forward as we go into the future or mixed use but it still has that similar intent of sometime some
part of that but not get rid of it entirely. I think it sends the wrong message.
Mayor Lockwood:
One thing I will had, again, it is not a huge deal but as I am going through the LOST negotiations, and
one of the big parameters is popUlation so ultimately if there are more citizens here it would bring a little
bit more tax dollars. The other thing I have to say is that it is probably, since we have been a city, it is
probably the first rezoning we have had where I haven't had one negative comment or someone
speaking against.
Councilmember Thurman:
We have received a few emails against it. When the studies were done as far as where people live,
where people worked, it showed that most people that live in Milton have to work outside of Milton.
And that leads me to believe the fact, and I know when my firm was looking three years ago to open an
office up in North Fulton, we looked at several buildings in Milton and they didn't have any vacancy
that would work for us so we ended up opening our office in Alpharetta because we didn't have that
option in Milton. And so I think that we are showing 15% vacancy rate which is all of North Fulton that
goes all the way down to Sandy Springs that is really a misleading number. If you look at what the
vacancy rate is in Class A office buildings in Milton, I believe it would be very different from that.
And, there are a lot of people, like I said, who live in Milton who don't get the opportunity to work in
Milton just because there is no Class A office buildings that are vacant that they could work in. I really
believe that we can't take our prime piece of property that we have left and make it into something just
because we are afraid that the market wouldn't support anything else right now. We really just need to
wait. Rather than having it go into something that will cost us $250,000 to $500,000 per year, it is better
just to wait until it fulfills the need that we really need it to fill which is to have more work space in the
City of Milton.
Councilmember Longoria:
I just wanted to make a follow-up comment to what Matt said earlier. Obviously, it is not an easy thing
to sit there and talk about. You want something to happen that nobody sitting in the audience is standing
up and cheering for. So, there is nothing easy about sitting here and weighing the balance between what
if we say yes to this what if we say no to this so I appreciate you putting a lot of thought into that and
thinking about what the real issue is there. And, you know, I have no doubt, regardless of how this vote
goes, that the people that occupy this property aren't going to receive services from the city. We are
going to provide the services that are required. We are going to do everything we are supposed to do as
a city. So, that is not really an issue. But, there is an opportunity cost associated with this and the
opportunity costs are in a couple of different areas. The first area is if it's residential, it is not
commercial. There is an opportunity cost there that trickles back to all kinds of things, the least of
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 20 of28
l which is the $7 million dollar number, which I would agree with Joe, it is startling when you look at it. I
have a hard time believing it but, I also don't think it got plucked out of thin air so there is something to
it there. The other opportunity cost is because the city for the most part is on a fairly inflexible budget.
We just can't go out and generate money anytime we want to. There's an opportunity cost in terms of
the rest of the citizens because in order to provide the service that we need to citywide, we take from
certain areas. Citizens aren't going to be able to get certain services that maybe they expect or would
have grown to expect if we are spending our resources elsewhere. So, I appreciate your comments,
Matt. I would agree with what you had to say and Karen as well. Thanks.
Mayor Lockwood:
Okay, I think I have heard the council clear and loud and I think anymore conversation is more to justify
each person's position versus I don't know that it is going to change anybody else's so with that being
said if there is no other comments if someone wants to make a motion and a second.
Councilmember Thurman:
Mayor, I will make a motion. I would like to make a motion for rezoning Z12-06NC12-03 that we
deny the applicant's request based on the fact that it is, I don't believe that it is what the, it is not what
we need as far as the live/work/play. It does not provide the work aspect that we need. The fact that the
feasibility study it could be detrimental to the residents and the fact that it could, based on the
information provided by the school board, that it could put a burden on our schools. I think that is
probably the three reasons.
l Mayor Lockwood:
Does staff need to clarify or restate those reasons along with the motion for denial?
City Manager Lagerbloom:
I've got them and what I don't have I can pull off the recording.
Councilmember Large:
I would like to ask a question. We only have six members here tonight what is the result if it is a tie?
Mayor Lockwood:
If there is a tie, then it fails, and we have to bring it up for another motion.
Councilmember Large:
Again, I am trying to stay within the point of order. I know we have a motion on the table. Would it be
appropriate to again ask the applicant if we deferred it if they would be willing to redesign basically the
entire concept and come back to us with something that may be more agreeable that is more in line with
what the LCI recommended on what we approved. Again, instead of just turning it down.
Councilmember Thurman:
There is already a motion and a second.
Mayor Lockwood:
At this point, protocol would be that there is a motion and a second for denial unless that motion maker
and second would like to withdraw it then we would need to vote on that and again, if it were a tie, it
would fail and that could also be another motion that would be brought up if the first motion failed so
you do have that option.
