Commission - Special Meeting

Good to have you here. It is Tuesday, April 21st, 2026, Earth Day Eve. Uh, Unified Government closed for regular business tomorrow. Hope you enjoy the day off midweek. Um, we're here for two meetings this evening. Uh we're going to have a brief special called session uh with uh appears to me uh three items including an executive session at the conclusion of our night and then we have our regularly scheduled agenda setting session. Um so I'm going to go ahead and ask clerk Howard to give us the roll call. Davenport here. Link here. Taylor here. Right present. Fisher here. Johnson pepper here. Meyers

here. Thornton here. Hamby, we have a quorum.

All right. Thank you, madam clerk. All right. Uh, tonight we're going to have several opportunities for public input. Uh, public input is going to run on essentially the same format for each opportunity. Um, you will have a threeminut opportunity and there is a light in front of the clerk uh built by one of our former employees back in 1990. Fun fact. Um, it will turn green when you begin speaking, yellow when you have 30 seconds remaining, and red when your three minutes has concluded. Uh, and at that point, I will thank you for your time with us because we're going to have to move on to the next speaker. Um, and so now is the time when we have public input uh for either of the three items uh that are on the special called session. Uh, so the single sheet agenda. So, is anyone here to speak to either the animal services contingency funding item, the land bank authority recommendation, uh, or the executive session that you don't know anything about? So, uh, any any comers? It's crickets in city hall tonight.

All right. Uh, seeing none, um, I do need a motion from a member of the commission for suspension of rules given that both of these are items of new business. Second. All right. I have a motion from Commissioner Link and a second from Commissioner Fischer for suspension of rules. All in favor of suspension of rules, please say I. All right. Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries. All right. Uh first item is an animal services contingency funding item. Uh I I believe attorney Drake, there's an ordinance associated with this. Do you have that in front of you?

Yes, sir. Ordinance to amend the FY2026 operating capital budget for Athens, Clark County, Georgia, so as to provide funding for expenses related cost and providing animals with medical care, including services and supplies and animal care maintenance in the animal services department and further purposes.

All right. Thank you, Attorney Drake. I appreciate that. And um as I speak to my colleagues in cities uh around country, it turns out that this is a common area of additional funding need lately. um just given the increased need for both some of the medicine as well as uh some of the professional staffing that goes with running an animal services operation. So, this is not very unusual. Um I'd entertain a motion from a member of the body for this. Move to approve. Second. All right. I've got a motion from Commissioner Link and a second from Commissioner Taylor. Commissioner Link, any remarks?

Um no. I'm glad to see these animals taken care of. I know times are tough and we've got lots of pups and kittens out there that need adopting. Commissioner Taylor, any followup? Yeah, I I did owe um Commissioner Link. I was sitting beside Doug yesterday in GLZ and that's his safe space. So, we want to make sure his safe space say stays safe for Doug. He out there. Yes. Doug Hansford, interim animal services director. other duties as assigned. Anyone else? All right. Uh we've had attorney Drake read the ordinance. We have a motion from Commissioner Link, second from Commissioner Taylor. All in favor, please say I. I.

Any opposed? All right. Hearing none. Motion carries. Um all right. Uh second item tonight is a recommendation for appointment to the land bank authority. Um Rick Parker. I need a motion for approval. So move to approve. Second. All right. Got a motion from Commissioner Link, second from Commissioner Taylor. All right, Commissioner Link, any remarks? Um, I think Risk is the perfect person to serve on that board. Um, we need his expertise. Commissioner Taylor. Say the same. Any others? All in favor, please say I. I.

Any oppose? All right. Hearing none. Thank you, Rick Parker. We very much appreciate your willingness to serve. Um, all right. I do need a motion to enter into an executive discuss, excuse me, executive session for discussion of real estate acquisition or disposal following the conclusion of our agenda setting meeting. Do I hear have such a motion? So move, mayor. Second. All right. I've got a motion from Commissioner Fiser and a second from Commissioner Link. All in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? Hearing none, we will be in executive session. All right. Uh, do I have a motion to adjourn following the conclusion of the executive session? So move. Is there a

second? All right. Got a motion from Commissioner Taylor, second from Commissioner Link. All in favor, please say I.

Any opposed? All right. Hearing none. Motion carries. And we are going to roll right on into our agenda setting session. And so terms of public input are essentially the same as I described earlier, that threeminut opportunity. Um there will be an opportunity for public input on our consent agenda uh which are currently items one through let me get this right items 1 through 12. Um there will be a separate opportunity following presentation regarding each of the recommendations from our planning commission. Uh so that is 13 14 15 and 16. And then there will be an opportunity for public input on new business which are items 17 through 26. All right. Um so uh first let me ask is there any member of the commission who would like to remove one of the consent agenda items for discussion? Commissioner link which item would you like to see?

I say same thing number one. All right. Any others? Number four. All right. Number four commissioner. All right. Any others? All right. So, accepting one and four, is there any member of the public who would like to speak to any consent agenda item which are 2 through 12? Just uh just items 2 through 12 on the agenda in front.

All right. Um we're going to go ahead and I'm going to uh adjust my seating. We're going to call up planning director Bruce Lonnie and we're going to go through this planning and zoning items. Dexter's got one. I am happy that

during this segment of the meeting is planning director Bruce Lonnie will give us a presentation on each project around which the planning commission has made a recommendation. Um, we'll have public input and then we'll have discussion.

All right. So, the first zoning item coming to you from the April 2nd planning commission meeting is a reszone request at Wit Davis Road. Uh, this property is the subject of a reszone for the purpose of uh redeveloping for multif family but age restricted multif family. Um it does align with the general business future land use. So there's no change needed there. But this is a non-binding plan. Uh 52 apartments totaling 80 beds. It would be a 34 split on the building and they were they are seeking affordable housing tax credits. This gives you an aerial view of the location. This is very close to the Whit Davis intersection with Lexington Road just south uh behind Tractor Supply and the fuel station and across the street from Walmart. Future land use designation is general business and this shows what the change in zoning would look like if approved from the CN zoning to the RM3. RM3 is not a zone that we have a lot of on the map. Um it is a 50 bed uh to the acre density multif family zone. Here's the view from Whit Davis looking into the site. Um some of you will recall when there was a restaurant here back in the day. Uh but it has been a vacant lot for uh quite a while. This is the site plan that came in. And again, this is a concept plan. This was non-binding. Um what they're showing is the building slid towards Whit Davis Road with a handful of parking spaces and a uh connection to the Southeast Clark Park there um down in the lower corner.

Planning Commission's recommendation. They found that it was compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plant. I'm sorry. Thank you. You don't want me to start over though, do you? I know you're good. Okay. All right. All right.

All right then. So, compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plan, uh it's consistent with the surrounding future land use map, zoning map, and the ordinances involved. Um just reminding you again, this is a non-binding plan, but it is for age targeted affordable housing, and they are seeking tax incentives u to help with the financing on the project. Sanitary sewer extension issues exist, but a solution is available, and the applicant worked through that with our public utility staff. So, planning commission's recommendation is approval with conditions. Those conditions include the following. That no fewer than 35 apartments will be restricted to 60% AMI for the first 30 years of the project. No fewer than 11 apartments will be restricted to 50% AMI for the first 30 years. That connection to the Southeast Clark park will be a condition meaning it has to remain as part of the project. And the final condition is 80% of the total housing units for the property must be occupied by at least one individual who is 55 years of age or older. Up to 20% of the units may be occupied by caregivers and others that include surviving spouses or children of residents who were 55 years of age or older when they died. So this was um something that was agreed upon and asked for by the developer. um from a a property management standpoint, this is something that that they feel is important and they were very comfortable with this being a condition of approval. And that concludes the staff report.

All right. Uh thank you, Director Lonnie. I appreciate that. Is any member of the public here to speak to this item this evening? Good evening. Just provide your name and place of residence.

Uh David Ellison, 2500 Daniels Road. Um here on behalf of the developer, uh this was a project for plan to use low-income housing tax credits. Unfortunately, uh the we got the uh application results from the Georgia Initiative for Community Housing. Uh their bid was unsuccessful and they did not get the points and so their application for these low-income housing tax credits in May is no longer competitive and so we would like to withdraw our application um because they are not able to proceed uh without these tax credits. Thank you.

So just to be clear, you're going to withdraw this ahead of the voting meeting. I would like to withdraw this at today's meeting and possibly get a vote tonight on what Davis wrote. We um we don't have an opportunity to vote tonight um but we can withdraw prior to the public notice of the following meeting. So we make that happen. Okay. Great. Thank you. All right. So uh given that that's the case, I don't know that we need discussion because this is going away. All right.

Yes, Commissioner. I just want to hear again what what was said there that the because I the application wasn't due but what why was it disqualified just so I understand for future projects.

So uh the uh application deadline for the lowincome housing tax credits is in May and as part of that process there's an opportunity um to apply with the Georgia initiative of community housing um I believe it's the acronym is gick. Yeah. uh Athens participates uh in that process and it's my understanding that Athens awarded its points to the housing authority. Uh and because uh my client did not this client did not get those points, it believes its opportunity to get tax credits is no longer competitive. Okay. And that happened between the planning commission meeting now. Obviously, I got word this morning.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. That helps me understand. Yeah. And and just for those watching or folks in the chamber, um what used to be somewhat less competitive, low-inccome housing tax credits, what in the industry they call 4% credits, have become more competitive over time. And so as a result, you know, many of these projects just aren't happening as often. Um part of our hope is that the federal government allocates more of those credits nationally that then uh move down to states and localities. So anyhow, thanks everybody. Uh yes, Commissioner Co Pepper. So, the housing authority had already gotten credit, so there weren't any more credits left or it just didn't qualify because of the project.

So, what Mr. Ellison was referencing is that um when you have a gick committee in your community, they have an opportunity to provide kind of a bonus point. And so, that bonus point often kicks project sort of over the finish line. And since GI allocated their bonus point to the next phase of north downtown, this project then didn't get that bonus point, making it uncompetitive. And that decision was rendered just yesterday morning at the meeting. Uh there was a a special called meeting of the GI committee to render that termination. Um question. So can the applicant try again for next year because it's annual, correct?

That That's correct. That's right, Commissioner Danport. And there are some other vehicles that other developers use for comparable projects. There's a vehicle called New Market Tax Credits that that more often than not is a sort of mixed income kind of project, like if there was a cafe or grocery in the ground floor, for example. Um, but uh so hopefully they will return when the time is right. All right, we're going to move on to next item, which is uh 4190 Lexington Road and some associated addresses. No.

