Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 02/22/2012 - MINS 02 22 12 REG (Migrated from Optiview)Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page I of 47 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. Oficial Meetings are audio and video recorded. ' The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on February 22, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Joe Lockwood presiding. INVOCATION Reverend John Wolfe, Birmingham United Methodist Church, Alpharetta, Georgia CALL TO ORDER Mayor Lockwood called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL City Clerk Gordon called the roll and made general announcements. Council Members Present: Councilmember Thurman, Councilmember Kunz, Councilmember Lusk, Councilmember Longoria, Councilmember Large. Council Members Absent: Councilmember Hewitt PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Lockwood led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Approval of Meeting Agenda (Agenda Item No. 12-043) Motion: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve the meeting. Second and Vote: Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6 — 0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Lockwood read the rules for Public Comment. • Public comment is a time for citizens to share information with the Mayor and City Council. • To provide input and opinions for any matter that is not scheduled for its own Public Hearing for today's meeting. • There is no discussion on items on the Consent Agenda or First Presentation or from Council. • Each citizen who chooses to participate in Public Comment must complete a comment card and submit it to the City Clerk. o This is not a time to engage the Maygr- or Council in discussion. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 2 of 47 • When your name is called please come forward and speak into the microphone stating your name and address for the record. • You will have five minutes for remarks. Scott Stachowski, 3154 Chippingwood Court, Milton, GA 30004 • I am the President of the Hopewell Youth Association. • On behalf of the over one thousand kids that play baseball at the Hopewell Youth Association, I want to say thank you. • We are in full support of the purchase of the land adjacent to Bell Memorial Park. • Over the last eight years, Hopewell has put almost $300,000 of our own money into that park. • That initiative began well before the City of Milton was here. • In 2004, we purchased the Bennett house. • Thank you again for all you are doing to enhance the recreation programs for the City of Milton. CONSENT AGENDA City Clerk Gordon read the Consent Agenda Items. 1. Approval of the February 6, 2012 Regular Minutes. (Agenda Item No. 12-044) (Sudie Gordon, City Clerk) 2. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Tunnell, Spangler & Associates, Inc. for the Purpose of Providing Professional Planning Services for the Creation of Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. (Agenda Item No. 12-045) (Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) 3. Approval of a Purchase Agreement between the City of Milton and Hardy Ford for the Purchase of Eight (8) Ford New Generation Police Interceptors (NGPI). (Agenda Item No. 12-046) (Deborah Harrell, Chief of Police) 4. Approval of a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Milton and Dewberry & Davis LLC to Provide City-wide Future Flood Plain Mapping Services. (Agenda Item No. 12-047) (Carter Lucas, Public Works Director) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to approve. the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion pasged unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS (None) Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 3 of 47 FIRST PRESENTATION 1. Approval of an Ordinance Restating the City of Milton's Defined Benefits Pension Plan. (Agenda Item No. 12-048) (Sam Trager, Human Resources Director) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to approve Agenda Item No. 12-048. Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING (None) Zoning transcription is verbatim ZONING AGENDA DEFERRED TO MARCH 19, 2012 REGULAR COUNCIL IYIEETING 1. RZ12-01— To Amend Article VI, Division 2 — AG -1 (Agricultural District) as it Relates to Allowing Structures Housing Animals within the Front Yard and Fencing Along Public -right-of-ways. (Agenda Item No. 12-033) (First Presentation at the February 6, 2012 Regular Council Meeting) (Discussed at February 13, 2012 Work Session) (Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director Thank you Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. As the City Clerk said, we discussed this item at the February 3`d work session. And at that time there were two items that came up that we have incorporated into the working document that you have before you. And that is that we changed the words domesticated animals to livestock, and again, that was a discussion item and certainly something that you can review and concur with tonight. And then, secondly, there was a discussion about fence colors in the section dealing with fences and so we did add some fence colors. And we suggest black, white, or dark brown, and again, that is in there for your discussion and review tonight. We will be working off of the Planning Commission's recommendations with the City Attorney's comments which are attached to the memo. And the grey represents the City Attorney's comments and the yellow was the original comments by the Planning Commission. In addition, I gave you sort of a working summary so that you could discern the difference between the current zoning regulations and the Planning Commission recommendations. And I gave you a breakdown including, you know, barns in the front. The way it currently reads now by the Planning Commission, horse barns only in the front and then uncovered riding areas and uncovered riding areas with lighting or bleachers and then the same with covered riding areas, covered riding areas just without anything, and then covered riding areas with lighting and/or bleachers. And so you can see by these bullets points, essentially, what is contained in the Planning Commission's recommendations. And so our thought is to Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 4 of 47 work from the Planning Commission's recommendations with your comments and any changes or wherever you want to go. Mayor Lockwood: Do we have any public comment on this? City Clerk Gordon: We do have one, sir, in support and that is Laura Bentley. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, thank you. Laura Bentley, 2500 Bethany Church Road, Milton, GA 30004 Laura Bentley, 2500 Bethany Church Road. I spoke at the work session so this is a continuation of my support on behalf of the Milton Horse Council for this amendment. Certainly, we understand we can't discriminate against other animals besides horses so that's fine. The arenas in the front yard, in the front, in front of houses on large parcels, I think we are all in favor of. The only concern that I would bring forward at this point would be parcels that are perhaps ten acres or less with the covered riding arenas. You know, I think I mentioned at the last meeting that these structures aren't necessarily always new. They can be moved so that would be a concern. I also just think of it in terms of, I have a ten acre horse farm and so I thought, you know, what that might be like if I put a covered riding arena in the front of my property where I am very close to neighborhoods on each side. I think it would really change the complexion of, you know, my area and I think you might have the potential to affect negatively more people than positively. So, I would just ask you to consider that on the smaller parcels that, perhaps, you might want to consider that to be a situation where you would have a hardship so that it would come forward, neighbors would know, and it could be, you know, accommodated but, you know, perhaps neighbors need to know about that so thank you very much. Mayor Lockwood: Thank you. Do we have any other public comment? City Clerk Gordon: No sir, we do not. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, I will go ahead and close the public hearing then and we will open it back up to council for questions and discussion. Kathy, if you would like, do you want to, should we go with and just kinda go off your summary and go item by item? Kathleen Field: Yes, and one other piece of information which was emailed to you, and I believe it was the request of Councilmember Thurman, was in regard to; are there any current size limitations on anything and we did find that for non -institutional buildings on a development of four acres or less the maximum building size shall be 20,000 square feet. Let's see, and if two or more buildings are built the total size of all buildings shall be a maximum of 25,000 square feet no Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 5 of 47 single one of which will exceed 15,000. So, you can do 20,000 on four acres or less and then over that, over four acres, the maximum size shall be 25,000 square feet. So, if it is one building under four acres 20,000; if it is more than one building under twenty acres a max of 25,000. And then on developments larger than four acres, the max shall be 25,000 square feet. So, that was a piece of information that Councilmember Thurman asked for. So, back to the cheat sheet here, so to speak, in terms of the bullet points and again, as I said, we have divided these into various structures. So, the first structure we talk about, and then again under the Planning Commission recommendation, they are suggesting horses only for barns in the front and that would be allowed for residential uses and then in non-residential uses but the minimum of ten acres that it be allowed. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, Karen. Councilmember Thurman: I just have one question. When we discussed this in work session we actually had current zoning, Planning Commissions, and then Planning Staff recommendations. And it looks like now we just have the current zoning and the Planning Commission's recommendations. Are you going to give us staff recommendations as we go through each category? Kathleen Field: I could. I think that the thought was just to use one as the working document to work off of and so that is why we chose the Planning Commission one but certainly if you would like me to do that I could certainly do that and Robyn if you can...... Councilmember Thurman: I would. I would like to hear what staff recommends in addition on each of these categories, especially since it is no longer included in our information. Kathleen Field: So the only difference in the horses is well, we number one, recommended that it be animal barns as opposed to horse barns. And that we also allowed for barns in residential areas for residential use. But in terms of non-residential, our difference was that we had no minimum acreage, whereas, the Planning Commission recommended a minimum of ten acres so that's the only difference. Mayor Lockwood: So, I guess we could start with the point horses versus livestock or all animals. Kathleen Field: Right. Mayor Lockwood: And the council have a discussion on that basically if been or discriminated against other animals. But, I think staff's recommendations, and I would say mine would be too, of to a livestock or a different term than horses only. Any comments on that? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 6 of 47 Councilmember Thurman: I agree. I mean, I can see why it would be primarily horses, but at the same time, if you have a goat or a ... Mayor Lockwood: Cows or... Councilmember Thurman: Something else that is friends with the horse and wants to come in the barn I would hate to tell it it couldn't. Councilmember Large: Right, that's what I heard last in the work session that there were associated animals that went along with the stabling of horses. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, so staff can kinda. Councilmember Large: To allow that. Mayor Lockwood: Making notes of that so when we get to. Kathleen Field: Yea, so Robyn's going to keep, Robyn with Ken's help are going to keep notes of all your comments. Councilmember Thurman: And I guess the other part of this to discuss is whether or not we really think it needs a ten acre minimum because staff did not have a ten acre minimum. Kathleen Field: Correct, we just allowed it by right. Mayor Lockwood: Well, let me ask kinda a theoretical question. We're talking about barns in front of a home, or a structure, a home obviously on the residential that's an issue, but on non-residential maybe a piece of property that doesn't have any structures on there so is it even a is it a moot point? You know, if it's a non-residential unless, you know, there's a house on it it's considered a non- residential use I guess we can keep it on there but, I'm just, it may not be an issue. Councilmember Thurman: I mean if it has a house on it does it automatically go to a residential? 