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 21 of28
City Manager Lagerbloom:
Mr. Mayor, before you call for a vote, I am just going to ask as a matter of protocol if you would be
willing to withdraw the second and simply make a motion to deny with no further infonnation.
Councilmember Thurman:
With no further infonnation, I will be happy to.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
The second will be removed then withdraw your motion and then make a new motion in its place and
the motion is simply a motion to deny.
Councilmember Kunz:
I will make a motion to withdraw my second.
Councilmember Thurman:
I will withdraw my motion and make a motion to deny. Do I need to restate it?
City Attorney Jarrard:
Just the agenda number the Z number.
l
Councilmember Thurman:
RZI2-06NC12-03
City Attorney Jarrard:
That is fine.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thunnan made a motion to deny RZ12-06NCI2-03.
Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion failed (3-3). Mayor Lockwood and
Councilmembers Hewitt and Large voted against the motion. Councilmember Lusk was absent
from the meeting.
City Attorney Jarrard:
Mr. Mayor, pursuant to section 17 of the Milton rules, passage of a motion shall require the affinnative
vote of a majority of those voting, therefore, that motion fails. The matter remains pending.
Mayor Lockwood:
We can open it up for another motion if somebody has a different motion we can give that one a shot.
We can have a motion for approval or we could have a motion for deferral until at some point we break
a tie.
Councilmember Large:
I make a motion that we defer the application and in the meantime the city, with the city architect and
others, work with the developer who owns this property to try to work out a concept that is more mixed
use and commercial and residential has the walkability, has the aspects that we are all looking for
connection to Hwy. 9. Again, I realize that this is a motion but have the time to consider things, one
thought that I had was even a hotel piece or portion of this property being designated as a pad for a
hotel, which we all know, I know this is a long motion.
l
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 22 of28
Councilmember Thurman:
Motions are long in Virginia.
Councilmember Large:
Gotcha, yes they are.
City Attorney Lagerbloom:
Councilmember if you could just get it down to a motion to defer.
Councilmember Large:
I just motion that we defer to work with the developer.
City Attorney Lagerbloom:
I need a date sir. I need either September 1 i h or October 15 th •
Councilmember Large:
I'd say we could probably do something by September.
City Attorney Lagerbloom:
So, your motion would be to defer until September 17 th ?
Councilmember Large:
Yes.
Councilmember Thurman:
So, he is going to redo the whole site plan in a month?
Councilmember Large:
Well, they don't have to redo the whole site plan. It is the concept, basically.
Councilmember Hewitt:
I will second that only because I have some more questions so we can discuss it.
Motion: Councilmember Large made a motion to defer Agenda Item No. 12~141 until the
September 1 ih. Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion.
Councilmember Hewitt:
Perhaps a question would be, does the applicant have any interest in that?
Mayor Lockwood:
Yes, that is what I was going to say. The applicant may not have any interest.
John Bell:
We did study the mixed use concept. There were several problems. It is not viable today. The
commercial piece is not viable today. The residential piece is obviously. The site itself, the linear
nature of the site and the topo of the site makes it also very challenging for mixed use. A mixed use can
mean a lot of things to a lot of people. Most truly mixed use sites where you see residential, office and
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 23 of28
retail are on a much larger scale, larger acreage than this. To make truly mixed use, to force that into
just 21 acres, I honestly believe you will never see that. It won't happen. It can't happen. And, it
certainly, to me, it would destroy the integrity of the site plan and the opportunity that we came up with,
so we appreciate the motion sincerely, but I think we would rather stay with what we've got for those
reasons. Again, they are not viable today. This is viable today and the site won't lend itself to mixed
use. It's mixed use by virtue ofthe fact that you've got office and retail that are walkable to the site. It
completes the Deerfield mixed use component. There are other residential places that are walkable
within Deerfield but nothing like this.
Mayor Lockwood:
With that being said, I would only support a deferral if the applicant wished for a deferral but it that the
case, would the applicant prefer not to have a deferral?
John Bell:
Well, we have a motion and second unless somebody withdraws the second.
Councilmember Hewitt:
I will withdraw the second.
Mayor Lockwood:
Or, we can vote on it.
Councilmember Hewitt:
Either one is the same thing, isn't it?
City Attorney Jarrard:
Withdrawing the second, obviously dispenses the need for voting on it.
Councilmember Large:
If I withdraw the motion, can I replace it with another motion?
Mayor Lockwood:
Yes.