All right. This request is for 4190 Lexington Road, 150 Pine Cone Place, as well as 120 and 140 Merks Lane. The request is two parts. One is a future land use map change from general business and single family residential to mixed density residential across all the subject properties. There is also a zoning map change proposed from commercial general in RS8 to RM1 across all of the subject properties. Here's an aerial view of the property. Um, heavily wooded. It's it's kind of space left over in between uh a mid- 20th century subdivision to the east and apartment development to the west. Uh future land use is depicted here. You can see the general business is towards the Lexington road frontage and only goes to that same depth that you have along the corridor and then single family residential was the future land use assigned uh is the future land use assigned to the the rear portion. Uh the request is to take the entire property all the properties to mixed density residential. Similarly, when you look at the zoning, you'll see commercial general zoning at the frontage. You'll see RS8, single family zoning in the middle, that orange color, and then the lighter tan is RM1. So, you see RM1 adjacent to the west, and then presently the current zoning on over half of the property is RM1. The request is to have all of the property zoned RM1. And the intention of the applicant is to recombine all of the parcels. And then this shows the environmental areas that are on site. You see there's a creek that runs from uh northwest down to southeast through the site. Um that

area in the back where the creek runs is the part that is already zoned RM1. And so that's part of the motivation for the applicant to seek RM1 zoning over the balance is to have developable area away from the creek. And then this is the concept plan was that was submitted. So this is a non-binding plan but it is intended to show the development yield that would be possible if the reszone was approved. The intention here in this concept plan um it does show fee simple lots. Um but again this is non-binding. So that there is no condition of approval that had this required to be subdivided. Um so I just want to make that understood. It is a straight reszone request to RM1. This had previously come in under a a preliminary review and the applicant was requesting RM2 zoning. They did amend their application to shift it to the RM1. The difference there is 24 beds per acre with RM2. Um 18 beds per acre, I'm sorry, 16 beds per acre uh with RM1. So planning commission's recommendation they found it was partially compatible with the comprehensive plan. It did increase the variety of housing types possible in this area and and in our market. Creates affordable housing. Uh did not ensure infrastructure or connectivity. There were some questions about that. Um but it was compatible with future land use map and the zoning map. There were some other zoning related corrective actions that would need to be addressed during the permitting process, but because this was a non-binding plan, that wasn't that much of an issue for us to dig into at this point. Uh, planning commission's recommendation was approval of the requested future land use change and approval of the reszone to RM1.

All right. Thank you. All right. Uh, go ahead and see if anybody's interested in speaking to this, if there's any member of the public here tonight. Good evening. Again, just provide your name and place of residence.

Yes, sir. Jeff Carter with Carter Engineering Consultants were the civil engineer land planning group uh on the project and I just want to re reiterate to what uh Mr. Lonnie mentioned and that originally we came in we thought we would be able to get something a little more dense as RM2. Um, and through the planning commission process, uh, you know, we realized that really we probably should drop down a little bit to to a less denser project, which is what we have here. And, uh, the the back roughly twothirds of the property is already zoned RM1. So, we're not asking to change that zoning. All we're trying to do really is clean up the front part of the property so that it's all has the same zoning. Um, most of these houses will be detached, uh, threebedroom, fourbedroom. They're smaller houses, but they got several bedrooms in them. It's a local builder, local developer that has a good track record of, um, providing these affordable housing uh, houses. And, uh, there will be some uh, duplexes uh, that'll be uh, three bedrooms each. Um uh but most of the lots will be uh detached um single family lots. So just wanted to uh let you know I'm here. Be glad to try to answer any any questions that you have. Um obviously there is a a stream on the property. We'll have to go through all the necessary permitting for that. This is just the first step for us, but we know that we've got to get buffer encroachment permits, variances, all those things that go along with plan review, storm water ponds, all that uh will be will be uh applied to this property when the time comes through plan review. So, thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Carter. Is there anyone else here to speak to us tonight? Good evening.

Hi. Hi. My name is Ken Portier. I live at 160 Spruce Valley Road, Seed Creek subdivision, which backs up to this uh property. The planning commission recommendation write up says that the applicant addressed concerns by the public regarding sanitary sewer capacity and storm water. What is not said is that this occurred after the public comment period and the public was not able to comment on the sanitary sewer capacity and storm water solution proposed. Public utilities suggest that the sewer concern can be addressed by placing a holding tank and pump on each of the 45 properties proposed and that these would be maintained and managed by the owner resident. There are a number of unressed questions with this proposal. Has this solution been used anywhere else in Clark County? The average household generates 60 to 150 gallons of waste water a day. This suggests that each of the 35 lots would need something like a 300-gallon tank for a three-day retention. The 10 quadriple lots proposed would need to hold 1,200 plus gallons of sewage for a 3-day retention. What if the pump stops working? Assume the meantime between failure of one of these pumps is 2,000 hours, which is typical for the kind of sewer pump that we're talking about in industry averages. With 45 pumps, the probability of one failure in one year of use, assuming a half hour per day of use is 98%. It's almost certain that one of these are going to break in a year. Where does a spill go if the pump's not serviced? Who services this? Who pays? What's the track record of homeowners maintaining critical infrastructure? So, for example, look at homeowners who

are required to have backflow preveners on their property. What's what's the um compliance on annual inspections? How effective is this program? Will this particular situation be handled similarly? Finally, the sewage solution is posed as a temporary until the county fixes or upgrades the Cedar Creek sewer line, which public util, excuse me, public utility noted has failed in recent years. So, how long is temporary? Uh, I would posit that temporary often becomes 30 years. So, just think about it. And then finally, I argue that the storm water issue was not addressed. It was simply punted to county staff who would review the proposed final plan and decide if it was protective enough of Cedar Creek headquarters. The public has no say once the decision gets to this stage. And then finally, the ACC comprehensive plan talks about opportunities to amend Athens clerk county code to enhance the protection of natural environmental features such as

Thank you, Mr. Forier. Appreciate your time with us tonight. Is there anyone else here tonight to speak to this proposal? All right, we'll come for commission discussion and this property rests in district one. So, I'm going to turn to Commissioner Davenport for any opening thoughts.

All righty. So, thank y'all um and thank you for everyone who came out today to speak in um support and in opposition. So, I do recommend my colleagues watching the April 2nd planning commission meeting. I watched it like 5,000 times, so it's worth a watch. Um, there's a resident, um, I think her name is Meredith Rididgewood. Um, please take a look. It's only like she only spoke for, of course, 3 minutes, but just pay attention to what some of the comments that she made. Um, um, I think she covered some of the concerns. So, I did speak with the applicant today and I appreciate the time. Um, I do just have some great concerns about the septic and I'll speak on that in just just a minute. Um, but the buffer um I uh so um I do agree with some of my colleagues when they say that we need to look at our zoning because like if you have an existing neighborhood and you're building a new neighborhood that we need to have more than a 25 foot buffer

75 is what we have. 75. What we have um this one is seeking 25, right? Did I read that wrong? A 75 put foot buffer from the back of existing properties. No, off the creek. It would be off the top of the Not the repairarian, but from Oh, you're Oh, I'm sorry.

I'm thinking the buffer between the City Creek neighborhood and the uh I forget the name of um the neighborhood below it. So, especially in the back, those one, two, three, four, four lots in particular that are existing home. I think there's three homes there, but that's a 25 with a fence and well, a fence and some vegetation and a couple trees, but like, you know, a 75 foot buffer would at least satis um satisfy some of the the resident's concerns and um and see the creek. But my main concern, so my main concern is just a septic tank, you know. Um, it just that is an environmentally sensitive area and um you uh can you explain to me as well as others the the planning plans review stage if this is approved like what happens next?

So So if approved as requested it would just be it would be RM1 property. um

that would come through our plans review process. And so um as it relates to the sanitary sewer and how that's handled, public utility staff would review and only approve if there was a mechanism that met their standards. Um same with soil erosion and sedimentation control because that was also a concern for the creek. Um there would be standards that are brought to bear that have to be met as part of the design and will be monitored throughout construction. Um but it it is an atypical approach to have um a series of holding tanks on lots this small um tied to sewer but but essentially holding and waiting for dry weather flow. Um that is not something that we have at this scale anywhere else in the community.

So y'all heard that right. Okay. Um also Cooper Road is right across the street right next door to Tuxen. So, right, G dot closed that off from going east, taking a left. No, I got it right. Going west, taking a left. So, it's blocked off. Um, so this pretty much is going to be a left right in neighborhood or people have to probably do a U-turn if they're going towards downtown to get into the neighborhood. Is there Was there any discussion of lining Cooper Road up with or any potential of lining Cooper Road up with the interest of that development? You get what I'm saying? Like it's just it's going to create with 180 units. That's a um you know more than likely going to be workforce of students. Um that's going to be a lot of traffic and then only having one entrance, one direction to get in. people going to do a U-turn. And I know Tuxton, the church across the street, they get upset where people do U-turns already and they're in their in their drive in their parking lot. Um, but the main thing is that buffer um the buffer against Cedar Creek and the the main issue. Long story short, five years ago, we approved a project across the street from Southeast Clark Park. Do y'all remember that?

Um, it was a 64 vote. Um um a lot of people in the East Hampton Estates came in, they were upset by it, but we clearcuted all those trees and there was a small little swamp type drainage um where a little lot of mosquitoes and frogs were playing, but that's where because of the elevation, that's where the water drained. And I could be wrong, Bruce. Call me out if I am wrong, but during the construction of that, that looked like the little swampy area where the drainage was drained out. So, I'm assuming all the species that lived in there um were probably, you know, no longer exist. But, you know, we clearcuted that whole land and then we had to came back um and asked for a pump station and those home were deemed to be well, they were set up to be affordable. Um, they have been grading that property for over I believe over a year now. I could be wrong, but it looks I drive by every day. I'm assuming it's about a year and three months now. And I doubt those those homes are going to be affordable because the the um with the pump section that we just added with um the grading um it it just I can't see that that what they paid for that property and what the homes that they're going to put there are going to be affordable. So, um,

to to think about the component elements that you've mentioned, Commissioner U. Bruce, obviously this is a G dot right ofway. Do you know if there's been any conversation about modifying the um the turning arrangement or signalization at this point? From a staff standpoint, I I don't believe so, but the the applicant may be able to respond to that. I don't know, Mr. Carter, if you've had any conversations with G DOT about the turning movements here. We have not pursued any permits with G DOT. We fully anticipate it being a right in right out. Just knowing the the area uh trying to prevent left turns from out of there out of the intersection there we think is is a reasonably good thing to do. U but we do not have any G do permits or anything like that.

Thank you sir. Appreciate it. And then uh Bruce obviously addressed the unique nature of the individual holding tanks. You know one of the things commissioner that uh this body always has the opportunity to do is create conditions around approval. And so when it comes to the buffer and opportunity that can be taken is to provide a kind of foot depth that may be greater than that required by code uh around buffering. So just want to make that point. All right. Thank you. So uh Commissioner Link. Yeah. Um Bruce, can you explain to us the dry weather flow versus wet weather flow of sewer capacity?

I'll give you a planner's answer, not an engineer's answer. Uh so wet weather flow when you have um a sewer system that allows for rainwater to make it into the pipe, you lose capacity during a rain event because it's filled with water from the rain. And so any kind of effluent coming from any property has to fight for the same space that the rainwater is also taking. So in a larger rain event, you you have compromised much less flow than you would normally have. In dry weather, we tend not to have issues with our our sewer system in in I would say most all of our basins, but the challenge we have is that infiltration of rain water making it into certain section of of the sewer system takes away capacity during a rain event.

So, what are the size of these lots drawn on this concept site plan? Do you know? Um, actually, no. I don't know off the top of my head, but the applicant would probably Would the applicant be able to Could could you give us an idea of what the square footage? Sure. Uh the typical lot layout there, you can't really read it, but it's 100 100 ft. A typical lot will be 100 feet deep by 40 to 50 ft wide. So 42. So 4,000 or 5,000 foot lot. That's kind of sub our lowest single family. RS5 let you have a 5,000. Yeah.

