City Council - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

Good evening. I would like to welcome Pastor Billy Low with City Church who will lead us in tonight's invocation. All right, let's pray. Heavenly Father, thank you for today. Uh thank you for this city. Lord, as always, we pray for our first responders that you would keep them safe. Uh Lord, we we're grateful for the work that they do. And we also pray for wisdom for this council as they lead this city. God, would they be discerning and wise and uh may you be glorified in every decision in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. Amen.

Thank you. I would like to call the regular meeting of the Milton City Council for Monday, April 13th, 2026 to order. The city encourages you to review tonight's agenda carefully. Each citizen who chooses to participate in public comment must complete a comment card and submit it to the city clerk prior to the agenda item being called. While the Milton rules allow a speaker to turn in their comment card up until the clerk calls the agenda item. Once the agenda item is called, no more comment cards can be accepted. Will the city clerk please call the role and make general announcements?

Good evening, Mayor Council. I'll be happy to call roll for the April 13, 2026 regular meeting. I would like to remind those in attendance to please silence all cell phones at this time. As the mayor mentioned, if you would like to make a public comment, you are required to complete a public comment card prior to that agenda item being called. All speakers will identify themselves with name, address, and organization before beginning their comment. And if you are representing an organization, a notorized affidavit is required stating you have the authority to speak on behalf of that organization. If you have not brought your comment cards to me now, please do so. Demonstration of any sort within the chamber is prohibited. Please refrain from any applause, cheering, booing, outburst, or with any person speaking. Anyone in violation may be asked to leave. Mayor and council, as I call roll this evening, please confirm your attendance. Mayor Payton Jameson

here. Council member Daney here. Council member Juliet Johnson here. Council member Carol Kirkley here. Council member Jan Jacob present. Council member Phil Kramer here. For the record, council member Brian Dolan is absent. Merit, you do have a quorum. Would everyone please rise for the pledge of allegiance? I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

And next is approval of the meeting agenda. Uh, council, I would like to add a couple things. I would like to add a new business item that was inadvertently admitted from the agenda due to ongoing Milton Trails Advisory Committee business. It is time critical that this vacant position be filled. The agenda item is 25-114A and that is a resolution appointing or reappointing members to the city of Milton Trails Advisory Committee by appointing a board member for district 1 post one. Actually, that is um for my uh position I believe. So

that is correct mayor. Okay, that's for the mayor position and that is going to immediately follow the consent agenda. Um and then we will have a motion for executive session to discuss personnel land acquisition um andor litigation. Okay. Uh with that I would like to have a motion on the agenda. I'll make a motion to approve the agenda as proposed. Second. Okay. I have a motion from council Kramer and a second from Johnson. Please place your votes. softly. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Mayor,

yep. I apologize for interrupting. Um, we do need to make one change regarding the consent agenda as we'll be removing one item um and asking the council to defer it to the next regularly scheduled council meeting. Um, yes, we have that. That's the number two development on the subdivision plats. We'll call for public comment right now. We're going to do public comment first. Or do you want me to I'll defer to the uh to the city attorney. I just because you approved the agenda already. I just want to make sure that we don't have to uh make that change now. Okay. Yeah. You you don't just uh public comment will be fine as long as we make the change obviously as part of the consent agenda.

All right. Thank you. Okay. Next is public comment. Do we have any public comment? We do sir. We have one.

Okay. General public comment is a time for citizens to share information with the mayor and the city council and to provide input and opinions on any matter that is not scheduled for its own public hearing during today's meeting. Please remember this is not a time to engage the mayor or members of the city council in conversation. When your name is called, please come forward and speak into the microphone stating your name, address, and organization for the record. If you will please call the first public comment. I invite Joan Boriserelli to the podium, please. Joan Borseri, 540 Kings County Court, Milton, Georgia 30004. I'm a me member of the Milton Historical Society as well as the PR Chadwick House Preservation Committee. I'm speaking tonight as a private citizen. It's just a quick update on McConnell Chadwick, worthy of being saved and able to be saved. This was the mantra of the Chadwick House Preservation Committee. We're pleased that the Georgia Trust believed this to be true when they named the house to the places in peril list. Also at the state level, the Department of Community Affairs on March 26 of this year deemed the house eligible for n national register listing. This department is the gatekeeper in Georgia for the Federal National Register of Historic Places. The National Register has general criteria for a listing. To be eligible for the National Register, the property must be generally at least 50 years old, have historical significance, have retained integrity with enough original character to convey convey its historic significance. A word about the process in Georgia. Being named as eligible is not the same as being on the national register. This is just the first step to that end. In our first application, we made the