Councilmember Hewitt:
I withdraw my second.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
For purposes of keeping score here, you withdrew your second so that motion is going to fail for lack of
a second.
Councilmember Large:
I withdrew my motion.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
So, now the floor has no motions.
Councilmember Large:
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 24 of28
I move that we approve Agenda Item RZ 12-06NC 12-03 as submitted by the applicant.
Councilmember Hewitt:
I will second that but only because I have a couple of questions.
Motion: Councilmember Large made a motion to approve Agenda Item No. 12-141.
Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion.
Councilmember Hewitt:
We had some staff recommend conditions which were different on at least one thing from what they
have submitted here. So, do you want to go with staff recommended conditions or a modified staff
recommended conditions on this site plan that they gave us right here?
Councilmember Large:
I am fine going with modified staff recommendations especially like the circulation right in right out.
Councilmember Hewitt:
So, how can we amend that motion procedurally?
City Attorney Jarrard:
You need to withdraw your second and reinstate your motion.
Councilmember Large:
So, I withdraw my motion.
Mayor Lockwood:
Now, restate your motion.
Councilmember Large:
I move to approve zoning Agenda Item RZ12-06/VC12-03 with the conditions that they worked with the
staff recommendations but eliminate the right in right out.
Councilmember Hewitt:
I second that.
Mayor Lockwood:
Chris, did you get that?
City Manager Lagerbloom:
I am not clear, no. On the off chance that this would pass, which I am not thinking that it will, we do
need to make sure the motion at least captures what the intent is.
Councilmember Hewitt:
Can I interject here? I think what we are wanting to say is in staff recommended condition 4b(2). It
states in the staff recommended conditions to provide two full access drives and one right in and right
out access on Deerfield. And, I believe what Councilmember Large is saying is that provide two full
access drives period. And, delete the portion that says, "and one right in and one right out access on
Deerfield Parkway."
L
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 25 of28
City Manager Lagerbloom:
Does that capture your intent?
Councilmember Large:
Yes, that captures the essence.
City Manager Lagerbloom:
So, staff recommended conditions with the removal of 4(b)2 after the word "drives".
Councilmember Hewitt:
And that is what I intend to second.
Mayor Lockwood:
Mr. City Attorney, just to clarify, we had a motion for denial and that failed due to a lack of majority.
We've got a motion to approve. What happens if that fails for a majority also?
l
City Attorney Jarrard:
If it is a tie vote then that means that the substantive motion is defeated per your rules and; therefore, I
would ask someone has got to make a motion to postpone this to the next available date when the tie can
be broken, when you have a full component of the council here. That has to occur because this matter
remains pending until that time.
Vote: The motion failed due to a (3-3) tie vote. Councilmembers Thurman, Kunz, and
Longoria were opposed. Councilmember Lusk was absent from the meeting.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria made a motion to postpone Agenda Item No. 12-141 until
the Sept. 5 City Council meeting. Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Lusk was absent from the meeting.
2. RZ12-11-To Amend Article XVI, Signs as it Relates to Moving Signs and Replacing the
Current Name "Crabapple Crossroads Overlay District Signs" to "Crabapple Form Based Code
Overlay District Signs".
(Agenda Item No. 12-189)
(First Presentation at August 6,2012 Regular Council Meeting)
(Kathleen Field, Community Development Director)
Kathleen Field, Community Development Director:
Mr. Mayor, this amendment proposes two things. The first is to prohibit moving signs that are held
by people. Currently the definition of signs does not include signs held by people; therefore, the
definition has been amended to reflect the situation. In addition, within section 64-2295, signs held
by a person except during demonstrations, assemblies and public gatherings have been added to
prohibited signs. The Planning Commission recommended to include signs worn by a person or
animal and to include costumes to be prohibited. That is the first change to this amendment. The
other change to this text amendment is to replace the existing title of the Crabapple Crossroads
Overlay District Signs with Crabapple Form Based Code Signs. Staff has also deleted the previous
l
l
l
l
-------------------._.
-
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 26 of28
Overlay District Map with the new one that reflects the geographic area of the Crabapple Form
Based Code. So, this second part essentially is a housekeeping issue. The Planning Commission
recommended that the Overlay District be included in the new title to read, Crabapple Form Based
Code Overlay District Signs. This text amendment was reviewed at the Work Session last week and
is here for your review.
Councilmember Hewitt:
Does Title XVI include both of these because as we talked at the Work Session that we might want
to take out the portion of the moving signs. If we were to make a motion, would it be appropriate to
still amend Title XVI but only for replacing the current name, Crabapple Crossroads Overlay
District Signs to Crabapple Form Based Code Overlay District Signs.