Um I mean yeah my initial concern was why go RM if these are be simple um and but now I'm wrapping my head around the sewer capacity issue. Um I mean I'm reluctant to see fe simple lots with that kind of arrangement like relying on individual homeowners to maintain that kind of like holding tank pump situation is kind of sketchy. we know the problems we're having with some of our septic tank situations. Um, so that that kind of is a concern of mine. Um, yeah, thank you. I think I'm Anyone else tonight?

I I do have a quick I mean, could we require that the entry align be aligned with Cooper Road across the way so we could possibly get a proper intersection there and make it a little safer or does that do prohibited? They they said no. Well, they already I think it was four years ago when they reconfigured that. Sorry, that four years ago when they reconfigured and um you can only take a right turn now and onto excuse me, a left turn going um east onto Cooper Road in or out of Cooper Road. Commissioner Myers.

Yeah. Um, first just to comment on the the use of the word affordable here. Um, having listened to some of our uh forums that are going on and in for seats that are up for election. I mean, we're not talking about lowincome affordable. We're talking about more moderately priced houses, which the market needs, but I I I think we need to be careful by what we mean by affordable here. uh when we're talking about like in the last project that was just removed um in comparison to the the median income. Um but I want to follow up on that sewer capacity not available. So the last time we had something like this with the wet weather flow sew sewer capacity was with the Homewood Hills project, right?

And that but that one had leakage in the pipes. This one we don't I mean where the pipes were leaking as well. Um so this might be a little bit different but the the implication here you all wrote a privately designed owned and maintained sewer storage sewage facility to retain sanitary sewer on site until off peak hours is required or you know with to serve the development or alternative solution is deemed acceptable by by the PUD director. But the one they they heard it was not individual tanks. It was like group tanks again which is which means that I mean this is what I have to understand because if you're talking about like 10 of them and there's how many spots were there? 50 60 how many home spaces?

55 you know we're we're talking about like five per house or something. Then you have a whole coordination among people to be the upkeep of that. And so I I I that makes me just really weird wary of this as well in terms of how long this would be and how it would go on. Um I and I I I a little concerned about uh you know allowing something like this having people come into it and then 10 years from now there being problems that really all the details weren't followed through on. Um, so, uh, that's that's my concern. But the other thing about the Pine Code in place, I mean, there has to be there has to be, uh, that has to be brought up to public standards, including right of way and street improvements, and that would be to the at the expense of the, uh, developer. Okay. And are there um a bunch of residents on that Pine Cone Place?

No. No. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Wright.

Um, yes. I'm just going to ask staff to maybe give us an email on the category C water and sewer availability. I'm I'm going to need a little more learning on those um comments, the italic stuff. Um, so there's several bullets here u from public utilities department and and I um there might be more that we could have or maybe I should have a phone call but it seems like all of us need a little bit more details about um about that. And then in the transportation uh Bruce, this Pine Cone Place uh consideration that uh transportation public works have noted, is that in this image or is there an image you can show us about the Pine Cone Place part?

Yeah. If you if you look to the lower edge um where there's a little culde-sac that's drawn in, what it's connecting to is Pine Cone Place. Okay. And is that one of our roads? It is public. It is substandard. Okay. But it is public. So the point being that if this was approved and that road needs to hook up to it, it needs to hook up to a a proper st public standards as well. Correct. So is it is it dirt? No, it's paved. Okay. But it's just not at the standards of which we width and pavement depth is not what we would typically get these days. And so

it's about a lane. I mean, if you look at it, if you drive out there, it's it's it's essentially a single lane. Um and then the cost of that upgrade comes from where? So the the developer would have to bring it up to standard to function. The question is to what standard is that? So during the plans review process, what we would look at is first and foremost fire and emergency access to make it passable and be able to work for that because that would be their second point of access if there's an emergency. Okay.

And then secondarily from there would be adequate width to serve the anticipated traffic flow. Um the challenge for this site is as everybody's noted, you have kind of restricted access off of Lexington Road. So some other point of connection is likely to carry a good many trips because you're going to want to avoid that Lexington Road connection at times. Um so it's likely that Pine Cone Place would have to be brought up to much more than just a fire and emergency standard to function properly. And the planning commission said approval. So, the planning commission's approval and and there's one thing.

Yeah. The there's one thing I I should have mentioned in my overview. The current zoning out there would allow for uh I believe it's 175 bedrooms today as currently zoned. So, without changing anything, 175 bedrooms would be possible. Okay. Um this proposal takes it to 181, maybe 180 depending on how things uh work out with infrastructure. So I think that comparative analysis by the planning commission was important to them. You know, a net gain of five additional bedrooms over across this site um was not something that they found to be a worry.

Gotcha. And um on the our agenda here, the disillusion of Can you explain dissolution terminology, but that's that's on the next item. Oh, I jumped down PD. Yeah, we'll get to that one. That's a That's a typo. We're We're working on glossery of terms. Got Commissioner Thornton. Then I'll return to Commissioner Link. Yep. I see where I jumped in. Thank you,

Bruce. I have um uh two developments in my district and I know I believe they both were um approved by Wright because it never came before us for a reason. But the one near um Ryland Ryland Park next to Leanne Drive in Linda. Um did they hook into our water our septic system? They have adequate sanitary sewer there. So they are on ACC sanitary sewer and that's one of our newest main lines there. It's in good shape.

So And I guess my point is, so they were able to do that and then you can walk right across the street and they're septic. That's correct. That's a problem. Topography.

Um uh I don't know about topography, but I'm I'm glad um the sewer situation is more than in my district um or it's a concern because we have not talked about sewer um in prior years. So, um, my next question was about the So, this developer cannot do what they did at Ryland Ri Ryland Park. Can they They cannot pay and and connect to our sewer system.

It it will be a connection to ACC sewer. is just connecting to a sewer that has limited capacity during rain events. And so these holding tanks would allow for um off- peak flow to to happen. So these tanks would would essentially drain out um when the capacity is in the pipe to to handle it.

Now I will say about um I think someone mentioned about um who and what maintains. I will say at Creekstone, uh, that owner maintains all the septic tanks. He he takes that on himself. So, um, I don't I always I always need to probably thank him because we know those septic tanks have a don't have a real long life. And um I think Commissioner Wright and Link addressed the fact that we can't make it mandatory for people to maintain their septic tank. So those would be my issues too around um sewer.

Commissioner Link. Yeah. Um that Cedar Creek main the capacity of that is the issue here. Correct. It's not a matter of topography, is it? Well, it's it's not necessarily just that main. It's it's the connectivity to that main. Um the distribution lines to get to that main. Those are the ones with the capacity issues. Correct. It it's a it's throughout the subbasin. Okay. Where there's the infiltration issue.

Okay. Um so, do we have an ETA in our service delivery plan on when those will be get getting updated? Have we gotten there yet with our plan? Yeah, that that will be we'll know that as we go into the next meeting. So definitely I'll have them email we'll get an email out on that because I don't know I'm asking that same question like where is I mean that's a concern if those are like imminently going to get upgraded. I'm I'm less concerned about this but you know also note that this whole like underground tank and pumping system um will certainly add cost to this development. Um,

and if you recall, you know, when we did when they did the service delivery plan presentation, part of that included the map that was kind of showing the yellow areas, the red areas where there are capacity issues. So, they're consistently chipping away at those. And so, I want to find out where this particular area and what the issue is, where that's expected to be addressed.

I kind of wonder if this is a project that, you know, if we just let it wait a couple years, that capacity, you know, a few years, that capacity would be there. and we could feel better about that. You know, I just hate to see this kind of maintenance necessary, especially for a few simple project where you have so many different owners. We've seen roads go bad. We've seen septic tanks go bad. When you have those situations, you never know what's going to happen in the future. I think I think it's worth making it clear though that this is not a binding plan and they are not bound to subdivide. So straight reszoning to RM1 is the ask. And that would allow for

um detached or attached units by right. And um you know if the developer were to get the reszone request approved and then work through the design solutions, it may be advantageous for them to do something that is shared units in a single structure or fewer structures to make sense out of the sanitary sewer connection. Um, I mean, I like the idea of fe simple lots. I I like the idea of inviting home ownership, you know, in this kind these kind of modest um, you know, smaller scale lots. And I wish our code, you know, was adaptive to it. Hopefully, we can make it that way soon. Um, but yeah, that sewer, you know, the the group maintenance of the sewer capacity is is worrisome. I wish this was a planned development where we had those questions answered. Mhm.

All right. Some questions that we'll hear some more about for certain. All right, Bruce, we'll head on to the next one.

All right, so the next request is for 1165 Ogulthorp Avenue. It's a two-part request. Um, first part is to dissolve the plan development that is currently on this property that was approved in 2022. Um, and to reszone the property. um from commercial neighborhood which is the underlying zoning today to RM1. So this PD amendment would remove the binding site plan in the binding report um that was associated with that 2022 plan development. The future land use would remain traditional neighborhood. It would accommodate both the CN zoning and the RM1. So no change there. The existing PD provides a mix of neighborhood scale commercial apartments and detached units as well as some senior units were intended. Um the mix is shown there on the screen. Uh this reszone request though would come with a non-binding plan for 22 one-bedroom units and 34 two-bedroom apartments. So traditional neighborhood would remain the future land use, no change. Um the zoning change that is being requested would go from CN, remove the PD, and then that area shown as CN would become RM1 as part of the second request. Here's an aerial view of the property. Uh, Forest Heights neighborhood to the south. Um, across the street you have, uh, Ogle Thorp Elementary and Resource Medical. Um, and neighborhood there to the west and church property to the east. No environmental property uh, uh, features exist on the site. So, this is the PD that is in effect today. This is that binding site plan. shows the series of detached structures. Um what you what went went through with that PD approval uh four years ago was considerable discussion with the

neighborhood on how it should or should not interconnect and and interact. Um a lot of those same concerns were raised at the planning commission meeting. So this is the proposed plan. Um you see a single footprint of a structure. um still a single point of connection for vehicles and no connection proposed for land or drive. Um the challenge here though is that at this density with this type of structure, there's different emergency vehicle access needs and so there may have to be a second point of access and it would likely have to come from Landor for for safety purposes. But there's a condition of approval, but the planning commission um uh forwarded this to you with that addresses that. So this is a side by side just to con compare um existing PD on the left proposed concept plan on the right. So evaluation in looking through the application, there wasn't really a strong justification provided for removing the current PD. Um that was discussed by the planning commission with the applicant and I think there were realities that were expressed about the marketplace today and and how uh the challenges they're facing with building out the PD as it's currently designed. Um there is more of a mix of housing in that current PD than is what proposed. The proposed plan is non-binding and it has a concept that is a single multi-story structure uh that is atypical for the area certainly different than what's next door uh immediately next door on either side and this is a common housing form that we we have throughout the community. So that was a discussion point with the planning commission as well. Um partially compatible with the comp plan though in that it is infill it is redevelopment. It's an opportunity to bring some housing into an area. Um it does decrease the variety of housing units and prices, but it increases the variety in this immediate area. There is no multif family in this exact spot. Um zoning is viewed as an opportunity for

additional housing. These types of requests are are considered seriously for that reason and this proposal is limited to just a single form that as was noted is relatively common in our community. It is compatible with future land use map, but it would result in an RM1 spot zoning. Um that was part of the evaluation. So planning commission's recommendation they found it partially compatible with the comprehensive plan does increase the variety of housing types in this area. Um it does create affordable housing for sure and does not ensure infrastructure or connectivity. However, there was a discussion again with public utilities about how to overcome any kind of public utilities challenges there. and there's some design solutions available um compatible with future land use would be compatible with the zoning map if approved. Um other zoning ordinance related issues would have to be addressed during plans review. Um so this is not a binding plan. So this would be to approve removing the dissolution of the PD first vote. Second vote would be to consider the reszone to RM1 from commercial neighborhood and planning commission offered these four conditions. If it's required, a second driveway would serve as emergency access only and not for public use. Two, households would be limited to 80% AMI for the first 30 years of the development. Three, the age of the residents would be limited to 55 plus for the first 30 years of the development. And then four, what this condition does is it puts in place, locks down the setbacks that are a part of the proposed concept plan. So it would have a 60 foot 65- ft front yard setback off of Ogulthorp, 110T setback from Breen Ridge, those houses to the west, and then 156 foot setback from Landor. And so that's what's shown on that submitted plan. Um those were scaled out during the meeting and those were arrived upon as a condition of approval from the planning commission.