7 Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 7 of 47 Mayor Lockwood: To a residential, yea that's, that's my point. Kathleen Field: Yes, that is the distinction. If you live on that lot it is residential. If you are not living on it and using it as a just a lot next door or commercial use to it then we put that in the non-residential. Mayor Lockwood: Okay. Councilmember Thurman: But if it has a house on it that you are not living in does it go in the non-residential or the residential? Kathleen Field: That's a Ken question. Councilmember Thurman: Because, if somebody, if somebody buys a a ten acre lot and it may be next door to the house, you know, they buy the house and the lot next door to them but they're not going to ever live in that one they buy it primarily for the pasture, what category, what bucket does it go in? City Attorney Jarrard: Well, I think, I think it depends as with any other, a lot of time, with the law. What is the primary purpose of the property. And if the primary purpose of the property, is best we can devise, is not for residential purpose but for agricultural, and true bonifide agricultural purpose, I think that planning staff have the ability to make that call. It is a fact question, and it is a tough one, but the best we could do would be based upon the information provided by the property owner as to what the intention is to use the property for. Mayor Lockwood: You know, I'm in favor and I'll use a couple of examples of not having the minimum ten acres required on non-residential. Because you may have a situation, whereas Councilmember Thurman said, you may have someone lives or has a home or property and they buy one acre or two acre property beside them that's vacant. They may buy that and just put a barn, small barn, on there and keep one or two horses or some type of livestock. Which is, I think, the intention that the city would like to see but if they can't do that, then the only use for that property is for somebody to build a home on it. City Attorney Jarrard: Right. Mayor Lockwood: So, I would be against having a ten acre minimum on a non-residential use just because of that. Someone may buy a four acre site or five acre site instead of developing it into, you know, a few Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 8 of 47 homes, they may put a barn on there and pasture some horses or whatever, which again I think the intent for Milton kind of would be nice. So, or has so, you know, that's my and I would like to hear what everybody else thinks. But if, and I don't know what the minimum is, I mean you know, one acre they could probably, you know, put a small barn and one horse on two acres a couple that kind of rule but. City Attorney Jarrard: Mr. Mayor, your hypothetical raises the exact point I was trying to articulate and that is what someone's purpose for a piece of property can change. They very well may purchase the property with an intention a specific intention to do one thing with it and that may not work they may have to change their intention. Mayor Lockwood: Does anybody have any comments on that as to whether we took the minimum off? Councilmember Longoria: Yea, so I understand the idea behind the minimum because, you know, you don't want to over do a piece of property and have it primarily be the barn or, you know, the stable or whatever. So, the real question is what is the minimum. So, like you said mayor, you know, if it's not ten acres what is it? I mean the way things go with ordinances there, you know, it's black and white. If it's 9.9 acres okay sorry you can't have a barn on it. So, so I think we can be a little bit more flexible on the minimum but I don't know what that number should be. Councilmember Thurman: You still have certain setbacks don't you? Kathleen Field: Yes, we still have a 100 foot setback and then there's a 150 foot required setback from a residential occupied unit building. So, even if it's not on your own land you still have to be 150 feet away so that's what's inherent in the ordinance. Councilmember Large: So, I was understanding when you were talking about non-residential uses for maximum building size, you were talking about under four acres or less. Kathleen Field: Yes, right now we. Councilmember Large: Allow up to 25,000 square feet. Kathleen Field: 20,000 in one building; 25,000 in two buildings. Councilmember Large: In two buildings, okay. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 9 of 47 Kathleen Field: Then over four acres. Councilmember Large: Right. Kathleen Field: There's a maximum of 25,000. Councilmember Large: 25,000. Kathleen Field: Right. Councilmember Large: So, there is some sort of regulation right now as to how much you actually could put on a piece of property, although, again four acres down to one acre that could be a big difference in terms of putting a 20,000 square foot building single 20,000 square foot building or two buildings over 25,000 total. Kathleen Field: Right. Councilmember Large: I will bring up the same point again, is there a way as part of this ordinance, that we don't establish a minimum acreage but you establish, as you do in a lot of zones, a floor area ratio that's allowable based on the acreage of the property? So, you know, you can only establish, you know, if you have two acres which is, you know, 90,000 say in round numbers square feet and you could have, you know, twenty percent of that could be floor area or barn that would be a way to kinda at least control. Councilmember Thurman: Well, I think the setbacks do control it because when I when I used to live in Crabapple we had 3.82 acres and you could not put a barn on the property unless it was like a, because of the way the lot was shaped, unless it was a five foot wide barn which really wouldn't do you a whole lot of good but just because of the setbacks. So, I mean that was even on, you know, almost four acres. Councilmember Large: Depending on the shape of the property. Councilmember Thurman: Depending on the shape of the property. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 10 of 47 Councilmember Large: If it were a square piece of property then you probably couldn't put much. Councilmember Thurman: Yea, you still would be. Councilmember Large: You'd still be pressed. Councilmember Thurman: A two acre square piece of property you wouldn't be able to put anything very large on it within the and be 150 feet away on all sides. Mayor Lockwood: Well, and I think you gotta also look at, and I don't know the answer, as to who controls this but, you know, a responsible livestock owner or horse owner is not going to, you know, if he only had a small parcel you can't put too many animals on it. Again, I'm just, you know, thinking through and one acre may be, if I suggest, may be too small but, you know, I'm looking at a situation where somebody lives on an acre lot and they've got a horse and they board it somewhere else and they'd like to buy the acre next door to them rather than have a house built there put a small barn and keep their horse there, you know, if we can with setbacks and all that if that can control so that you don't have a huge building on there or if it's over ,you know, or maybe it needs to be two acres or three but I'm just trying to look out for, you know, some of the mini you know mini mini farm, or small farm, or somebody that wants to just add some some natural land around their house that a could could use it for that so, Bill. Councilmember Lusk: Karen and Lance brought up the point that I've been mulling over here too. Configuration of the property could have ten acres that is two hundred feet wide and a half a mile long or you could have a gourd shaped piece of property too which would restrict, would be restrictive, because of your side sets and setbacks. Could be physical features out there too, flood plain, creek something like that. So, I'm still kicking this around in my mind how to address it. Kathleen Field: May I make a suggestion? Currently, you know, and also the Planning Commission and the current regulations both speak to a minimum of ten acres which I think is easy enough. We can all visualize that would you be amiable to anything less than ten acres requiring a use permit. So, then it gets a case-by-case basis so if you end up with these odd shaped pieces of property or something, at least there is an avenue for people to come through to get there. Councilmember Lusk: I think that is how you address something like that. Councilmember Thurman: I'm okay with that. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 11 of 47 Mayor Lockwood: I'm okay. Would you consider maybe dropping it say to five acres and then anything under five acres had to have a special use permit or whatever. Five acres is a pretty good size piece of property that someone could... Councilmember Thurman: Yea, cause I mean in order to get the conservation property tax break it's, I think, it's six acres is that, it's eight acres okay yea, I don't think you would, you definitely don't need to be any greater than that. I would hate to be able qualify for conservation property tax but not be able to put a horse on your property. Mayor Lockwood: I'll just throw that out I don't know, five acres, but then have to go through anything below that or anything below that you'd have to bring... Kathleen Field: Yea, you'd have to bring it for a case-by-case review and it would go to the DRB then it would come to the City Council for review. So, that might be a way of dealing with those obstacles. Mayor Lockwood: Is everybody okay with that? Alright, Robyn are you taking notes? Five acres. Councilmember Thurman: Five acres and less than five they'll go for a use permit. Robyn MacDonald: Structures housing livestock, which may be located in the front yard, provided that the structure must be, located at least 100 feet from all property lines and at least 150 feet from any occupied structure located on any other property and a minimum of five acres. Kathleen Field: And anything less than five acres. Mayor Lockwood: No, anything under five acres requires a use permit. Kathleen Field: And that's just for the non-residential. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, and that's on the, yea, the non-residential. So, that wouldn't be on the rear side of the property, it could be anywhere. Okay? Kathleen Field: Okay. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 12 of 47 City Attorney Jarrard: Not to be redundant, but the other shoe that needs to drop is that greater than five acres is going to be permitted as a right, less than five acres special use permit. 7 Kathleen Field: Okay, shall I proceed? We are now moving on to uncovered riding areas in the front. And the Planning Commission, in terms of residential, they recommended that it be allowed and the staff also recommended it be allowed. In terms of non-residential, it is really the same discussion we just had in that Planning Commission recommended that it be allowed but with a minimum of ten acres and the staff recommended that it be allowed with no minimum acreage. Mayor Lockwood: That's something again that affects, you know, could we have a brief discussion on what people perceive as a riding area? I know everybody has something different. I'm perceiving that as it could be a corral type, you know, fenced in riding area an oval shape or, you know, someone may just have a, you know, some area in the front that they ride in real casual so is that what staff. Kathleen Field: Do we have a definition in there? Mayor Lockwood: Do we have a definition of that? Is everybody on that page though they picture a riding area being a ring a fenced in ring? Councilmember Thurman: I pictured it being a fenced in area that is specific to riding not just a pasture that you could go ride in. Mayor Lockwood: Would it be, you know, I know staff recommending zero, Planning Commission ten acres. Would it be reasonable to go back to the same five acres, anything under five acres, has to come before us for a special use; it's allowed anything over five acres. Is there a problem with that? Kathleen Field: It's whatever you..... Mayor Lockwood: No, I'm just asking does anybody have a... Councilmember Thurman: I like that. Mayor Lockwood: Robyn, are you writing? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 13 of 47 Robyn MacDonald: There's no writing areas defined. I'm sorry. City Attorney Jarrard: That provides a nice symmetry in your code, quite frankly, that you are using some... Kathleen Field: It will be the same thing we just agreed to. Councilmember Large: Just visually just to give you a perspective in your mind, five acres is about 470 feet square is a five acre parcel of land. So, that kinda gives you an idea how much five acres is square. Of course, you've got configurations. Mayor Lockwood: I'm going to say a typical riding, you know, a riding area and, tell me if I'm wrong Laura, but somewhere 180 x 60 feet wide something like that? Seventy-five but, you know, again you have a small piece of property you may have a smaller riding area and you have setbacks and all that. Okay. Kathleen Field: Okay, I'm moving on now. We are getting into a little more intense use here. This is an uncovered riding area but with lighting and or bleachers. Mayor Lockwood: And can I say something too because we discussed this earlier. It sounds natural to include lighting and bleachers together but really a lighted, you know what, I'm wrong, we are on uncovered. So, okay, lighting is a big issue on uncovered, okay. Kathleen Field: Okay, so, with either lighting and/or bleachers. So, the Planning Commission's recommendations were in a residential use area to prohibit them and in non-residential, even with a minimum of ten acres, to also prohibit them. And the staff suggested that in the residential area that they be allowed with a use permit and that in the non-residential with no minimum acreage this also would be allowed with the use permit. So, we controlled everything with the use permit and the Planning Commission prohibited both. Mayor Lockwood: Does anybody have any comments? Matt. Councilmember Kunz: I like the idea of the use permit as well. And just because we want to give someone an avenue to bring their case before us just to say, you know a brush with a broad stroke, may not necessarily be the best way to go. In my mind, I just see others if we are going to try to increase the demand for equestrian housing, someone may come up with that idea, you know, we don't want them to automatically think they can't come to Milton if that idea doesn't work. It's just my thought. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 14 of 47 Mayor Lockwood: Okay, so you are thinking on residential instead of prohibiting them allow with a use permit? Councilmember Kunz: 7 Yea, some sort of avenue that makes it at least a discussion. At least bring neighbors out here and we can have an idea of whether or not it makes sense. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, I think the thing that, and what I was going to get into between covered and uncovered; the lighting part could be a major issue with an uncovered riding ring. It could be stadium lights and, you know, certainly mess with the neighbors and all that versus a covered riding ring with lighting may just be a little bit of light inside that just illuminates the area inside and doesn't shine out. I can see the Planning Commission's point with prohibiting them just because of, you know, what it could entail a commercial type operation with bleachers and big lights and all. But I'm certainly open to, you know, if the council wants to have some kind of an avenue where on a case-by-case you can look at it. Councilmember Large: Going through a use permit process you could require an applicant to present a photometric plan as part of your facility just like you would do for a commercial piece to show what the foot candles are at the property line see what the spillover is because lighting can be designed to limit that. Kathleen Field: Right, that's exactly right, yes. Councilmember Large: So, going through a use permit would allow that process and to look at those types of effects on the adjacent property and right of ways as well. Councilmember Longoria: I like the use permit because in essence, you know, you can consider it prohibited unless there's special circumstances that would, you know, make the way the ordinance reads not apply. So, I don't have a problem with that. Councilmember Thurman: I like the use permit too because I think that if you don't have the use permit in here their only alternative is to try to get a variance which would require a hardship and there are times that it might really be in the best interest to the community, and it might be perfectly appropriate to allow it, but yet it's not a hardship. So, I like the use permit because then it does give you a little bit more discretion as far as whether or not we really feel like it's what's best rather than just having to create a having to have a hardship for it. Mayor Lockwood: Anybody else? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:40 pm Page 15 of 47 Councilmember Lusk: I go along with that. I guess what comes to mind is, you know, how many of these cases could you anticipate coming up in the future? I know Planning Commission's put a lot of work into this and, of course, staff has and our attorney has too. I'm not into beating a dead horse, but I wonder if we're just overworking this whole thing. I understand the need for controls and constraints and restrictions on all this but use permits seem to be the easiest and probably the most universal way to handle a lot of these cases. Mayor Lockwood: So, what we are talking about is possibly having them allowed in residential areas but with a use permit. Councilmember Thurman: I'd probably have them allowed in a residential or a non-residential but requiring a use permit and, you know, you could minimum use permit period so regardless of what size acreage it was just requiring the use permit for it. Mayor Lockwood: Well, I think we certainly would if we're going with lighting and bleachers. We need to at least mimic and be the same or more land or than the unlighted. Councilmember Thurman: The unlighted though we said use permit for less than five acres. I would say use permit regardless of the acreage because of the lighting that we want to make sure that we look at each of them on a case-by-case basis. City Attorney Jarrard: Just a question real quick, this is basically the third situation where we are talking about plugging in a special use permit process to allow something to be done on a small piece of property. Does the council have a vision that there would be any identifiable criteria that would guide your granting of the special use permit, in other words, and this may be something Community Development staff could just answer for me, I mean, are there just some generic whether the discretion of the City Council the granting of the special use permit would be deemed the best interest of the applicant, something like that. Because in the absence of any criteria whatsoever, it does make a hard burden for the council to deny one if there is nothing by which, do you see what I am saying, you have no criteria by which to apply to it and you simply say come in and get a permit and the applicant fills all their applications out correctly and comes and applies and gets before you and you say we are going to deny you and the answer is going to be why. What was the criteria that you denied the special use permit? I just, and it may just be me not being able to hone in on the correct language in the Milton Zoning Code and maybe Community Development staff could guide me there but I don't want us to leave it open such that you put in a permit that is not giving you any more latitude that I know you are looking for. What I know you are looking for is to be able to fashion maybe some conditions with respect to it you know maybe the light candles and how many foot candles can come off the lighting and making sure you don't adversely impact the adjacent property owners because of the small size of the lot. I Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 16 of 47 get all that, I just wonder what your vision is as far as maybe seeing some of those criteria in the actual code. Councilmember Lusk: Where I have the heartburn with all of this I think is with the lighting aspect of it and Lance brought up a good point of doing photometric studies or analysis of this I think of all of the things that are probably objectionable is the lighting aspect of facilities like this the impact, it impacts everybody around 360 degrees from a property. I think if we were to grant a special use permit and have some guidelines to address this I agree with your point I think it needs to. Kathleen Field: I can respond to that too that based on the vote tonight should you desire to use the special use permit as a pool to grant these that we would come up with the criteria that would be necessary to base your special use permit on but we really needed to see where you were going tonight to see if indeed that special use permit was an avenue that you were going to take. We are prepared to develop those for your review. Councilmemher Thurman: I would think that it would be very similar to what the criteria is to grant a variance in a lot of jurisdictions because a lot of them don't require you to have a hardship a lot of them just have to say it's the intent of the it's in the best interest of the community, it's not detrimental to the adjacent property, and that would be what I think we would need to have in there is something so that it wasn't a blanket granting of it where it was not appropriate but it does allow us to do it where it is appropriate. My thought was that there is a very nice barn on New Providence Road that's a covered riding area it is not far off of the road and if they wanted to put a house and I believe they do have a house back behind there, you know, it would be appropriate in that particular area in this under these situations here it's automatically going to be denied because really no way you could ever have a hardship for it even if you had 50 or 60 acres you still wouldn't have a hardship so. Mayor Lockwood: But I see Ken's point too what Kathy's saying is if we elect to choose a path then staff can bring back to us some stipulations or criteria. City Attorney Jarrard: And that spot on answered my concern. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, but I agree with Bill too that you know the big thing I think what gives everybody a little heartburn is the lighting part so it would have to be addressed with you know and I'd certainly be in favor of putting a minimum acreage maybe its five or whatever for a lighted one and then they'd still have to go come to us for a special use permit so we could check out all the lighting and make sure they fit the criteria rather than ratchet it up a little bit for a lighted uncovered. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 17 of 47 Councilmember Thurman: Well, I would think for a lighted though it shouldn't be a whole lot different than lighted tennis courts are as far as you know the impact on the surrounding area so I think and I think you even have to have a greater setback for the riding thing so I think we need to look at it along those same criteria, you know, is it any different from lighted tennis courts. Councilmember Longoria: I think we have to have some kind of lighting ordinance. I don't know if it's specific to overlays but I have read plenty of times what the criteria are for lights that are allowed versus lights that aren't allowed so I'm sure that we do have some coverage there. I think the challenge here and to sort of answer your question again is, you know, we're sitting up here trying to think of the infinite number of possibilities that are gonna come before us and the reality is that there is really only a finite number because Milton has already laid down properties, you know, already defined, things like that, but we're trying to just cover the issue related to it's obvious that the homeowner or landowner should be able to do this, yet, the way our ordinances read they just have no avenue to come back. I like what Councilwoman Thurman said in terms of, you know, the guidelines that we could set up to that. I don't know if they're specific enough. I don't know if those are still a little loose but certainly working off that would be a good idea. City Attorney Jarrard: Concur, and I think Councilwoman Thurman's point was a good one. When you're into the area of unknown, you don't have any idea right now the source of applications you might receive. You want to leave yourself a little bit of room that might look a little like some variance criteria. Maybe take out the hardship but certainly the intent of the code. That sort of language is always nice. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, okay. Do you have any suggestions on this one based on this conversation? Kathleen Field: I think where we are with the non-residential in terms of whether or not there should be a minimum acreage or not and do you want to preclude anyone with lighting or bleachers from five acres or less and just allow it after that with a special use permit or just as Councilmember Thurman suggested just a blanket permit so I think that's where we are. Do you want to have a minimum acreage with a special use permit or just throw it open with a special use permit? Mayor Lockwood: You know, again, I just and I understand Councilwoman Thurman with the tennis court analogy the only difference is it's probably going to be much bigger so it's gonna have more lights. I still would feel comfortable having some kind of minimum acreage whether it's five or whatever then a use permit after that. Councilmember Longoria: So you're saying it's allowed above a certain acreage? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 18 of 47 Mayor Lockwood: It's. not allowed under a certain acreage. Over a certain acreage it's allowed with a use permit. Councilmember Longoria: Okay. Councilmember Kunz: I agree, I mean if we are going to have five acres for any kind of a riding covered area that I'm thinking of in my mind, which I've seen to be pretty big it sometimes may not be enough acreage for what I'm thinking would need that kind of lighting so I'm okay with establishing a minimum. I'm not sure if five is the right minimum, but we need to definitely look at that. Councilmember Large: And this is for both residential and non-residential uses? Mayor Lockwood: I think we are prohibited in residential, correct? Kathleen Field: No, in residential where we are now is that it's allowed with no acreage requirements with a use permit. Councilmember Large: Right, so if you're residential you could get it, you know, so if we're applying an acreage requirement it seems to me you would have to apply it to residential and non-residential. Councilmember Thurman: Realistically, you said four acres square was about 475 by 475. Councilmember Large: Did I say four acres? Councilmember Thurman: So, realistically, if you had to be 200 feet from all properties lines, that would only leave you about a 75 by 75 foot riding arena on four acres, so realistically you are going to have to be bigger than four acres for it to work anyway or else it's going to be a very small riding ring. Even if it's a perfect square. Councilmember Large: Four acres is only 417 actually square. Councilmember Thurman: Well, it's gonna be a really small riding ring 17 by 17. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 19 of 47 Mayor Lockwood: Well, we could go back and put the same, you know, have both if it's five acre minimum, which I think we all agree that's gonna be pretty tight anyways and over that, you know, five acres and over special use permit; five acres and under no. Kathleen Field: Is that for both residential and non-residential? Mayor Lockwood: I would think we would need to do that for both. Councilmember Thurman: That's fine with me. Mayor Lockwood: I'm trying to come up with something that allows someone that just wants to have a little hobby farm and maybe one or two acres and wants to keep one or two animals in a small barn or whatever but then also not have somebody take a small piece of property and try to maximize, you know, and have a lighted arena and all that. So I think this will work. Kathleen Field: Shall I continue? Now, we are into covered riding areas; and this is just a covered riding area with no lighting or bleachers; just a plain covered riding area. The Planning Commission recommended that for a residential use parcel to prohibit it. The Staff recommended in residential areas to allow the special use permit. For non-residential the Planning Commission prohibited. For non-residential the Staff recommended allowed with a use permit no minimum acreage. So Planning Commission again prohibited both residential and non-residential; Staff allowed it for both residential and non-residential with a special use permit. Councilmember Lusk: Are we using this summary sheet? Kathleen Field: It doesn't have Staff on it. The idea was that we wanted to work off the Planning Commission but I'm happy to provide the Staff. Mayor Lockwood: Again, first off, you know, make sure everyone's picturing the same thing. I think I know which barn Councilmember Thurman's talking about with the covered riding area and that's very appropriate and nice looking. Again, I have seen a lot of tasteful smaller riding areas, covered riding areas and on smaller property. I just want to make sure everybody's thinking the same thing because there are pretty ones and ugly ones and anything in between. So, I think when we talked before we could have the covered riding areas with some kind of permit where they would have to go through DRB and that process to where we could have some minimum standards there where they couldn't put up a jokey, rusted metal something that they moved from somewhere else. If that would help too but I will open it up to see what; got some ideas on the Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 20 of 47 covered riding areas? I'm almost picturing covered riding areas smaller than uncovered because that's a massive structure, you know, you wouldn't have near as much as many applicants for a covered riding area as an uncovered riding area. Kathleen Field: And don't forget, this is where the under four acres kicks in where your max is a 20,000 foot structure and if it's over four acres you're maxed out at 25,000 feet. Councilmember Thurman: For consistency, it seems like if we just prohibited them under five acres in the front yard but then allowed them above five acres with a use permit that would be consistent with what. Mayor Lockwood: I would like to add some more restrictions on this, like I said, having to go through part of the use permit is DRB. Councilmember Thurman: AA g A%, c a -1 rA Z;A they have to go through the DRB. L1 1V ✓ N ✓Vl NVL •V, ♦ V ♦v v Kathleen Field: Yes, that would be inherent in the review process. Councilmember Thurman: I think that's important. We want to have some say so in what the structure looks like, especially if it's in the front yard. Councilmember Large: Plus, going through the use permit process opens up the public comment as well; the public hearing process. Kathleen Field: Yes, absolutely and it also goes to the Planning Commission, is that correct? Councilmember Large: Yes, the Planning Commission touches it. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, do you want to recommend something? Kathleen Field: Well, I think that what you've recommended so far, you know, with the uncovered with the minimum of five acres and anything over five acres has to get a use permit so that you're not allowing it under five acres and anything over it gets a use permit might be good to go. 11 Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 21 of 47 Councilmember Large: Mayor, I'm okay with that I just I'm getting a little bit confused because the whole idea behind updating this was to allow more flexibility for our citizens. I think the background on this ordinance in particular said we had a lot of residence who had to apply for some kind of variance because they couldn't put the structures in that they wanted. And in looking at this, for the most part other than for animals barns, we were getting more restrictive not more flexible. So, I'm a little concerned that somehow we missed something. So, I hate to sound like a broken record but I'm for putting in some mechanism that allows residences to gain access to what they want to do. If that's through a special permit or whatever, I think it's a good idea. But just blanket saying, it just can't be done, I think we are closing our eyes to what the original intent of this was. Mayor Lockwood: You know, I see that point, the only thing I would say is I think we are moving in that direction with the barns and the uncovered riding rings, we are allowing that in much smaller areas. When you get to a covered riding area, that's usually a pretty serious facility and, you know, somebody's gonna have more than five acres, or ten acres, or, you know, whatever. So, I don't know that we're really limiting people real bad. Councilmember Longoria: Yea, and I'm at a disadvantage because I grew up on a quarter of an acre so, you know, that's my challenge. Mayor Lockwood: I'm just saying as we are working down the line we are getting into more serious uses and I think it's reasonable to say that you know we're not, if somebody, and I doubt very seriously we'd have somebody, you know, come in with two or three acres that wants to put a covered riding area. Councilmember Longoria: Right, and then it becomes obvious. Councilmember Thurman: And then it's not in keeping with the intent of the zoning code so you deny so. Mayor Lockwood: So, I guess hearing that and hearing the council, would you recommend going with the same? Kathleen Field: I would, because you're getting into more intense uses and if you've done it for the less intense ones, I would think you would want to be as consistent if not even more prohibited. Mayor Lockwood: We could do five acres also or we could bump it up if council wanted to. Am I hearing yes for five acres or with a use permit? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 22 of 47 Councilmember Large: I think five. Councilmember Thurman: I think five with a use permit is fine because it may be five acres Councilmember Large: And it kinda sets the ground rules right up front for anyone that's purchasing a piece of property. At least they know what the rules are going in and what you have to go through in order to do what you want to with the property. Robyn MacDonald: Five and above or five and below? Councilmember Thurman: Prohibited below five; five and above it has to have a use permit. Is that correct? Mayor Lockwood -- Yes, ockwood:Yes, allowed on five and above with a use permit. Kathleen Field: And then the very last one is the most intense. It's the covered riding area with lighting and/or bleachers. And the Planning Commission did recommend that both residential and non- residential be prohibited and again, the staff recommended that both of those be allowed with a use permit, residential and non-residential with no minimum acreage involved at all. Mayor Lockwood: And, you know, again when you get lighting could be a big issue or it wouldn't necessarily have to be. And, bleachers I think you need to, you know, it's one thing, I've seen a lot of small riding rings where you've got bleachers but, you know, it's just four steps up and six people could sit on it or whatever versus a full set of bleachers that could house fifty people or a hundred people. Kathleen Field: It's the loudspeakers that you could end up with the bleachers as well. Mayor Lockwood: Right, I would be comfortable ratcheting it up some because that's a pretty serious. Councilmember Thurman: Would you say ten acres with a, prohibited in under ten acres; above ten acres allowed with a use permit? Mayor Lockwood: I'd feel comfortable with that. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 23 of 47 Councilmember Kunz: I actually go along with that as well. I mean, you know, with what we're looking at the use of a covered riding arena with the lighting, with the bleachers is gonna be involving a lot of people. A lot of people going to that, not just for a one time deal, you're talking about, you know, indoor shows and things like that. I actually like as it is what they say, but I'll go along with what Karen said for having it with a use permit of ten acres as well. But we are talking about a big operation. We just need to be aware of that, in that situation, which is good. We need to allow people to know that it they want to do that in Milton but we gotta make sure that you know, we can't go overboard. Councilmember Large: I think ten acres is appropriate, again, still going through a use permit process that way during that process you can set hours of operation, you know, those types of things. Kathleen Field: Which is a very important issue. Councilmember Large: That is going to be a very important issue especially if it's near a residential area. Councilmember Thurman: Have we defined what lighting actually means? Does it mean one light bulb out front or does it mean actually the whole riding area being lit? I think we need to make sure that if you have one little light bulb out front, it's not considered lighting, but yet the whole area being lit with flood lights, I think is what the intent is here. Kathleen Field: So, we really need to define lighted, what that means, in terms of whatever the measurement is. Is it lumens is it not? Councilmember Large: Quick candle, lumens. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, you probably need to have some criteria where, you know, you could consider unlighted if it just has a couple of residential type light fixtures with a bulb where you can see to get out of there if it's dark versus actually lighting it up like an indoor stadium. Councilmember Large: I guess maybe it would be like arena lighting. Kathleen Field: We will bring some definitions back so you can review it. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 24 of 47 Councilmember Kunz: I do have one question. This is just a general question. Did anybody discuss what the ordinances were or look at them with what they were with regards to our neighbors in the north up in Canton, Cherokee County. Are these in line with that or do we know? And I just ask for an economic attraction deal. Where do people want to actually take their horse properties and things like that. I just didn't know. It's just a question. Kathleen Field: Robyn, can you address that? Robyn MacDonald: Just throughout the years, I've done a lot of research on the agricultural uses and really most of the communities in the area, Cherokee or Forsyth; they really don't address specific criteria. Actually, there's only a few counties that even have AG -1 left so most of the information I get if from other jurisdictions out-of-state whether it's Aiken, SC or Lexington, KY or Calabasas, CA. Councilmember Kunz: So, all the primary equestrian places have a jurisdiction? Robyn MacDonald: Right, yea, I mean, there's really not a lot to go don't even have AG -1 districts left. by even really there's a lot of jurisdictions that Mayor Lockwood: Does that give you and staff some to, you know, you can work up some criteria? Kathleen Field: Yes, some criteria, absolutely. Mayor Lockwood: Maybe, Robyn, do you mind repeating what we've. Robyn MacDonald: I was going to ask you guys if we understood exactly. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, we can go back through. Let's talk about livestock allowed in barns in front of houses residential is allowed and on non-residential I think we are allowing that also with no minimum. Robyn MacDonald: I have a question. The way it's written even with this Planning Commission recommendation, I don't really see where it talks about residential versus non-residential. We're talking about the position that it is, for instance, the Planning Commission had recommended that horses be located in the rear side yards and then 4(b) talks about structure, housing, livestock may be located in the front yard so there is nothing that defines whether it has a residential or non - 7 Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 25 of 47 residential actually it used to be defined at the old four and you can see that but in this version we don't really talk about that, if that makes sense. Mayor Lockwood: I just assume if we are talking about allowing barns in front of a structure it would have access to everything. Robyn MacDonald: Right, and then if it was just a barn without any other structure, it is still gonna have to be within the confines of the setbacks. Mayor Lockwood: Correct. Robyn MacDonald: Okay, so 4(a) would be structures housing livestock which may be located in the rear or side yards but you all want them anywhere, you want them in the front yard too, correct? Councilmember Thurman: Well, that's b; is the front yard, right? Robyn MacDonald: Yea, I know, but they separated it because the original recommendation. So you want them anywhere, front, rear, or side, as long as they meet the setbacks, correct? Councilmember Longoria: Yes. Robyn MacDonald: So we can create the 4(b) would be structures, housing, livestock which may be located in the front, side, and rear yards provided that the structure must be located at least 100 feet from all property lines and at least 150 feet from any occupied structure located on any other property and parcels with less than five acres will require a use permit? Mayor Lockwood: No, not on that one. Robyn MacDonald: So they can just do it no matter what? Councilmember Thurman: We said on the first one we did say it would require a use permit for less than five acres. City Attorney Jarrard: I thought you said them on the first three of these. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 26 of 47 Councilmember Thurman: Yea, that is what we had written down. City Attorney Jarrard: But I think one of the things Robyn is trying to clarify, because we switched up mid -debate as the debate progressed. What I originally heard was on a lot of these special use permits we were talking about was zero up to five acres is where you wanted the special use permit to have to be in play; five and above no special use permit the notion being that I guess they have a big enough piece of property. Councilmember Thurman: That was for the first two and then we switched after that. Mayor Lockwood: And I was under the impression we talked about, and if we use the cheat sheet with barns in the front of a house, residential as well as non-residential, that we didn't have a minimum. Did we say five acres? Councilmember Thurman: We said non-residential, a minimum of less than five acres it required a use permit above five acres it did not require a use permit. Mayor Lockwood: So we are still allowing that in a smaller area. Kathleen Field: Just for non-residential? Councilmember Longoria: Just for non-residential. Councilmember Thurman: For residential, we said it was allowed anytime. City Attorney Jarrard: Well, that is challenging then to the extent that you just combined them. Councilmember Thurman: And, it was the same thing, I think, for the uncovered riding areas. One and two, I think, were the same and then we switched it up. Robyn MacDonald: So, structures housing livestock without a residential use which may be located in the front, side, and rear yard provided the structure must be located at least one hundred feet, etc. Any parcels less than five acres will require a use permit without a residential use. But for residential uses, 1 Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 27 of 47 you would want the same thing but with no use permit. It would just say structures housing livestock. Kathleen Field: Are allowed. City Attorney Jarrard: Yes, which is going to allow it. Robyn MacDonald: Are allowed. We still need to put the setbacks. Councilmember Thurman: Yea, we definitely need the setbacks in there. This one, I think, was uncovered riding areas was the same. Allowed in residential and allowed in non-residential above five acres; allowed in residential below five acres with a use permit. City Attorney Jarrard: Right. Basically, a mirror of what we just went through. Kathleen Field: Yes, same thing, just change the wording from livestock barns to uncovered riding areas. Robyn MacDonald: And that's with no lighting. Mayor Lockwood: Correct. Kathleen Field: That's correct. And then the next three. Councilmember Thurman: Uncovered, unlit, unbleachered. Kathleen Field: And then the next two, for residential and non-residential it was allowed with a use permit over five acres. Is that how we? Councilmember Thurman: Yes. Mayor Lockwood: Yes. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 28 of 47 Councilmember Longoria: Residential was the use permit. Did we put the acreage on it? Mayor Lockwood: I think we put five, right? Robyn MacDonald: Less than five needs it? Mayor Lockwood: No, I think we allow them on five acres and then with a use permit five acre minimum. Robyn MacDonald: For residential covered or uncovered? Mayor Lockwood: Well, uncovered riding with the riding and bleachers as well as covered riding Councilmember Thurman: Without. Mayor Lockwood: Without. We kept the same from what I recall. And then when we got to the covered riding with, covered riding areas with bleachers and lighting we went up to ten acres. Councilmember Thurman: Should we go to eight acres since that is consistent with the conservation? Mayor Lockwood: We could, I don't know if the two go hand in hand. Councilmember Thurman: It really doesn't matter I guess. Robyn MacDonald: Okay, so uncovered riding areas for residential, where there is a house on it, residential structure you're asking for a use permit for more than five acres. Mayor Lockwood: Right. Minimum of five acres and a use permit. Councilmember Thurman: And that's for both residential and non-residential. Mayor Lockwood: Yea, we did it for both. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 29 of 47 City Attorney Jarrard: And, to be clear, less than five acres it's prohibited. Robyn MacDonald: So, you can't have an uncovered riding area Mayor Lockwood: That's lit and bleachers Kathleen Field: The uncovered, the plain uncovered, goes with the barns, the same restrictions as the barns. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, then we move to the covered riding areas with lighting and bleachers. We said a minimum of ten acres and a use permit required. Robyn MacDonald: Could you please say that again? Mayor Lockwood: The covered with lighting and bleachers and/or bleachers, minimum of ten acres, and requires a use permit. Robyn MacDonald: So, it would be prohibited under ten acres? Mayor Lockwood: Correct, because we felt like that was a pretty high intense use. Okay, do we have any more? We can recap that for motion? City Attorney Jarrard: Well, here's the question. Does the council want to recap that in a motion this evening or does the council want to defer this to let staff go put it all together because once you've had tonight is three different versions running parallel so I'm just offering that to you from the standpoint of trying to get something that you can understand as well when you see it in front of you. I'll leave that to you. I'm not advocating that, I'm just asking. Mayor Lockwood: Karen? Councilmember Thurman: If we defer it, because I think that may be a good idea to have one clean thing that we are actually approving, but it would have to be deferred until the next zoning agenda, correct? So, it would be deferred until Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 30 of 47 City Clerk Gordon: March 19th City Attorney Jarrard: Well, you've had your public hearing, I don't know that it would need... Councilmember Thurman: Could we go ahead and have it at the first? Do we have any permits or anything before us that this would affect? It seems like it might be better to wait until we had something clean that we actually City Attorney Jarrard: I agree, just something for the purposes of your record. Make a clean record. Mayor Lockwood: Do I have a motion that we defer this item, but staff, I believe, has enough information to come back with a clean, clear-cut copy of what we've discussed? i,athieen Field: Absolutely. Councilmember Kunz: Before we do that, I'm just trying to think of the work session as well when we talked about the livestock issue, didn't we also mention something about, because horses was still prioritized by the Planning Commission, but didn't we mention something as well about other animals requiring a use permit? I'm just trying to, for some reason I am recalling that, and I don't remember exactly but that was just a thought because I remember mentioning that horses requiring a goat but they didn't want all animals there. Do we want to talk about that? Mayor Lockwood: Well, they had said horses only but we captured livestock. Councilmember Kunz: But, do we want to do that is the question? Mayor Lockwood: Do we discriminate? What's the cow gonna say or the goat, or llama? City Attorney Jarrard: It's tough line drawing, it is, because you have a facility for housing horses and you may get some various other animals that slip in there, then you get a citation offense. Councilmember Thurman: We some pretty sheep right on Providence Road and I would hate to discriminate against them and their big bright red bows that they wear at Christmastime. ,..� Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 31 of 47 City Attorney Jarrard: But Councilmember Kunz is correct. I know the Planning Commission did limit it quite succinctly. Mayor Lockwood: I personally feel like we don't, you know, livestock now, I can't really think of if someone is building a barn, it's going to change, if they've got AG -1 property and they are allowed hogs or whatever, I don't think it is going to necessarily gonna precipitate them to build a barn and then have, you know, an animal that we don't, that people don't want. I think if this is all talking about putting a structure in a barn, I think if you're gonna put a barn, for all practicality it is going to limit it to horses, cows, maybe sheep, maybe llama something like that you already see around. City Attorney Jarrard: Are we defining livestock in this as well? Mayor Lockwood: Can you define livestock? Is there a way to define it? Robyn MacDonald: It is defined in the animal section. Livestock means horses, mules, cows, sheep, goats, hogs and all other animals used or suitable for either food or labor. There are actually larger setbacks for hogs. It's like 300 feet. Mayor Lockwood: We're not so much talking about what kind of animals because if people didn't put a barn they could have any kind of animal within the existing ordinance. I think we're okay with the livestock definition as long as it's defined there. Councilmember Large: I don't want to belabor this, but can we just get a quick re -cap of everything. Are we straight on everything? Mayor Lockwood: Well, I think that's why we are deferring it, we are talking about deferring it, so we will have it on paper. So, I will open it up for a motion. Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to defer Zoning Agenda Item RZ12-01 to the March 19, 2012 council meeting. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. 2. RZ11-17 — To Amend Article XVI of the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 64 of the City Code) — Signs. (Agenda Item No. 12-012) ORDINANCE NO. 12-02-128 (First Presentation at the February 6, 2012 Regular Council Meeting) Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 32 of 47 (Discussed at February 13, 2012 Work Session) (Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field: Mr. Mayor, members of the council as the City Clerk mentioned we did discuss this at the work session February 131h and we did capture several items that were discussed and let me just give you an overview of them and then I will direct you into the document itself. You will have a new document dated February 16'' and essentially this document has cleaned up all the comments to date but does highlight the discussion items from the work session so that is sorta where we are and they're highlighted there is no case recommended they're just highlighted for purposes of your discussion this evening. The first item we talked about at the work session was flags within the entire city in terms of the size and number of flags permitted. So, we did go back and look at that and we did increase the number of flags from one per development to three flag poles not to exceed the district height of each flagpole and each flagpole would be allowed one flag. The length of the flag shall not exceed one quarter length of the flagpole. Single- family residential lots would be permitted to have one flagpole not to exceed twenty-five feet in height and one flag measured in the same manner as flags in development_ That means the length of the flag to the flagpole. We also looked at the idea of a grand opening event signage and this would be across the entire city and staff has included an allowance of a special event permit that regulates this type of event. We propose that the event last for only forty-eight hours and to allow the following: one banner, one four square foot temporary sign, one temporary tent, one inflatable device, one search light, one temporary outside display of merchandise. And then within all the overlay districts we put in clarifying language in the area regarding doors and the spandrel glass panels and we propose that we clearly now show that they should be excluded from the calculation of the applicable sign area. Within all overlay districts, we cleaned up the language in terms of no window signs to be allowed in clerestory windows and that in no case should window signs exceed ten percent of the total area per elevation. And that was in response to Councilmember Thurman's concern about a fagade being 100% glass, so if we are going to allow 20% coverage in a window and we are going to estimate that to be 50%, if the windows were 100% of the building we said that in no case should it be 10% more so you still get that same percentage of coverage. Okay, so that's where that came from. Within the Crabapple and Birmingham overlay districts, businesses whose primary entrance space is an interior parking lot or courtyard may have an additional wall sign and the sign shall not exceed three percent of the applicable wall area and that was in response to Councilmember Lusk's concern. So, now if you will go and we have numbered the lines so it should be a little easier tonight. Thank you Councilmember Lusk for that suggestion. I'm on page fourteen and I'm on line 688. This essentially shows you how we changed the language for flags and this same language appears in all the districts all the way through so let me just read one to you and you will know that this carries through. It reads as follows: Each development may display no more than three flagpoles, and in addition, each single family detached residential lot within each development may display not more than one flag and flagpole. Each flagpole is allowed one flag. In non- residential districts, the flagpole shall not exceed the maximum allowed building height. In residential districts, the maximum height of the flagpole shall be 25 feet. The length of the flag shall not exceed '/4" of the length of the flag pole. The size of the flag shall be calculated accordingly. So that is the flag language that we inserted to respond to again the discussion that came up at the last work session. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 33 of 47 Councilmember Thurman: What about if you've got a flag that's attached to your, it's not on a flagpole, but it's attached to your home, how are those calculated in here because there's no longer a square footage and you really don't have a flagpole, how are you calculating? Kathleen Field: Oh, I see what you mean, yea, we have one at our house. I know what you're saying. Angela, would you like to respond to that, please? Angela Rambeau, City Planner We basically don't have any prohibitions or anything else, you can just do it. Mayor Lockwood: It doesn't count against the flagpole. Angela Rambeau: No. Kathleen Field: Any other questions on flags? I am now going to move on to page 17 and I'm on line 864 and this speaks to the Grand Opening Event Signage so let me just read this one but again this appears in the OI district, the mixed use district, and the commercial and industrial park districts, okay. It says as follows: Grand Opening Event Signage. Signs for Grand Opening events are permitted for any new or relocated business according to the following standards: The grand opening event is allowed within two months of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. A special event permit must be obtained from the Community Development Department prior to conducting the Grand Opening Event. 1. The special event permit for a grand opening is valid for a period of 48 hours. 2. Signage • One banner shall be allowed for a Grand Opening event, which shall not exceed twenty four square feet in area. (See Section 64-2303.1.b) A separate permit is required for this banner. • One four square foot temporary sign is allowed. 3. A temporary tent may be used in conjunction with a Grand Opening special event permit. The Fire Marshal's sign off must be obtained on the Special Event Permit for the use of the tent. 4. One inflatable device is allowed, within the event footprint, with a maximum size of two thousand (2,000) cubic feet, and a maximum height of twenty (20) feet. The vendor or owner of the inflatable must indicate the method of inflation, chemicals used, sign a hold harmless agreement and provide evidence of liability insurance. 5. One search light or similar device is allowed. The light must be diminished by 11:00 p.m. 6. Temporary outside display of merchandise is permitted for a grand opening event. • Such display shall be located next to the building entrance door, provided a minimum 36 inch clear and unobstructed walkway is maintained. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 34 of 47 • Any display not brought inside of the business at close of business day is considered outdoor storage and is prohibited. So that is our sample of an outdoor event. Councilmember Kunz: One question, item six also refers to item one which is for that 48 hour period? Temporary outside display of merchandise is permitted, I assume, for that 48 hour period. Angela Rambeau: Well, that's for each day, you still have to bring it in at the end of the day. Councilmember Kunz: But for a week's period, or for a month, for how many days? Kathleen Field: 48 hours. Councilmember Longoria: How did we get into from signage to outdoor displays of merchandise? Is that considered a sign? Kathleen Field: Angela, do you want to respond to that? Councilmember Longoria: If outside storage of merchandise is prohibited, I understand that. Angela Rambeau: You could have signage associated with the merchandise. If you have a table, for example, you will have some minimal signage but I wanted to just put everything in one area for the event, then we'll take this same verbiage and put it with, you know, the special use, but I just wanted to make sure that everything was covered in one place. Councilmember Longoria: Okay. Councilmember Kunz: That was also brought up at the Planning Commission meetings by some of the people, some of the business owners as well. Councilmember Thurman: Personally, I don't think we need inflatables so, I just don't. Kathleen Field: It's only 48 hours. r Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 35 of 47 Councilmember Thurman: I just don't know. I just don't know that we really have to have inflatables devices. City Attorney Jarrard: Are those the things that are blown up and meant to attract attention? Councilmember Longoria: Yea, like the 50 foot King Kong. Kathleen Field: Yea, the gorillas. Councilmember Thurman: We had a fire hydrant one time that was taller than any of the buildings we had in Milton. Mayor Lockwood: Then if you get into inflatables, does that cover inflatables if you have a special carnival or event, those jumping things. Councilmember Thurman: Yea, I don't know. City Attorney Jarrard: I don't mean to re -tread and y' all may have covered this at the work session but we should probably tread a little cautiously within the context of sign a hold harmless agreement and mandating that; sign it for whom and in favor of whom? And, even the proof of liability insurance, to whom does that have to be provided and what are the policy limits. Again, I am not saying any of these are bad ideas I'm just saying y'all may want to really think about them a little bit. All of them make sense, particularly to the extent that you could have combustibles used or you could have traffic impeded or individuals, these things fall over and hurt somebody, but when we get too much in the weeds of getting into private contractual dealings and requiring insurance by way of a code, we need to be careful about that. Councilmember Longoria: Is your concern there Ken that by dipping our toe in the water we get all wet? City Attorney Jarrard: My concern is that as the government requires part of these grand opening event for hold harmlessness to be adopted, I guess I'm wondering, would that be between the event coordinator and the office park that it's going to be in or is it going to be in the name of the City of Milton, I just don't know, and I just wanted to call it out to you. Councilmember Lusk: If this is all regulated by city permit with the whole harmless would the liability be in favor of the city? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 36 of 47 City Attorney Jarrard: It may very well be to the extent that we are permitting the activity but I don't think that we would incur liability anyway by simply the issuance of a permit. We typically don't pick up liability, goodness gracious, I hope not because we permit a lot of activities. And again, this is something we could debate. When I read it this afternoon getting ready for tonight, I did stop on that, and I wasn't here at the work session so I wasn't able to speak to it. Councilmember Lusk: I think your point is well taken. Any policy coverage would be in favor of whatever development authorizes the event. Mayor Lockwood: So do we need to strike that or change that? City Attorney Jarrard: Well, I would want to hear, I'm sure the staff had a reason that it was put in there and I would want to hear their thoughts as well and I could certainly be dissuaded but that stood out to me that, as someone said, that's us getting pretty far into the weeds. I would want an explanation for ,vhy we necd tV do that. Kathleen Field: Angela, could you answer that please? Angela Rambeau: It was pretty standard in some of the other ordinances I had seen, I had done research on, and I think we may already have some language like that in our special use permit. Kathleen Field: Special event permit or special use permit? Angela Rambeau: Special event permit. I know it's on the sign permit. Councilmember Lusk: Who is it written in favor of? Angela Rambeau: We don't get into that kind of detail. Robyn MacDonald: Like when I review special event permits, I make sure the events like St. Patrick's Day event in Crabapple, the business owner who is primarily responsible for the event has liability insurance for other people not to the city. It just proves to show that they are doing their due diligence and are covering their bases. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 37 of 47 Mayor Lockwood: You are protecting the citizens not necessarily protecting the city. The city shouldn't have any liability just because they issued the permit. Kathleen Field: Well, if the language is already in the special event permit and this speaks to them getting a special event permit to put up the gorilla or whatever, maybe we can just strike the language here and then it would just fall to the special event permit. Mayor Lockwood: Are you okay with that, Ken? City Attorney Jarrard: I am, and again, I'm not trying to be a wet blanket and to the extent that we've got some language like that in other areas we could take a look at it and I could be talked out of it. Kathleen Field: So, would you like us to just strike that language then from this or do you want to just leave it? Mayor Lockwood: It sounds like it is something we may need to address on another so just leave it in there and we will address it across the board. Kathleen Field: Okay, very good. I'm on page 25 and I'm down at line 1314 and we did clarify this so that subsection (k) reads as follows: wall signs shall not exceed 100 square feet or five percent of the applicable wall area, whichever is less. The length of the sign shall not exceed ten times the height of the sign. The area of the doors and spandrel glass panels are excluded from the calculation of the applicable sign area. So I think that makes it a little clearer what we meant from last time so we did add that language to clean that up. And then at the very bottom there on line 1317 under subsection (1) it has been re -written to read as follows: permanent and temporary signs in windows shall not exceed twenty percent of each window. No window signs are allowed in clerestory windows. In no case shall window signs exceed 10 percent of the, rather than saying elevation, we would like to make the following amendment to read: In no case shall window signs exceed 10 percent of the wall area of the applicable elevation. We thought that was just a little clearer. So, we cleaned up the calculations how they are calculated and what happens with the clerestory window which I think was an issue from last time. Moving on if I may, I am on page 31 section 1496 under the Crabapple Overlay. This is the additional sign: Single tenant buildings and end units of multi tenant buildings may have an additional wall sign. Businesses whose primary entrance faces an interior parking lot or courtyard may have an additional wall sign. The size for either of these signs shall not exceed, we would like to put in the words "shall not exceed" three percent of the applicable wall area. So that gets you an additional sign if you are facing to the rear. On page 54, in order to accommodate the balloons and the gorillas and everything else as well as the temporary signs and banners all dealing with that special event opening we had to change some of the language under prohibited signs so you will see on line 1973 on page 54 we had to add the language "except where specifically allowed" Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page A of 47 and we did that under subsection (2) on line 1977 with beacons and search lights to say, "except where specifically allowed" and, of course, that specifically allowed would be that grand opening enin event. And then the same down on line 2009 under temporary signs and banners attached to fences or walls except where specifically allowed. So that took it out of the prohibited and put it into specifically allowed for those grand opening events so we had to clean that up. On then as we get to page 55 we essentially made a few clean ups in terms of citation numbers so specifically if you look at line 2047; you'll see where it starts off revocation of a sign permit in accordance with section, we've changed that section number to 2230.b, so that whole paragraph all those numbers changed to 2230.b. The next page, which is page 56, we did change line 2089, we changed that section from section d, the reference now reads section 2332, line 2095 again we changed that rather than section d it now reads section 2332, the same on 2106 again the section now reads section 2332 and then line 2113 the same thing section 2132 and then the final change is on the last page. Angela, do you have that last change? Oh, here it is. On the very last page on line 2120, we have changed the section number to 2330(f). And that cleans that up. That accounts for all of the changes that we did as the result of the work session. Councilmember Lusk: We spoke off-line before the meeting about seasonal agricultural signs. Could we have a discussion on that? Have you pulled up the Fulton County? Kathleen Field: Robyn has done that. City Attorney Jarrard: And I just took it from Robyn. It is in the Fulton code. Apparently this is in a former version of the Fulton code that has now been repealed provides, the heading is called Seasonal Agricultural Signs which are defined as temporary directional signs for agricultural products grown and/or sold in AG -1 districts or at institutions provided that signs are posted at the commencement of selling activity and are removed within seven days at the end of the selling season. The biggest issue I see with that to the extent that we would want to replicate it is that is not a content neutral verbiage. Temporary directional signs for agricultural products grown to the extent that that is the government attempting to tell you the message that has to be on the sign, that's a problem. But you can get around it. The way you would do it would simply say some sort of expression sign in agricultural and it would simply allow the same sort of thing except we just omit any reference to what message has to be on the sign. Now everybody knows what will be on the sign. It will be selling their products or their wares but you just have to be very cautious about putting in what the sign has to say on it. That's all. We can emulate that if you would like to. Mayor Lockwood: Because at this point, is it not allowed in our ordinance? Angela Rambeau: Well, nothing specifically like that. We do, however, allow the three four square foot signs on every residential lot that can be used for whatever. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 39 of 47 Councilmember Thurman: Well, these could actually be for if you had a sign that wasn't on your own property, correct? Or is it for a sign that is on your property? Agricultural not agricultural sign. C4y.Attorney Jarrard: Such signs shall not exceed sixteen square feet in area and shall be located only on private property with the owner's permission. Which suggests to me it can be off of property you own and could be done by way of a private agreement. Mayor Lockwood: What size is that? City Attorney Jarrard: Sixteen square feet in area. Mayor Lockwood: Are you guys okay with that? Councilmember Lusk: Can we incorporate it? Mayor Lockwood: It's in there, right? Councilmember Thurman: No, that was in Fulton County's. Councilmember Longoria: I hate to bring up something we talked about last time, but we talked about churches with special events and things like that and for the life of me I can't remember where we ended up with that because we had specific issues with some of the churches in the city where they weren't allowed signage to advertise things like fall festivals and stuff like that. Did we get around that by providing permits for that? Angela Rambeau: I didn't add anything specifically for that. I don't think we've ever told them they couldn't have signage. I think they type of signs they typically think of were in the right-of-way. The ones you see at the corner or along the side of the road, those are pretty much across the board prohibited. Again, you'd still have those three four square foot signs per lot and a banner. Councilmember Longoria: Okay, that's the answer I was looking for. Thank you. City Attorney Jarrard: This talks about limiting their duration to the selling season. Once again, that's focusing right back on that the sign is going to be necessarily linked to the product that is sold. I think we Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 40 of 47 talked before the meeting maybe about thirty days and with a permit.. Is that what y' all have in mind or something less or more? Councilmember Longoria: I don't remember that specific conversation but yea, thirty days sounds like a good idea to me. Mayor Lockwood: Are there any other questions for Kathy? Kathleen Field: I would say there was a lot of work put into this by the Planning Commission and staff. I came really after it was all drafted. I really want to give the credit where the credit is due. Mayor Lockwood: I want to thank everybody for all their hard work and Planning Commission and Staff because, you know this is something that we needed to do and over the last five years have learned some things that needed to be adjusted and I think we've taken most of those things into consideration and it says a lot when we have business owners come up and thank us and tell us they feel confident with it and I don't believe we've had any negative comments from citizens or whatever either. Kathleen Field: I truly think the Planning Commission tried to address all the issues that were put b�iore it. Mayor Lockwood: With that being said, does anybody want to make a motion and add what Ken's wording is going to be? City Attorney Jarrard: The way I have this framed right now based upon the feedback is that we would call this seasonal expression signs in agricultural zoning districts. Which would be a temporary expression sign in agricultural zoning districts shall be allowed for thirty days and shall require a sign permit. Such sign shall not exceed sixteen square feet in area and shall be located only on private property with the owner's permission and shall be located out of the right of way. Councilmember Thurman: That's probably a good start. We can always adjust it if we find it needs to be but I think that at least gets us. Mayor Lockwood: Is that something that we can have a motion to approve? Angela Rambeau: I have a question. The sign is only allowed on AG -1 property or can someone in a CUP put up a sign for a farm down the road? Regular Meeting of the Milton City Cotincil February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 41 of 47 City Attorney Jarrard: No, this sign can only be in AG -1. Mayor Lockwood: That is going to limit it a lot. Robyn MacDonald: Do you want it allowed in all districts so they can advertise on Highway 9 for their Christmas tree farm or the farmer's market? City Attorney Jarrard: Well, then you would just call it seasonal expression signs in all zoning districts. But again, at that point you are cutting the tether of even having any remote possibility of it being linked to agriculture so it could be anything they wanted to say on it could be on there. That's the first amendment. I would recommend just because this is sort of a new thing we are grabbling with that we limit it at first. Maybe see if there is a utility for it, if it's needed then maybe come back ar d if it needs to be expanded maybe you could do that. Councilmembcr Longoria: So, as you originally read? City Attorney Jarrard: Right. Mayor Lockwood: Okay, well a motion could be made to approve this ordinance with staff's recommendations and then allow Ken to read that into the motion. Do I have a motion? Councilmember Thurman? Councilmember Thurman: I will make a motion that we approve RZ 11-17 to amend article XVI of the zoning ordinance Chapter 64 of the city codes signs agenda number 12-012 based on staff recommendations and the addition of the verbiage. City Attorney Jarrard: Verbiage for a seasonal expression sign in agricultural zoning districts which shall mean a temporary expression sign in agricultural zoning districts shall be allowed for thirty days and shall require a sign permit. Such