Kathleen Field:
Yes sir.
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Hewitt moved to approve Agenda Item No. 12-189 without staff
recommended amendments to Article XVI, signs, as it relates to moving signs. Councilmember Large
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Lusk was absent from the
meeting.
3. RZ12-12 -To Amend Section 64-2371 to Create Permit Expiration Standards for Land
Disturbing Activities.
(Agenda Item No. 12-190)
(First Presentation at August 6, 2012 Regular Council Meeting)
(Kathleen Field, Community Development Director)
Kathleen Field, Community Development Director:
Mr. Mayor, currently the zoning ordinance does not provide a mechanism for the extension and
expiration of land disturbance permits. This proposed text amendment will provide the tool to the
Community Development Staff to extend the permit, if necessary, to be completed. The Planning
Commission recommended approval with some minor changes to the wording of the text amendment
but without changing the intent. Therefore, we would establish Section 64-2371 entitled Permit
Expiration for Land Disturbing Activities which would read as follows:
Permits for Land Disturbing Activity shall be valid for two years. Work must begin within 180 days of
issuance of the permit or the permit shall expire. Permits for projects which have achieved substantial
completion may be extended at the discretion of the Director of Community Development not to exceed
one additional year from the expiration date of the permit provided that the permit holder issues a
performance bond equal to 125% ofthe estimated cost of completion of the project.
That is the proposed text amendment, Mr. Mayor.
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 27 of28
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No. 12-190.
Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember
Lusk was absent from the meeting.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. HDI2-01-Approval of an Ordinance for Historic Designation of the Property Located at 12560
Hopewell Road (The Hardeman Store).
(Agenda Item No. 12-191)
(Joint Public Hearing Held July 16,2012)
(First Presentation at August 6,2012 Regular Council Meeting)
(Kathleen Field, Community Development Director)
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Agenda Item No. 12-191.
Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0).
Councilmember Lusk was absent from the meeting.
NEW BUSINESS (None)
L MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
STAFF REPORTS
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 8: 17
p.m. into Executive Session to discuss land acquisition and potential litigation. Councilmember
Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Lusk was
absent from the meeting.
RECONVENE
Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to reconvene the Regular Session at 8:27 p.m.
Councilmember Hewitt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0).
Councilmember Lusk was absent from the meeting.
l
l
l
Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council
Monday, August 20,2012 at 6:00 pm
Page 28 of28
ADJOURNMENT
(Agenda Item No. 12-203)
Motion and Vote: Council member Thurman moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 8:28 p.m.
Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0).
Councilmember Lusk was absent from the meeting.
After no further discussion the Regular Council Meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m.
Date Approved: September 17, 2012.
l
STATE OF GEORGIA )
) AFFIDAVIT RE: CLOSURE OF
COUNTY OF FULTON ) OPEN MEETINGS
)
l CITY OF MILTON )
Personally appeared before the undersigned officer, duly authorized under the laws of the State of Georgia
to administer oaths, JOE LOCKWOOD, who in his capacity as Mayor and the person presiding over a Council
meeting of the CITY OF MILTON, and after being first duly sworn, certifies under oath and states to the best of his
knowledge and belief the following:
At its Regularly Scheduled Council Meeting held on August 20, 20] 2, the Council voted to go into closed
session and exclude the public from all or a portion of its meeting. The legal exceptions applicable to the exempt
matters addressed during such closed meeting are as follows:
[Check or initial as appropriate]
1. X discussion or voting to authorize negotiations to purchase, dispose of, or lease
property; authorizing the ordering of an appraisal related to the acquisition or disposal of real estate;
entering into contract to purchase, to dispose of, or lease property subject to approval in a subsequent
public vote; or entering into an option to purchase, dispose of, or lease real estate subject to approval in a
subsequent public vote pursuant to O.CO.A, 50-14-3(b)(l)(B-E);
2. discussing or deliberating upon the appointment, employment, compensation, hiring,
disciplinary action or dismissal, or periodic evaluation or rating of a public officer or employee or
interviewing applicants for the executive head of the city with the vote on any such matter coming in [ public pursuant to O.C.O.A. 50-14-3(b)(2);
3. __ attorney/client privilege in order to consult and meet with legal counsel pertaining to
pending or potential litigation, settlement, claims, administrative proceedings or other judicial actions
brought or to be brought by or against the agency or any officer or employee or in which the agency or
any officer or employee may be directly involved, pursuant to O.CO.A. 50-14-2(1),
4. other (explanation):
I certify that the subject matter of the closed meeting or the closed portion of the meeting was devoted to
matters of official business or policy, with the exceptions provided by law as set forth above.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
l