All right. Is there any member of the public here to speak to this item tonight? Good evening.

David Ellison here on behalf of the uh developer uh which is a partnership between Pedmont Housing uh and the Athens Land Trust. Uh and so this project um you know we're seeking to reszone this from a PD to RM1. Uh we understand the existing uh PD is a very interesting project. Uh but unfortunately the interest rate market changed shortly after approval and the property owner of those developers can never get financing. Unfortunately the current PD is simply not financially viable and cannot get off the ground. Uh what we're trying to do is propose a project that satisfies many objectives of the comprehensive plan. Uh specifically this is affordable housing for seniors. Uh we are intend to participate in the inclusionary zoning ordinance and we will be applying for lowincome housing tax credits which has that May deadline. Uh we believe that this proposal satisfies many of the objectives of the comp plan and specifically I want to get through some of these conditions here. Uh so again we don't want uh a second driveway but obviously we want to be good neighbors. uh the developer Pedmont Housing uh they buy and hold, they don't sell, and it's Athens Land Trust. So, we're trying to accommodate the neighbors and we're fine with it being emergency access only. Uh the second condition we need to clarify a little bit because that's vague. Uh households limited to 80% AMI suggests that all of the occupants would be 80% AMI. we're actually uh most of them actually all of our housing all of our occupants would be below that. Uh we're looking at unit matrixes at 50 60 70% AMI. And so that's one issue that we're going to want to clarify uh before y'all vote at the uh in May. We understand what planning commission was trying to do, but since this is something that will be part of the ordinance, want to

make sure that's clear. Uh age of residents 55 plus. Uh that's this is going to be senior housing. Uh I believe the uh project that our client did on Braay Street with Athens Land Trust was a workforce housing, but this will be senior housing with a covenant that runs with the land. And the purpose of this uh condition was to essentially allow, you know, dual enforcement opportunities between the state with the covenants that run with the land and the county. Um now the setbacks uh at the planning commission uh we offered these setbacks because we know there's no binding site plan uh but we went to a community meeting last night and it sounds like some of the neighbors are more concerned about height than setbacks. And so what we're trying to do is figure out well can we reduce it from three stories to two stories and if so uh that may adjust some of the setback requirements. So we're working on that. We may try to come back with theision different condition there. Uh, we're also want to try to address some of the neighbors concerns about the landscape buffering. Our current proposal, and I know over my time, just give me one more moment. Our current proposal is for landscape buffer wall with a 10-ft vegetative buffer. Um, but we're also looking expanding that vegetative buffer, but keeping that fence, which would be allowed by right.

Thank you, Mr. Ellison. Thank you. And the developers here if y'all have any questions? There. Anyone else here to speak to this proposal this evening? All right. Seeing none, we'll come for discussion and this in district five. So I'll begin with Commissioner Fischer.

Thank you, Mayor, and I want to thank the developers and and the residents from Forest Height and surrounding the area. We met last night to talk about this particular project and um Mr. Ellison, he did um u mention some of the concerns of the um residents there. Um Height was one of them. Um of course, you know, we need this type of housing in our community. So, um it's a good project. Now, one of the things that um someone resident was telling me and I'm I'm ask I'm asking the developer see they feel like they have some rock under um that particular um property. So, I'm ask them to do a um study see whether or not if if there is any rock and if they hit rock what happens um with the particular development. Um also um one of the other concerns were again what's the height you know and I think if we can lower that to two stories um people may um feel a little bit better about um this particular project but like I say it's it's senior housing it's affordable um is what we've been talking about some of the stuff that we need but again I want the residents to be happy with this project um some of them feel it doesn't fit the character um of that particular um neighborhood. So that um that was some of the um concerns. Um it is it is on the bus line from that um perspective. Um it is one and two bedrooms. And um one of the things that we talked about was um because it is for 55 and older um young people can't come and stay. I mean they can't stay. They don't have a property manager on staff there. Now, one of the other things that we going to have to deal with pretty much what happened in Patrick's um development is the sewer. There's not enough capacity there to um support that. So, they're

going to have to do some underground um sewer um for that particular project. So, that's a concern there, especially if there's rock there. So, for me, we got to get those things figured out whether or not there is rock on that particular property. And then you know then what happened then also then the tax credits and I I didn't ask this last night but if you don't get the tax credit like first um development do you all move on and it's nonbinding so a lot of stuff is in play here but again these are some of the things that our community and you know some of the campaign trail people been talking about you know we need that type of housing but again uh I want to make sure if we do this um that we do it right and that the neighbors that that has to live there, they going to be comfortable with this particular project. So, um, let's hit mayor. Thank you. Thanks, commissioner. I've got commissioners right in link.

Bruce, can you go back to the picture that has both the current plan development? Okay. Um, so you said the one on the left was just four years ago. Yeah. Do you all remember was that the one where the young lady came and she was concerned about the wildlife? in this area and it being cleared and how they had forts and stuff. Yeah. Believe that's the case.

Um seems like it was much longer than the but but yeah that it got prepared and then it didn't get to happen at all. So I I think it's good that this property is getting some new attention and the housing. I think this was supposed to be medical offices and daycare the the the previous iteration. Yeah, that's correct. Yeah, but I I think that I think in my opinion the residential fits that area better than the the various amenities of this one. But it doesn't matter. It's not happening. The request is to how did you say that? Dissolve. Dissolve.

Dissolve. Okay. So, that other word I don't have to try to learn it, do I? Okay. All right. Thanks, Commissioner Link.

Yeah. I mean, I'm happy to see senior housing, affordable, residential on this lot. Um, I'm okay with the three stories. That seems like a, you know, a reasonable, modest, transitional, um, height, especially since it's primarily fronting Ogulthorp. Um, you know, I would like to see some actual connectivity to the neighborhood. Um there's this concept of spot zoning that that uh Bruce brought up, but I feel like this is appropriate spot zoning here. I mean, I live in a neighborhood that's mostly single family homes, but it does have these, you know, pre-zoning spotzoned apartment smallcale modest apartment buildings and and they're, you know, our senior I mean the current president of our neighborhood association lives in one of them. Um, this is necessary housing and and I think um contributes to the diversity of our community. There are plenty of people aging out of some of those homes on Forest Heights. I have folks in my neighborhood who are ready to give up their big old houses and would love to have something like this to be able to move in in their neighborhood. Um, so I I hope we can move this forward and take care of any any concerns um that any of the neighbors might have and, you know, bring this community in into that neighborhood. It's a great neighborhood. I have tons of friends who live there and um I would love to see that kind of diverse housing brought there.

Commissioner Thornon.

Yes, I I I do like um the design. Um I could understand three stories being a little much when you're talking 55 and up. Um so I kind of get that part. Um, but I did want to reiterate because uh, Commissioner Fischer said it kind of fast. Um, this project also did not get the LITC funding even though it's due in May. The vote was yesterday. So, I just want to make sure your your client knows that that LITC funding is kind of off the table right now if if they don't know. He's raising his hand.

Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.

Good evening. Thanks for joining us. Just provide your name for the members of the body. Yes, sir. Uh, thank you. My name is Josh Thomas. I'm with Pontine Housing Group. So, we be the part owner and developer along with Athens Land Trust in this development. I just want to touch on the last part about the the so I think the previous developer that the gig team announced their award yesterday and that gives would have given any development two points and their point so we kind of know where everybody's putting in. We're all in the same business. We had them beat by two points regardless of you know if the get point didn't even exist. So when they realize they didn't get it dropped their score down to where we all kind of know where the scoring is but we're still up there with it. So that's why we're still moving forward. Okay.

Obviously, it would have helped to have the gig support for the two points, but we still think that we've got a fighting chance, so we're keeping going. Okay. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. U Yeah, Commissioner Myers.

Yeah. Um I just uh want to understand again this process with these conditions. So, we hear the developer is out there just spoke with us and I'm assuming there's some kind of memorandum of understanding with the Athens Land Trust who'd be overseeing this 80% AMI for 30 years and keeping track of the residents and such. But let's say the whole thing, let's say it passes, right? But then they don't get their funding, they don't get it. it all falls apart at that end and it's left with this new uh zoning with these conditions. Okay. So, what happens then? Someone who comes wants to So, if someone wants to buy this property and build it by right, they're going to have to follow all these conditions, right?

That's right. Um, and they'd have to figure out some way to would they have to, let's say, if they did that and they came in there, would they have to prove to you some like a process for number two and three, how they were going to do that? Um, how who was going to keep track of it and and such? Yes. I mean, there would be documentation that would be we would require an annual reporting to make sure it's in compliance. Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner Fischer. And then, Commissioner Thor. Yeah, let me go back. So, Bruce, to your point though, if this doesn't go through and somebody else buy, we'll still stay 55 and older though because it's nonbinding. So, the project could change, right?

The site plan is non-binding, but those four conditions if they're adopted or if they're rewarded as the applicant said, they might be asking for the those conditions ride and so they'll stay. They would be in place. Yes. Okay. I want to be clear because I don't want I want the community to understand whatever if doesn't go if this doesn't go through or we don't if if we approve the reszoning and they decide well we didn't get the tax credit then get the money we're going to pull out somebody else comes in those same conditions are there and have to stay there they have to abide by those conditions or they would have to come back to this body and ask for those to be changed all right I've got commissioners Thornton Lincoln right with additional thoughts

and and that and that was my point because um if they do come if someone does come back like this was a PD this isn't this one that was correct it was yeah originally so you're coming back to ask us to change that so somebody does have the option but they still would have to come back to us or they have to go with the conditions correct okay commissioner link um yeah So, we keep talking about three stories, but it's actually the height restriction on RM1 is is 30 feet, correct? With the ability for an additional 10 ft if they meet setbacks, which they were locking in the setback.

Okay. So, that's what they're doing. They're doing the setback thing. What is the height restriction? I I presume Forest Heights is what RS2 or I think it's RS25. 25. What is the height restriction? What is the height limit for RS25? I think it's 30. I think it's Wait a minute. I think it's 25. I think it's 25. It's taller than that for those people. We can find that out. Yep. Just curious because it seems like they're about the same. Commissioner, that was one of the concerns. Yeah. Why? Um because the people that's on that was on Breen Ridge, they was concerned about the three stories people looking right into their into their house. So, so that was some of their concerns. is is Breen Ridge.

It's right next door. It's 30 feet is the the height that's in RS2. Breen Ridge RS25 as well. I believe it's RS 15. I would have to double check, but it's 30 ft as well. Okay. My sense is that probably the setback means they would need to knock. So with the setback, they can go higher than 30 feet. But without the setback, they could do 30 feet by right if it were an RS. I mean, I'm just kind of making the comparison of what's already being built in the area. Right.