signs shall not exceed sixteen square feet in area and shall be located only on private property with the owner's permission and shall be located out of the right of way. Councilmember Longoria: Second. Motion: Councilmember Thurman moved to approve Zoning Agenda Item RZI 1-17 with staff conditions and the addition of the following conditions: Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 42 of 47 1. To add verbiage for the seasonal expression sign in agricultural zoning districts which shall mean "A temporary expression sign and agricultural zoning districts shall be allowed for 30 days and shall require a sign permit. Such signs shall not exceed 16 square feet in area and shall be located only on private property with the owner's permission and shall be located out of the right of way." Second and Vote: Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. End of verbatim transcription UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of a Resolution Imposing a Limited and Temporary Moratorium Upon Issuance of Business Licenses to New fain Management Clinics Within the City of Milton. (Agenda Item No. 12- 049) RESOLUTION NO. 12-02-211 (Ken Jarrard, City Attorney) City Attorney Jarrard: • Mr. Mayor and members of the council, this is a matter we have visited before, we visited it in a work session, and in fact, we have a moratorium currently in place. • This pertains to pain management clinics or also referred to as pill mills. • They have received a lot of attention from the Attorney General and the State General Assembly that has adopted some legislation attempting to combat what is perceived to be a real and growing problem with respect to the abuse of prescription medications. • This is something that is not only being looked at locally but state-wide; regionally and nationally. • The City of Milton in May 2011, adopted a resolution imposing moratorium on the issuance of business licenses for pain management clinics until April 30, 2012. • You did that for a couple of reasons: to monitor what the General Assembly did at the 2011-2012 legislative session with respect to these clinics to see if they adopted some meaningful legislation. • The result of this was a mixed bag. There was some meaningful legislation that was adopted; primarily there was a fairly ambitious centralized database program that was adopted that will allow for the state of Georgia to do some comprehensive monitoring )f prescription medications. They will tag by way of software certain controlled substance medications that are issued or authorized too frequently to have a legitimate medical need. • However, our review has indicated that it will be some time before that database is up and running so it will be some time before there is any meaningful relief. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Pz�ge 43 of 47 • The City Manager's concern is that he wanted to get ahead of this issue as opposed to reacting to it. • Based upon that and the further need to both monitor this and work with Planning Staff to come up with some regulations in the zoning code that will prevent the introduction of this type of business into the City of Milton, I am proposing to you another moratorium to commence immediately and run until August 8, 2012. • It will mimic the language of the moratorium that is in place right now. • This will allow me to work with Planning Staff to come up with potential zoning regulation to address this issue and also allow us to further monitor what the state of Georgia is doing. Mayor Lockwood: • Do we have any questions? I will now open it up to a motion. IV. otion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to Approve Agenda Item 12-049. C-AunciImember Kunz seconded -the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. 2. Approval of a Resolution Supporting Modification to the City of Milton Public Buildings and Facilities Authority Act. (A,vends Item No. 12- 050) RESOLUTION NO. 12-02-111 (Ch) -is Lagerbloom, City Managei) City Manager Lagerbloom: • Mayor and City Council this should be pretty straightforward. • We have had this discussion with each of you individually regarding some of the different ways we could go about restructuring our lease on the City Hall facility, at least for the short term. • One of those ways would be through our Public Facility Authority that was created by the General Assembly in 2007 and signed by the governor. • We have a different Public Facility Authority than the one that has been used for this purpose in Sandy Springs, for example, they have negotiated a lease structure for their City Hall. • One of the options they have there, which makes this operate fairly straightforward and is regularly accepted, is for the mayor and council on occasion to be able to appoint themselves to this Public Facility Authority. • Representative Jones has introduced local legislation to change our Public Facility Authority and ask that I bring something forward to the council so that she would have something indicating that you knew about it and your support for her to make that change. • That is what this document does and if you approve it tonight, I will be transmitted to her tomorrow. Mayor Lockwood: • Any questions on this? Do I have a motion? r Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 44 of 47 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Kunz moved to Approve Agenda Item 12-050. Councilmember Lusk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. 3. Approval for Correction on Listing of Positions Document Presented in FY 2012 Budget. (Agenda Item No. 12- 051) RESOLUTION NO. 12-02-212 (Deborah Harrell, Chief of Police) Chief of Police Harrell: • This is in the budget that was approved. • There was a position listing chart created by Human Resources and it inadvertently listed rive sergeant positions and four lieutenants instead of four sergeant and five lieutenants. • 1 just wanted to get that corrected because I want to maintain a lieutenant and CID as it is concurrent with what I have running UPD shifts. • It is really just a matter of correcting a typo. o The dollar amounts are correct. • Personnel is not changing. • There is currently a sergeant in that lieutenant box and I would like to get that to a lieutenant that is why I wanted to make sure that the typo is fixed. 1 do not want thereto be any question later so, as Chris says, as an abundance of caution. • So, we wanted to bring this to your attention for approval. r t Mayor Lockwood: • Any questions? Do I have a motion? Motion and Vote: Councilmember Thurman moved to Approve Agenda Item 12-05 1. Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. 4. Approval of Reclassification of Community Outreach & Policy Coordinator to Accreditation Manager. (Agenda I.tein No. 12- 052) RESOLUTION NO. 12-02-21.3 ("Deborah Harrell, Chief of Police) Chief of Police Harrell: • We had a civilian in an officer position and he was handling crime prevention, community outreach, and accreditation. • Accreditation is the overall term for the person who writes the policies, who keeps us in compliance with the state certification that we already have, and the person that wou id work on getting the national accreditation. • We are in a contract to get that. • We are about a year into a three year contract. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 45 of 47 • If you remember, we got that, it was kind of a grant but they waived their fee to get us in. • We were one of only five police departments internationally that were chosen for that so we really need to get that accomplished within the next two years. • So, that civilian left us around the same time that you were gracious enough to give me some new police officer positions in the new budget back in October. • What I would like to do, and I have already talked to Chris, is to take the position that was an officer position with a civilian in it, and split those job tasks into a civilian who is going to handle the accreditation part of the job and go back to a uniformed police officer that would handle the crime prevention and community relations work. • I worked with Human Resources to make sure the class specs were correct and the job descriptions were correct. • I am just asking you to approve that I will have that new title over a civilian position. Councilmember Lusk: • So, these will both be frill -time positions, correct? Chief of Police Harrell: • Yes, and they are already essentially staffed with internal employees. • We moved some internal employees around and hired a new records clerk, because the records clerk is who I want to move to this position. City Manager Lagerbloom: • Some of you may be sitting there wondering why we are talking about this at the Citv Council level. r • The reason is because this is in compliance with the charter requirement that states that the council is responsible for creating all positions of employment within the city. • That is why we are coming before you tonight, because the charter invests in you the authority to create new positions of employment within the city. Mayor Lockwood: • Any questions? Do I have a motion? Motion and Vote: Councilmember Longoria moved to Approve Agenda Item 12-052. Councilmember Thurman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). 5. Ratification of an Agreement for Sale of Realty between the City of Milton and Saradan Properties No. 2, LLC for the Purchase of 3.82 Acres Known as Fulton County Tax Parcel No. 22-4880-0534-007-1. (Agenda Item No. 12- 053) (Chris Lagerbloom, City Manager) City Manager Lagerbloom: • Council, this is a ratification of an agreement that you are aware of at this point. • We have been through the negotiation process and have been able to get this property we have affectionately called the old Hopewell School. • It is adjacent to our Bell Memorial Park and is 3.82 acres. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 46 of 47 • It is under contract for $345,000 which is within the appraised value. • This contract is contingent upon a 120 day due diligence period which requires several assessments to include a Phase I environmental assessment as well as a geotechnical survey. • It all that works out, we will choose to close on the property within 120 days. • If for some reason we discover something within the next 120 days, we can terminate this contract for any reason or no reason at all. • So, at this point, this is a ratification of that agreement to allow us to move forward to the next steps in acquisition. Mayor Lockwood: Do we have any questions? Councilmember Thurman: • Do we expect it to take 120 days to do our due diligence or do you think we can close on it quicker? City Manager Lagerbloom: • I believe we will be able to close on it quicker. • %arter will proceed tomorrow morning with getting the right stuff to move forward or. that property. • I think they want to close as quickly as we would want to close, because the sooner we close; the sooner we can make some improvements to that park. • We certainly won't take the 120 days just because we have it. • We will probably take 60 days, at least. Councilmember Large: • During the due diligence period, will you be doing a full title search on the property? City Manager Lagerbloom: • Absolutely City Attorney Jarrard: • We won't close until we have title insurance. Councilmember Kunz: also do ageographical survey to make sure we can actually move�the ground and e Wtllwea do what we want to do? City Manager Lagerbloom: • Yes, that is what a geotech does. • I don't think at this point we have any anticipation of building any structures on the property. Regular Meeting of the Milton City Council February 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 47 of 47 Motion and Vote: Councilmember Lusk moved to Approve Agenda Item 12-053. Councilmember Kunz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS STAFF REPORTS City Manager Lagerbloom: • We have a staff conference scheduled for the next two days. • I have learned now that the correct word for anytime you get together, you cannot call it a retreat, that word is apparently being attacked across the country because people think of spas, etc. • We now refer to these gatherings as staff conferences. • We have all met on a number of topics individually and all of those issues are moving forward in a very positive fashion. E(ECUTIVE SESSION (if needed) ADJOURNMENT (Agenda Item No. 12- 054) Motion and Vote: Councilmember Large moved to adjourn the Regular Meeting at 8:09 p.m. Councilmember Longoria seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Councilmember Hewitt was absent from the meeting. Date Approved: April 9, 2012. '5�nk e'L .�C -- C - Sudie AM Gordon, City Clerk Joe Lock d, Pofayor