Yeah. Go ahead. I would say go ahead. So, no, just keep in mind again that's why and I walked that piece of property before. Um, it it sits up high right now and I think again I don't some people who've been living there a long time. I really think there's rock under there. So, I don't know. But, but if you walk that property, I mean, it is, you know, it's walk it's high. So, again, that's I think that was concern of the residents from that perspective. So yeah,

it's so similar to the other one, the category, the C area and the details, all the itallic details with the water sewer availability. If we could get just a little more embellishment on the um the water stub out stuff. The other one had some other things and help us understand. I don't want to get confused, but that that they can use our water and sewer in dry conditions, but for wet conditions, they've got sort of a backup sort of built-in thing. If you can break that down for us a little bit so we understand because I'm seeing the same thing here as the other one. Um, as it's possible, but and if you could just help us understand more of what those differences are. Same with the um separations and making sure when these are listed they're issues that are being are resolvable because I want to make sure I'm not missing something that is a real concern.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. We'll get some uh feedback from staff on the geology, the hydraology, and other matters of technical detail. and we'll go ahead and move on to the last of the planning and zoning items tonight, which is 1930 new Jimmy Jimmy Daniel Road.

Okay. The request for 1930 new Jimmy Daniel Road is also a two-part request. Uh future land use map change is being requested from employment to mixed density residential and a zoning map change from EI or employment industrial to RM2. And the intent here is to construct 32 three-bedroom town home units. Um, so here's our site. Uh, New Jimmy Daniel Road is there on the west side of the property. Uh, the property, um, backs onto a pond, uh, that has served for storm water and more for this area for a long time. Uh, this site is just north of the old Athens Speedway,

super old Athens Speedway. Um so future land use going from employment which is largely what we have in this area to mixed density residential. I will note right here that um the future land use map that you just adopted um is not reflected on the screen because this application came in prior to that adoption. So we're still kind of working with this. But what we're seeing in this part of town is the uh future land use is migrating over the years. We've had a number of requests out here to go to residential from employment. Um, Jenningsville Parkway was originally designed to be a parallel route to Atlanta Highway for light industrial and commercial development uh 25 years ago and it just hasn't materialized and instead we've had residential development and so that's this trend for today. So light industrial to RM2 is the zoning request. Here is where you see those environmental areas. So there's a little bit of flood plane, a little bit of wetland, uh most of it offsite. What you have is open water surface area on the site. So here's that context I'm talking about.

Um so this is just south of the Sam's Club. You see at the top of the screen in the middle, um to the left we have housing, fairly dense housing. Um to the west, to the east, we also have fairly dense housing. and that has been more typical of what is being developed along especially the southern side of Jennings Mill Parkway for the last 15 years. This is the concept plan. Again, non-binding, but this is just showing how they could get the units on the site and have it work. Um, planning commission's recommendation, they found it to be partially compatible with the comp plan. Does create some nodal development. There is a lack of walkability in the area, but there is sidewalk available. um uh destination walkability I think is what the discussion point was compatible with future land use map zoning map and the ordinance and there were some concerns again regarding sanitary sewer. So that is is a common comment. Their recommendation is approval of the future land use change and then approval of the reszone to RM2.

Thank you Bruce. Is there anyone here to speak to us tonight? Good evening.

Good evening. Jeff Carter with Carter Engineering Consultants. Um, happy to try to answer any questions that you may have. The developer, Brian Elrod, is in attendance tonight as well. We just we feel like this property uh is currently zoned is just, for lack of a better word, just not happening right right now. And and it's been that way for a long time. And it's a good we feel like a good place for uh for some attached uh town homes. And I I'll just briefly just speak to the the sewer, too. just um just throw this out there that yeah, we realize there is the sewer issue. We have been working with the utility department and as you guys know, they're very capable in terms of of their knowledge of how this works and we're um we're absolutely on board with doing what we need to do. Um we don't feel like it's any problem at this point in terms of the the fix um the solution. uh they agree uh in the packet there's an email from the utility department saying that conceptually they they approve of our methodology. So I just wanted to mention that and again be glad to try to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Carr. Is there anyone else here to speak with us tonight? Seeing none that's in District 6. So I'll move to Commissioner Johnson for initial comments.

Thank you. This proposed development I'll start with the details. I'll then go to my what I like about it and then just if I have a concern, I'll mention that. Um the details like um Mr. Lonnie said, 32 unit town homes. Um and I I live in this community and or around this community and there are um there there is a lot of land to develop. And so what I like about it is that it expands our housing supply. And the only cons I have a couple of concerns, but um Mr. Carter actually mentioned one and um the second one is I have a concern a big concern about the the two the two-way entrance off of New Jimmy Daniel Road. Um that's a road I travel about 12 times a day back and forth. And I saw the traffic report that stated 59 cars travel on that road on average per day. The thing is where it's situated and where that proposed entrance is supposed to be is right in a curved corner, you know, type of thing. And when I'm trying to turn on old Jimmy Daniel Road from New Jimmy Daniel Road, cars are coming around that curve at 65 to 70 miles per hour. And it is tough and it's uh also a pass through from 316 to Atlanta Highway. It's used by a lot of commuters and also a lot of big trucks. So, I think it's just difficult and I'm not an expert or a builder, but just in my layman's mind, it seems unrealistic to have that entrance right there on old on new Jimmy Daniel Road versus the Jimmy versus the um Jennings Mill Road. And I if I don't know if that has been discussed or if that was a a concern from anyone else, but I live there and and I see that um it's it's just I have

to wait sometimes just to turn onto old Jimmy Daniel Road because the cars are coming so fast. So if you have a subdivision of 34 town homes that that could possibly grow because I saw in the report the density the final density number was not yet um determined. So right now it's 34. But if it grew, just think about how many cars are trying to turn out. Maybe left to go to 316 or maybe right to go to the Atlanta Highway. That's that's a challenge. And I don't know if there's any room to make a change, if that would mess up their permitting. I don't know. Um, like I said, I'm not the expert, but I do know as a person that lives there. I'm on I'm an on the streets resident expert in that regard. But I I would like to thank Mr. um Jeff Carter. He he sent me a message yesterday that he'd be happy to meet with me after today. And I wanted to read through it first. So, we're going to get together and talk about a few things, but if there's anything that you can say, Bruce, to speak to that, I'd appreciate it.

Sure. Um, their only frontage is on New Jimmy Daniel. So, they don't have frontage on Jennings Mill. Um, so whatever vehicle access they have is going to have to come from New Jimmy Daniel. Okay. Um, but the exact placement, again, this isn't a binding plan. So, your point's well taken about approaching the curve or coming out of that curve. Um, that central location that's shown on the site plan may not ultimately be the optimal location for vehicle access. Okay. And without having a binding plan, it gives, you know, staff and the designer latitude to move that that driveway to to the best spot. Thank you. I appreciate knowing they have flexibility.

Commissioners, uh, Davenport. Yes. So, um, reading the application, the land was subdivided cuz there's a little piece of parcel above it. Um, and we look at the road. Yeah. The little piece of parcel above it that um was detached from this entire property. Is that going to be developed? Did we approve something? Okay. So, if you go back to the former slide, the road at the north side just ends. Um, is there any potential for new development that that road can attach to? Yeah. A future project that attaches to Jenny Mills.

Yeah, the opportunity for interconnection is there. The topography is is not great. It does slope away from New Jimmy Daniel down towards the pond. So, that cross slope might be tough to design with, but um certainly that alignment that's shown would allow for some amount of access. Now, it it depends on what's built to the north. You may be remembering across Jennings Mill. There was a development that came in on the north side of the intersection that you just saw a couple months ago. Okay. Um but that you're you're absolutely right. I mean that the way that's shown there could be an opportunity for another development to tie in for some amount of access.

Thank you. Anyone else? Commissioner Myers. Yeah, this is really for the um manager's office or when we have that discussion with uh public utilities about sewer, the sewer plan. Um you know, it seems like it would be really helpful for us to have a sort of primer on these alternate ways of dealing with sewage that we're being presented with um and to hear from the experts themselves on that. So that's just a request.

Yeah, I'll definitely do that. And um there are with these three projects, you've actually been presented three different ways. They're generally the same, but they're actually three different solutions. So I think it would be nice to have them kind of cover at least what they anticipate the possible solutions for those. And again, they're all still viewed as temporary because ideally we're working on addressing these these capacity issues. But yes, I think that definitely would be an important thing to have. Commissioner Thor,

I would I would like uh the manager to um the manager is meeting with residents and families of JJ Harris on May the 4th um to talk about um sewer and capacity. If we could have those all the different types of just for information, I think that would be helpful for our meeting. Yeah, certainly. And I think in that case it's even a broader conversation because it may also include on-site treatment systems and what possibilities there are with those because there may not be sewer service to even connect to. So yeah, thank you.

All right. Thanks everyone and thank you Bruce. I appreciate it. We're going to move on to new business. All right, we had a couple of items that moved from consent to discussion. Uh the first of those is the uh item one, which is the Talesy Road Bridge um art uh which you see in your packet. Uh great sculptural piece that'll be in the middle of that roundabout. And Commissioner Link asked that this be removed. Yeah, I mean I mostly asked for it to be removed to bring attention to it um because it's really really cool and um

there's a you know the artist is um of some renown. Um yeah, I mean I think it'll really put that traffic circle on the map or that roundabout, excuse me, the roundabout. Um yeah. Okay, Commissioner Fischer.

Yeah. Well, since it's my district, I have I have received some complaints about the um um the structure based on and and the manager and I talked about the other day based on the size of the um structure, but he he he assured me that it's not as big as we think it is. So, we we'll take a look at it, but we I have got some complaints about about it being there and the size up and the distraction it could cause for drivers. So again, these I I I live in that district. So I'm just saying what I'm getting. So So I just want people to understand that and u we we'll take a look at and see what see what it look like. But yeah, do do you want to leave this on discussion? Yes.

Okay. All right. Uh moving on to item number four. I think Commissioner Myers asked for a discussion of this.

Yeah. I I just um I'm fine with it going back on to consent, but I would just ask the manager to explain this change again so that if anyone is listening that we can make sure it's clearly understood. the public this is a change to the administrative setup and over I don't know management of the public safety civilian oversight board and I just know that there was so much public input went into the establishment of that. I want to I just wanted to be on the record out loud what we're doing and then we can put it back on consent. you know, probably actually deferred to Gavin because it's actually his item and then if there's convers if there's questions about kind of post change what that means in the manager's office, I'll pick those up at that time.

Okay.

Yes. And those are good questions, Commissioner Myers. And I think what I'd like to reiterate is the fact that you're right. Um we don't want to diminish or at all change the impact of the public input that went into this ordinance originally as well as the setup of it. And that is not the intent or action that you're being asked to vote on tonight. Essentially, all that's changing this evening if I mean in two weeks would be who the board has by their side administratively. That is it. Um, as identified in the report, there are existing conflicts that would prevent our office from continuing to administer um, PeaceC and also audit those very same public safety departments. And to avoid that conflict, we've worked with the manager over a period of months to ensure there is a smooth transition. Uh, we will stay on for a period of months to ensure that that happens. And again, if anything, I don't see this as any sort of detrimental change. I think it will hopefully not only provide an opportunity for enhancement in the future, but it will also benefit the community in the fact that we will now gain audits um going forward as well.

Yeah. And the other thing I would add is um we have spoken obviously with the board. Um I have then had some individual meetings with board leadership and they're comfortable with this move. We've had some good questions, but once we worked through the comfortable with those.

Um, as far as the kind of staffing arrangement, so one of the assistant managers will provide kind of the support out of the manager's office and then one of an existing vacant position will actually be recruited specifically to support this and the HRC. So, we'll be able to kind of tailor that hire to the support of of this effort. That's part of the reason why um as Gavin mentioned, there'll be this fairly long kind of transition because we want to make sure that everybody's in place and everyone um is comfortable with it before we have the the formal kind of handoff with it and stuff. So,

yeah, the the um the question I had or actually just see what your comment is on this because I read through it and and there's reference to how this is set up in other communities and that there are many many communities where this is under the manager's office in there. But just as there's sort of a little conflict with what the auditor could do, there is sort of a conflict with the manager's office as well since you oversee and support the public safety. And so um how does that work? What are the guard rails that keep that

those were the questions really from the board members. So two thoughts that we had with that is um one is there the methodology for submitting and processing complaints will be no different than it was under under Gavin. So that will remain the same. the we actually viewed and ultimately I think the board members did also is the reporting structure actually viewing it as a strength because part of the challenge is with really any of the audits that are done inhouse it's ultimately handed off to management to say here's the information and Gavin currently as the monitor can't compel action I as the manager can I mean I can look at those recommendations and say chief at least with the police chief and with corrections they report to So I'm able to actually move that forward. So I actually see it as an opportunity to move some things perhaps that might not otherwise be able to be me. We haven't had that issue, but if you didn't have that issue, we would be able to

the the conflict that Gavin speaks to is really his inability to actually conduct audits inside those public safety operations, which I think is definitely something we need to make certain that is available for the audit committee to be able to advance if that makes sense um going forward. Yeah. And and I was going to ask about the guardrail for you, but I guess we are the guardrail for you. So if we felt like you were just ignoring everything that came and just siding with the one side or the other, we're the ones who would deal with that. Um

yeah, because the piece that you all would be looking for because ultimately it's the the board that actually determines whether or not a complaint is founded or unfounded. Staff has no role in that except to give them the the information that was submitted with the complaint. Where your concern would come in is if for some reason the manager's office was blocking those otherwise appropriate complaints from getting to the peace co. That's that's or ignoring responses. Same thing for the same you would have with audit if if you know audits are consistently coming out there's a manager's response to it and it says these things should happen and then every year it comes back to the audit committee and nothing has happened. Yeah, that's time to talk with your managers. Okay. Definitely.

Great. So we'll hold you responsible on that part. Everybody okay with this going back on consent? Four is back on consent. Uh apologies to everybody uh in the room and out there. I failed to uh call for public comment on old new business before discussion of those two items. So I'm going to do that at this point. Uh so is there anyone here who would like to speak to items 1 14 or 17 through 26 that's on your agenda? You're here to speak to any of those items. Now is that time? All right. quiet in the room. So, we're going to move on. So, item 17

is our first item of new business. And this, as previously discussed in the work session, is our community development block grant annual action plan. Does it have everything it needs to cons? Does this have to have public input separately at the meeting? A certain number of hearings. So, you probably want to leave it on. Yeah. Yeah. Let's leave this on discussion. Yeah. Next. Anything else on 17? All right, going to move on to 18. 18 is the home action plan. All right, you heard about this in the work session as well.

I I think this may also have to have public hearing. So, I think we need to on both of these this item and the previous one just to just to make sure that it's clear. The of course when we first presented the information, we were waiting for HUD's final uh numbers to come forward. So what you have in this information are the final numbers. So it it it is um accurate at this point. There's often an adjustment between that advance anticipation in terms of dollar amount and what we get out of HUD. All right. Uh moving on to 19 uh home ARP funding recommendations. You've seen this already as well. I I I think same story as with the last two. Yeah, we need to leave this on discussion.

All right. Uh moving on to 20. Uh totally different topic. This is calendar year 2026 residential traffic management program. Uh this includes those items that were in the commission defined option for last year's budget. So uh Commissioner Link. Yeah. I just want to state for the record that um I'll be making some requests that we get some normal town roads on that plan next year. We've got a lot of speeding cut through traffic that has to do both with the hospital and the med school. The conditions are changing in that neighborhood. So, I'm just putting that out there.

And of course, we we have a sort of analysis tool that we use countywide for that. Uh and so, um that should be going into that filter that provides ultimately that list of priority roads. I don't know if you want to say anything else. I would just say ultimately the same way we approach street paving and and other kinds of things is it'll be going through that analysis rather than just a a list of the list is important because the list is items that will get put into that analysis. But um this is an effort to move away from just kind of handpicked items and actually focusing on where the biggest impact will be realized. Um, the other thing I needed to note on this one is you all may recall that this was actually pulled from a an agenda a little while back. Um, and it was because we had no biders. So, we had to go back out receive the bids. The issue is really associated with the biders misunderstanding kind of two different projects. And so, once they understood that bids are solid, this is a a vendor we have used previously for this work. So,

Commissioner Myers. Yeah. Um I I my question was more that this is question and comment that this list that's in here takes care of all the pilot and legacy projects plus the projects that were in the bid budget CDO last year.

This clears everything that was in those. my request having spent a long time in that residential traffic management program that's supposed to uh sort of not uh sort of use a a more analytical objective is that we actually move forward with that and if there are process if there are problems with that prioritization let's deal with those that so that's uh next year and do we does this run out all the T-splas 2023 Honey, that I don't know.

I don't know. But I would remind you that if Tesplas 26 passes, there is pre-designation that accounts for an allocation in this. And the idea is that it would be brought forward every year. Right. Okay. Great. That' be good. Okay. Thank you. Everybody okay with this on consent? All right. We're going to move 22 consent. All right. Uh 21 is the public vehicle safety purchase with $20. Any questions on this?

Everybody good with consent on 21? Beautiful. 21's on consent. Uh 22 is the 2026 update to the collective bargaining agreement between unified government and the International Association of Firefighters Local of 2795. I I have a question. Commissioner Myers.

Yeah. on question on this there there's we in J back in January voted to uh I don't know implement the pay study that was done and we used I guess some money from this year for that pay six months of that. So I'm assuming that the other part of that for next year was just uh part of the manager's budget. Correct. Correct. Okay. Yeah. And then the stuff that's I I looked at this the the Georgia firefighters pension fund that's is that an additional like we're we're going to pay $55,000 a year for that. And what does that give firefighters?

There's a share of that that is currently paid for by the firefighters. So part of the bargaining was that we would pick up that piece of it in the first year that is a this year that's able to be absorbed by the current budget. But as the chief notes um I think we shared this with you all before that in subsequent years that will have to be added into the into the budget. As far as what it covers for the firefighters, I don't know that I know the answer to that. We'll have to find that. Well, right. I would assume it must be little supplemental pension otherwise. What? Yeah, by the Georgia code I think it's small a small okay

I don't think it's a huge amount but it is something I think that all firefighters in Georgia are eligible for. So in and this other thing that we're it was like in this agreement we are what are we doing the collective it's we're looking at something to do with the health.

So they part of what they were um proposing in their or part of what was bar being bargained over was their ability to leave our um employee health insurance program and take with it the the share that we contribute to that. Of course, part of the challenge with that is what we contribute goes into our risk fund because it's what manages all of our insurance. So, if you took those dollars away, those dollars leave along with with them. We did we did not reach an agreement uh on that. And so, what we did reach agreement on was that we've got in the upcoming budget, you remember that I had we had proposed that there's going to be an assessment much like we did with the pay study of our overall benefits package. And at the end of that then they they we expect if that's if that information doesn't result in changes that are satisfactory it will likely become part of the next bargaining discussion again as well. So so that's why it's noted in there because they they agreed that they would cease kind of bargaining for that at the point understanding that there's going to be this additional overall assessment. But um I certainly their expectation is that they're going to look at any changes that we make and how those relate to what they're trying to accomplish and then we'll end up probably bargaining over that again. Um and and we didn't really get past that point because we kind of ceased the discussions at that point.

Right. But there there would be I mean some consequences to not only taking our money and putting it in this other like moving where the money for the firefighters goes but it could affect the overall financial stability risk whatever.

Yeah. And that's the part we would we would have to consider further. There's a benefit in that there's people that come off of the insurance. there's a a consequence which is if they're generally healthy people coming off of it, we have less people in our insurance and and therefore generates that issue. And then there's just the money issue which is those dollars which again don't stay with our individual employees. They go into the risk fund um to manage and so there could be that piece. So yes, if we get into bargaining over this item again, those are exactly the things that we would be look and what they'll be looking at are do the benefits that they receive through our health insurance um are they equivalent to what it is that they think can they receive outside? Um so that'll be part of what they're bargaining on with it. We are also anticipating syncing up the um the calendar as you recall we have to do this bargaining every single year. So, we're looking at syncing that up, probably beginning bargaining in November, so that we have ample time for that analysis to get rolled into the budget, much like we were able to do this time, so that we don't run into the scenario we did with the pay increases where it was kind of a midyear kind of implementation and and they're definitely on the same page with us on that.

Okay. Uh, okay. To move this to consent,

right? 22 is on consent. All right. Uh 23 is a report from the GOC regarding employee engagement. Interestingly enough, this was assigned concurrent with our sort of first round of discussion around the firefighters union to ensure that we were wrapping our arms around our entire set of employees. Uh Commissioner Davenport, do you want to make any remarks about this? Um so yeah we have done this before in the past with the ACC gov have done this before in the past in doing employee study to engage the ACC employees I understand like uh what are their concerns are and the mayor had asked us to see if we want to update it um and ask different questions or you know to learn more and all that stuff but um I said move it to consent. It's just pretty much doing another employee survey, another employee survey to find out um because now that we have a new manager um he he has a benchmark from the the previous one and the new one that will be going out I believe this fall um give our new manager a new a better foothold on um how things are going amongst our employees. Yeah, I I asked if we could we had money and an anticipation in the budget. So, this was a good way to kind of start and do another internal survey. It's a good benchmark because as I as I joked, anything they don't like right now isn't my fault. Um so, so that way I can make those adjustments. The next one will be my fault. So, I want to make sure we get those. We actually will be doing something similar with our community survey. So, we'll do, you know, we try to survey the community every few years. We will be doing that after the election because that way the new mayor and any new council member commission members would have the similar opportunity where they would kind of have a benchmark and say this is the starting point basically. So we're trying to stagger those to to be able to accomplish that.

I I agree with the consent part but manager um since you brought up the community survey is that the survey where we learn how people get our information and and there was a time I I was I've been wanting the water bill to go away and I see that that's coming. Um but the inserts seem to be a communication tool. Is is this survey going to show that people still are expecting the water inserts?

There will be questions around communication. Most of it is around their satisfaction with services. So typically you'll see questions that gauge how important are individual services and then how do they rate those services because obviously the ones that are the most important are the ones you want to make certain are meeting your expectations but it'll be those um those kinds of questions but definitely how people receive information how they p how they would prefer to receive that information be a part of those questions most definitely. So similar, but uh I got the if I remember correctly, it would it was the same for consistency to see as well as the option to put

Yeah. And and that was true with the internal survey too. We're trying to it's good to have some of the same questions so you can kind of monitor trends over time. Um we are also though shifting in internally we're shifting companies. So it gives us a chance to ask some slightly different questions as well. Don't know if that will be the case when we go to the community survey, but definitely I would anticipate there being some new questions and then many questions that will allow us to gauge how we've improved or not improved over the years. Okay. And one more question about the internal survey. How is that how is that done? What's the delivery mechanism for that feedback?

There's a couple of different ways. I mean, obviously there's paper versions for folks that are do not have access to email. Otherwise it'll be done um electronically and and it's structured in a way so that it's anonymous. We've actually talked about also complementing it with some focus groups because one of the one of the struggles that we f or heard from before is people will give kind of you know they check a box or they'll give one line of an answer and it's kind of an incomplete answer to act on. So this would give an opportunity for those that might be interested to actually meet as a group and talk about some of those deeper. And so we'll do that at a couple different levels within the organization, but but generally it'll be done via email electronically supplemented with paper copies if if folks need to be able to access it. The community one historically has been done with um phone calls and probably some email I would assume with it. Um

website. The website. Yeah. and and you know a lot of these surveying companies across the country are really struggling with the phone call piece because of not not that many people having um either not having access to the phone or not answering the phone because of what it what it's coming from. So part of what we'll be looking at when we select that firm is how it how are they proposing to deliver those surveys? What's the best way? Obviously doing it through the website is always an component of that would would still be as well. Okay. Thanks.

Yep. Commissioner Dave, you had a followup. Um, can we make sure that um, all department heads when the new survey comes out that you I think we had a I didn't read this thing. Um, like a almost a 50% turnout rate or response rate um, just make sure we get that higher for you know each iterations.

Yeah, definitely. We'll we'll be um talking with the directors, we'll be talking directly with the employees. you know, usually if there's a hesitation, the hesitation comes from the employees that no matter what firewalls you put up about it being anonymous. There's just a distrust as to whether it's actually anonymous. Um it's really important though because it really does help us and it helps you all kind of gauge where is the sentiment of the employees across different areas and you know how does pay rank to benefits rank to working conditions um to the equipment that they have because it helps us and hopefully helps you all make a decisions about policies and budget expenditures and those types of things. So, we will continue to impress that upon folks um in that time. Making sure it's open long enough also that people can fit it into their work schedule and stuff too. We'll do all of those.

Everybody okay with this? On consent? All right. 23 is going to move to consent. Right. Uh 24 was subject of a recent work session. This is regarding the north downtown um Athens project phase three. This master plan revision and funding commitment. Any questions about this? Uh, Commissioner Link?

Yeah. Um, I'm happy to see this go on consent and I just want to address the concerns that, you know, this revision um coming down in the density a little bit has everything to do with a um cost increases um meaning that the parking structure that was originally planned is no longer viable. And um not only that, but the Department of Community Affairs requires that we have extensive parking for each unit. So um there's really no way around it um other than to come down on the number of units and and accommodate the parking at a ground level.

Commissioner Wright. Um yeah and and and based on some of our talking at the work session as this moves forward is it still the opportunity to have u not the um commercial but potential more residential is that still yes that that is still that is still being pursued and evaluated and stuff and and yes is of an interest of there's at least if not if not completely removing it at least reducing it certainly. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Thornton and then I have a couple of remarks.

Um I would like to take it off of consent. Uh one of the things that was presented was that um the housing authority was going to talk to just to make sure they're a breast that um Athens neighborhood health center. So I just would like to make sure they've made that that point touch outreach. And then after your comments, mayor, there's a couple other kind of technical things we want to

Great. Well, one of the things then that I've spoken about the attorney and the manager about is I want to make sure that even if phase three has to move forward and reduce capacity, uh, which it appears to be the case. I was interested in the prospect, should parking become available, of a slight lift in density for phase four,

uh, which is the last phase of the Colombia partnership. And I wanted to check with manager about that prospect if action on this item by the commission would still leave the door open for that. Yeah, th this um this revision predominantly deals with um the master plan and it does include phase three and an aspect of phase four, but the project that's moving forward for development with the exception of the demolition of the structures on phase 4 is really phase three. And so yes, there is there is still opportunity to talk about what that phase four ultimately ends up being as it works its way through that that process

because certainly the prospect exists of some future parking structure that maybe is a shared structure uh immediately adjacent to here. You know, we've got that fairly rectangular parcel on the corner of Door and College uh that it would not surprise me to see used as parking structure in the future. So, want to note that. And then also wanted to remind everybody that there is a phase five in the master plan that's not connected with Colombia residential at all. And that's the five acres that the housing authority has owned since, you know, approximately 1970. And so that's going to be some future opportunity for additional housing um as part of the master plan. So, Commissioner Link.

Yeah. I mean, I'd also suggest we um reach out to our state reps and and find out if they can somehow nudge the DCA um policy because in an urban context like this, you really should not need all that much parking. This is directly on multiple transit. Um you know, access to bike lanes, all of it. Um we really should not need all that much parking. Um, and and I hope that I mean, you know, I know that the state legislature is, you know, proclaiming to try and um enable affordable housing more, but this is one thing that could really go a long way, especially in rapidly urbanizing communities like ours, and there are plenty others, too, um, where, you know, if we could have built those extra units without having to build a ginormous parking deck, um, we could have gotten a lot more people into affordable housing. Yes. So, uh we have nine intergovernmental agreements on this project so far. As you read in fact in issues 28. There will be a 10th for phase three. This agenda report initially had contemplated that there would be a 10th and an 11th and discussion with the attorney's office. We don't feel like an intergovernmental agreement is needed right now to accomplish what's in item A. So, what you'll see between now and the voting meeting is gray shade edits that change item A from referencing an intergovernmental agreement to just becoming two additional action items. So, when you see that, it'll still accomplish the exact same things with very much the same words.

Great. And manager Cow, anything else? Right. Uh, okay. Consent okay with this? All right. I think Commissioner Thorne had asked that. Oh, oh, Commissioner, you want to keep this off consent to ensure that neighborhood uh health had a conversation with housing authority. Yeah, we'll leave it off consent. Thank you for reminding me of that. Uh 25 is an LRC report uh about a noise ordinance uh modification um with the prospect of a future one too. Commissioner Myers, I'll turn to you.

Yes. Well, this is um after after many months, this is pretty clear-cut, though. Uh basically we were addressing noise issues in the downtown area. Um and right now what we are putting forth is a text amendment that would extend the noise restrictions um to that we have in place already to mix density residential zoning districts. So a couple of months ago we did that to the a the AR the agricultural zones with some changes in in distances. Um, but we've done that for the RM zones, which I think makes sense for downtown, but it would be applicable anywhere so that we're treating treating neighborhoods the same. Um, we also with help from the solicitor who was very helpful. Special thanks to Will Fleiner for that. um uh made some changes to the fine uh fine so that we leave the first offense up to the judge who's working with it. But a second offense goes to 600 and a third to a,000 uh to hopefully make this a little bit more um you know less less friendly a bigger dip into the the party fund. Um, and the last thing, we're also requesting staff to do some preliminary data gathering of budgetary implications on decibel levels and on tools to measure decibel levels. um and ask the mayor to reassign the topic to committee in a year's time to sort of see how these updates have done, see if it deals with some of the problems we've had and then if we want to go into the decibb, we can go that go there again. We we spent a lot of time talking about decibb um but there's a lot of legal constraints there that make it uh difficult um or challenging or even make

it more if you know ultimately we got to think about what we're doing and what we're trying to get done and how effective it is and pro perhaps these fines will make the the biggest difference. Um anyway, that's what the report is from the LRC. Thanks Carrie. Thanks for carrying the baton over the finish line. Commissioner uh in succession I have commissioners right link and Davenport.

Um yeah we uh have had this assignment but we did do the agricultural first and then we went to the in town and so that it's um multi-family units can also um have peace and quiet or report not just single family uh dwellings. And in that year review, we um plan to understand if things have improved. Another thing the solicitor did uh and it was great because we had so many staff and input uh at our meetings and um is that he made it court only. So what we have seen is there's not that face tof face or the discussion or possibly the ability that that now happens with the judge looking at it that four citations in one day can have a little discussion about the importance of adhering to the first one type thing. So, um, so instead of it just pay the fine, um, and not have that, um,

opportunity for discussion with a with the with the judge and, um, but then also leaving the first offense as a teaching moment and adherence being the available. It's the repeats and the somewhat um, not giving the respect to the ordinance. And so that I think has already been so noted out in the community, the court only um version of this. So we'll see u what updates come and hopefully in a year or so when we revisit it um we won't have as many offenses. Soon as the first Tuesday of May, this could be on the books. Commissioner Link.

Yeah. Um I am glad to see those RM communities added to this. So this now means that um the Hancock corridor and um the east end of Cabbam um and much of East Athens that were were not did not fall under the noise ordinance, they can now be happy to call when they hear the parties. Um so I want to encourage mom I'll be reaching out to my constituents in those zones and letting them know. Um and um I I do have some questions about the um the discussion around the downtown battling battling cafe speakers and and whatever. Can can somebody from the committee kind of like enlighten me to that discussion and and why?

Commissioners, I know there's a lot of discussion. There's a lot of discussion on this and and perhaps uh you know, Commissioner Wright will want to add on to this because it's her uh her district. Um I I think there wasn't we did not find a tool in our bag of tools to address that. I mean part of the issue with the sound right now it's audible sound and so you are you know you have to when there's a lot of sound coming from different places it's hard to identify it as such. Um, I think there was discussion among, you know, we had a lot of staff and and people from the downtown community there that this might be a uh a place where a civil action might address the situation. Um, but we could not find a tool in our municipal tool bag that would work from the police perspective and from the solicitor's perspective as well. And let me ask Commissioner Wright if she'll add on to that. Yeah, I think another thing we did study a a big a a great deal. We had um David Lynn from the downtown development authority on site so that we could discuss the ability to enjoy your outside cafe without the loud music of another entity. But similar to leaf blowers and the other things when we studied the noise ordinance before uh I think it's at the state level or what there's a a level of you cannot limit you can't something about the noise when it's in the course of business

cannot be um stifled or refined or am I saying that right it makes it more difficult if it's that's the course of business yeah in the course of versus um an entity that might have a special uh

event uh permit to have a party, but they still have to be the noise ordinance because that special event or that party that might be happening from a group, they have permission to, but they don't have permission to ignore the noise ordinance. And so in the downtown uh course of business, I had hoped that a restaurant's course of business didn't include loud music, but it apparently does. And the other part that I wanted to have addressed was um megaphones and amplified music on our rideway. And again, the first amendment, it ends up being stifling to the content by

um uh adjusting or trying to put our idea of volume to someone's free expression of their choice to project. That's that was another big part of it as well. So we can't limit speakers or amplified noise in the public right of way without you know I mean we issue special permits all the time

you can offer a lot more guidance than I can because I know she was very involved in the legal research and also Will Cleaner was but ultimately in an urban area like downtown you walk out of here tonight you may hear music coming across the street that nobody's complaining about. I mean, if you're going to do it, you got to do it for all is what it comes down to. And that will affect things that you may not want to affect

because I know the complaints were coming from primary one location, a lot of them. And in fact, that location has another location right behind it that has live karaoke, which is so it gets into if you're going to shut it down, you got to do you got to treat everybody the same. So, if you could hear it from the RM or RS neighborhood on Pilaski Street or down Hancock, would then it be in violation?

Again, I don't want to get in particulars because this gets complicated, but if you talk to Courtney, she can explain to you and I will tell you these issues were discussed ad nauseium in the committee. I might need to watch those and we could get we could get some of the documentation some of the um memos that came from Courtney's research could be sent to everybody in those when it's a business it's in their course of business. I don't know part of it as well. I will say too you know the solicitor's input was vital because he has to be willing to prosecute him.

Yeah. I I'll note that um uh subsequent to committee's work, I was fortunate enough to be at a conference um that that included a sort of a mixer discussion of uh these questions of uh sound and venues in an urban context. and I was able to have a a lengthy discussion um with the longtime employee of the city of Austin who uh regulated this work through a permitting process. And so uh there had been a request to assign some future tasks to the committee and so I'll be integrating some of what I learned there kind of in a committee assignment where I hope to use some of what Courtney developed and some of what I learned in Austin. um because I think it continues to be an issue and but I do think we need to think comprehensively you know rather than isolating it to sort of today's burn our saddle thinking a little bit more broadly about okay what are the issues that we may face in a different location uh in the future. So okay

uh there there'll be some more work on this uh because I think everybody recognizes that it's an area of ongoing concern. Commissioner Davenport. Yeah. I'm just happy that LRC got something out, you know, you got and yours was trash. I'm just kidding. Um my question is um so you know this is the RM. Thank y'all for this because this is really going to benefit a lot of people and um the more densified neighborhood. when it comes to my question is like do we for some of the the troublemakers or whatever do we notify them because this is going to be a huge change considering it's we're going to vote on in May and it's going to be summer months and

so so maybe we can work with the communication shop to broadcast this and uh you know certainly some of the student connected organizations you know whether it's in fraternity council or others just to make sure that this is well understood okay thank Uh, can we put this on consent? Oh, yes. Yes.

All right. So, 25 is going to go on consent. All right. Uh, last item before we move to executive session is a recommendation from the charter compensation ad hoc committee. Uh, this was born out of uh both um uh action that actually the commission took about four years ago uh and the uh long in the tooth era of my time as mayor. And so, um, following on, uh, an earlier action to enhance the compensation for commissioners and my desire at the time to not see the same for the mayor while I was in office, but recognizing that um, we really need to come more in line with our fellow unified governments in the state like Columbus Muscogee, Augusta Richmond, and Min Bib. um uh pulled together the uh three prior mayor's prom uh Commissioner Thornton, Commissioner Meyers, and former Commissioner Edwards. And so there's a four-prong recommendation uh that would necess necessitate moving through local legislation within the general assembly uh that would ultimately in the future designate the mayor's position as full-time in the charter, establish the mayor's base compensation as three times that of the commission, which it was in the early 2000s. uh provide the mayor prom with a $5,000 annual supplement and then allow the mayor and commissioners the option to voluntarily participate in the management pension program. So um this was the recommendation uh unanimously from the committee and uh certainly happy to answer any questions about it.

I have a question. Yeah, Commissioner, can you tell us who was on the committee? Absolutely. It was the three prior mayor's prom. So Commissioner Thornton, Commissioner Myers, former Commissioner Edwards and myself. Thank you. Yeah, Commissioner Myers. Yeah, I just want to re reiterate that this this is all nothing's happening. So there's no there's no none of these changes are are going into effect. It's uh a recommendation basically to further explore it at a time and how to do that at a time when it is appropriate to do that. So we are not voting on whether or not to do these make these changes.

Right? So it would the order of events would be commission would accept this uh this would be handed to our local delegation to the general assembly who we would ask to craft a piece of local legislation in the coming legislative session or the next couple potentially. Uh and then the actual on the ground changes as uh as felt by electeds would happen in 2031. Yeah.

But it it actually I mean it doesn't it also just recommends that the that the commission revisit this. So before that even happens with the attorney's office drafting this. So with the work of the at So it's it's not going to go it's not going to happen without us coming back to us. Yeah. So what one one step for elected kind one leap for humanity? I have a comment.

Yeah, commissioner. So, I've been on this committee for on this commission since January 7th last year, and I've heard at least six or seven people since January that served with me and and three before me serving asking for a review of the charter. And to pick and choose what we we contact our local delegation to evaluate and make a decision about, I think is disingenuous. And I think it's inappropriate. I remember you interrupted me last month when I was asking about something related to the charter. Someone on this side said, "Well, he's the mayor. He could do what he wants." And then you proceeded to tell me, "Well, to make any changes to the charter, it's a very laborious process. It takes this and it takes that." But you found a way to do it for this. And I know you're not going to benefit from it. But what I'm getting to, to my colleagues who always talk about problems and disenchantment with the charter, we have four people that were willing to do it, including the mayor, and nobody's doing it for the things that really matter, that that protect us, that support us, and that strengthen us. I just wanted to say that just completely disappointed not in the decision but in how you were able to put it on the agenda and everybody was okay with it but you didn't also remember your own statement that you made to me that it's a laborious long lengthy process that involves the delegation. It's the same process. Just a note that um uh by practice there's a charter review commission that happens every decade and so there will be a comprehensive forthcoming charter review.

As commissioners we have the right to actually come together if we really believe what we said we will believe we we have the right to form in a group of six or or more to talk about it. No six people at one not one singular time have come together to say I want to be one of the six so we can put it on the agenda so we can actually have a discussion. So it's we can do it then more frequently than once every 10 years that's done by right any five commissioners can form a special call session. That's exactly right. Uh Commissioner Thorn

I'm going to u piggy back a little bit. Um, I really thought that when we met, we were talking primarily about um the the the mayor's pay pay. I'll just be transparent and it does not um impact um uh Kelly at all. So, so that was the intent, but we found out that it was too late in in the game as far as talking about that. Now, I am the first and will always can say that we do not need to wait no 10 years uh to review the charter. I've talked to several of you about reviewing the charter. Now, um, if anybody wants to sign, six people who want to sign to say, "Let's review it." I'm ready because that charter is so it's so outdated. And even when we did the last review, uh, mayor, it was during CO and half the folk fell off the committee. We didn't even really get a in-depth um, recommendation from the charter. I would be the first one to sign to review the charter. I am not picking and choosing what we do. But this I thought what had a time span which later on I found out it didn't. I mean we had passed it. So um I just want to be clear about that. Um um and and follow up with um uh Commissioner um Johnson's point. I'm I'm ready to review the charter. As a kind of functional question, what I would note is if there are commissioners who are collectively interested in a charter review that that you create some framework um basically some bullet points to say we want to look at these

elements. Charter is a big and fairly unwieldy document and so you know if you have a scope and a focus that would help everybody involved. Well, Kelly, sorry. Mayor, mayor, mayor. Um, when we take our oath, we we we swear we we we swear to the charter. And half of us, and I include myself, really don't know all the details until something comes up and then we say, "Oh, we can't do that because the charter says that." So, we do need to review our charter if that's what we're going to take our oath on. And um it should be mandatory. It I mean, I really do think that we should review it. And uh whatever we need to do, I would f I'd be glad to support it.

The uh the one-time classroom teacher in me, if he had his brothers, would have you take a quiz on it before you could uh register to qualify for office. That's That wouldn't be too bad. probably send some people home, including me. Uh, Commissioner Lincoln Myers.

Yeah. Um, yeah, that that uh 10-year overview process did get interrupted by COVID. Um, but I do remember some clear recommendations coming out of it, particularly as it as it pertains to the auditor's office and we've followed up on that and we've, you know, reorganized our auditor's office and we have a, you know, a proper audit committee with, you know, citizen experts and the auditor's office is getting a tremendous amount of work done. Um, so there has been something productive and it was a way overdue reorganization. Um, you know, so that did come out of that, you know, pretty troubled overview commission, you know, during COVID times. Commissioner Myers.

Yeah. Um, I'm just opening of the charter here and there's nine sections with many many subsections in here and since the question comes up and it's brought up a lot, I'm wondering if it would it would help me maybe it's going to be a really short memo to ask the attorney's office just what would be involved in what what would be the process that the commission would use to review the ch is there and you know I can read it again but from your legal perspective as well. how we would go about the process here of would you give us any recommendations on what the legal requirements are to change the you know the charter just like there are things where you can you know have a referendum for the whole community or it could go you know something goes to the state or can can you just give us a s a short executive summary of the powers that we have um and of course if there issues that in these many sections um that we want to address that would be helpful to know as well because I hear discussion of the charter and I know there's discussion of the sewers and this followthrough. So, but I don't know if that's a question of changing the charter or following through on what's in the charter. So um it would be helpful too for me if any of my colleagues you know have more clarification about what aspect of the charter is it the following up on the charter following through or there specific sh sections that want to be changed so I guess I would ask that of my colleagues but from the attorney's office if there's something specific guidance you could give us about how the charter gets changed

I have to prepare a minimum on that yeah just not too She's asking for a memo, but not too lengthy amendment. Yeah, I I don't want you to know. Yeah, don't do the don't write as long as the charter. Commissioner Johnson,

thank you. Just I I want to say uh three points. Just like the mayor when you u created this um ad hoc, very short-term committee, which there are dozens of for various reasons. You could have actually asked us if we have anything to also that we would want on the agenda to also review instead of making it so specific that would only benefit one singular thing that in the spirit of collegiality. It is upon you to include us and be a partner with us and you could have included us instead of just making it about one topic. And to Commissioner Link, you are absolutely right. That was something that came out of the 2020 overview committee. I will remind you, however, there was a conversation that several conversations in 2018 and throughout 2019 where you constantly talked about being unhappy about the charter. You constantly made statements about the the charter being changed. It needed to be changed. And you specifically stated because the commissioner Wright has the ability to just go up into Kelly Girt's office and tell him whatever he want she wants to do and he will do it. There was just no power. This is a per this is a private conversation, but what I'm here for is just I'm serious. I'm tired of the non-talkers. I'm I'm I'm telling the truth. I have it documented. And what I'm saying is people say what they want all the time, but for two whole years while you were the audit committee chair, this is what you said. Things can't happen because and you know the audit committee um the the overview committee did make a great decision, make a great choice, had a great outcome. But don't sit here and

say, not one person sit here and say that, yeah, I'll sign the list. I'll sign the list. This is a time here right and now the thing is you said it it was said it has been said by I've spoken in 20 thou in since I've been in office I've spoken to eight out of 10 of you two I I I don't really see you often I don't speak with you but at least eight people have shared with me on a one-on-one conversation that they think the charter needs to be reviewed if you are especially for the non-speakers tonight if you are serious let's just stop talking about it and make it happen. And if you're not serious, stop talking about it.

Got uh Commissioner Thornton, then we're going to move to executive session. All right. I'm going to say this. Um let me make sure I say it right. Um um Commissioner Johnson, if you take the lead and ask for signatures to have this put on the agenda, I'll be the first one to sign it. I will. Thank you. I sure will. All right. Uh we have a brief executive session item. Uh that should not take very long. All right. Uh it's the end of our agenda setting session. We don't have public input at the end of the agenda setting session. The end of it. We do not. I thought I would have a chance to speak early. Oh o only at the end of the voting meetings. Voting meeting. What is that? That's the first Tuesday of the month.

Oh wow. First Tuesday of each month. All right. All right. Uh we're going to go ahead and enter executive session. Just going to take a couple minutes. Thanks everybody.