mistake of applying under all four of the categories listed. Significant event, significant person, significant architecture and archaeology. We foolishly thought we could prove all of this. had we been able to hire professional consultants from New South or Edwards Pitman and Edwards Pitman actually did some pro bono work for us thanks to a contact with uh that do Rob Del Ross made uh who's on the city staff. Thank you Rob. Uh they would have honed us down to one or two of the criteria. In our second application, we let architecture be the star, and that involved more work for architectural historian Bob Gamble, who's worked with us for five or six years. That tack worked. Even preliminary eligibility counts towards grants, foundation help, and government funding. Note that our efforts took longer than they might have if Milton had a working historic preservation commission. Our learning curve as volunteers was high. What are the benefits of National Register listing? The property is read into the congressional record as being historic. It is an honor for the community. It becomes eligible for grants and easements. It carries a prestige factor putting the McConnell Chadwick House in a like category with other NR listed properties in North Fulton, Bington Hall, Bulock Hall, the Archabald Smith House, and the Simeon and Jane Rucker Log House in Alpharetta. It would be the only national register listed house in Milton. The next steps. The Department of Community Affairs provided us with resources, helpful t tips, and examples about how to proceed with the NR application if we choose to do so. We realized at the start that the listing involved a year'sl long process. Thanks to the city current owners of the house, the house has been dried in to

prevent more water damage and boarded up. We strongly encourage the city with community support to continue preservation efforts. A priority to move forward is the kitchen foundation. According to Bob Gamble, the kitchen was in the original footprint of the house, though it may have been rebuilt and the breezeway was added to connect the two structures. The kitchen is part of our applications for both the places in peril and our documentation for the National Register. Thank you for your time and attention. Are there any questions? Thank you. Thank you, mayor. That concludes general public comment. Okay, I will close public comment and we will now move on to consent agenda. Will the city clerk please sound the items?

Thank you, mayor. That first item is approval of the March 16th, 2026 regular city council meeting minutes. It's agenda item number 2696. Our next item is approval of the April 1st, 2026 special called city council meeting minutes. Agenda item number 2697. Our next item is the ratification of a professional services agreement with Evergreen Solutions LLC and the city of Milton for an update to the 2024 comp compensation study. Agenda item number 2698. Our next item is approval of a public works maintenance and operations services agreement with Tricapes LLC for right-of-way maintenance including routine maintenance and emergency response services for the public works department. This agenda item number 2699. Our next item is approval of a professional services agreement between the city of Milton and Atkins Realist USA, Inc. for the bridge aesthetic design services of project number 0018238 Clarity Road over Little River and PI000018240 Hickory Flat Road over Little River. Agenda item number 26100. Our next item is approval of a use agreement between the city of Milton and Crab Apple Green LLC for use of the green for the 2026 Memorial Day ceremony. Agenda item number 26101. Our next item, approval of an agreement for operation of parking services and addendum number one between the city of Milton and Celic Enterprises, Inc. doing business as AAA parking for the operation of parking services for the 2026 Meet the Neighbors event. Agenda item number 26102. Our next item is approval of an intergovernmental agreement between the city of Milton and Fulton County for waterline relocation on the Cox Road at

King Road intersection improvement project. Agenda item number 26103. Our final consent agenda item is approval of subdivision plats and revisions. The first development is 2405 Mountain Road. It's land lot 188 district 2 section 2, a minor plat. And the purpose is to subdivide the existing principal parcel totaling approximately 15.42 acres into three new parcels consisting of approximately three acres, 3.4 acres, and 9.20 acres. Again, a total of 15.42 42 acres and a density of 0.19 units per acre. The next development, I will read into the record, but we are going to be deferring this one. Mayor, is 15585 Thompson Road, Land lot 473. It's a minor plat subdivide the existing principal parcel totaling approximately 8.15 acres into two new parcels consisting of approximately 3 acres and 5.5 acres. This second development will be deferred to the next regularly scheduled council meeting which is going to be on April the 27th 2026. This is agenda item number 26104. Mayor, thank you. Uh council, do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as amended with the deferral of the number two development 15585 Thompson Road to next council meeting on April 27th. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda with the modification of deferring uh the second subdivision plat to the following council meeting.

Second. Okay. I have a motion from council member Cranmer and a second from council Jacobus to approve the consent agenda with the amendment. Please place your votes. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Okay, we will now move on to the added new business item. Will the city clerk please sound the item?

Thank you, mayor. That added new business item is going to be a resolution. Bear with me. Let me just get to my page. A resolution appointing or reappointing members to the city of Milton Trails Advisory Committee by appointing a board member for district 1, post one. Mayor, it is agenda item number 26. It celebrates 25114A. Mayor Jameson. Thank you. So, uh, council, this is for my appointment. Um, I would am pleased to nominate Julie Martin to the Milton Trails Advisory Committee. Julie has lived here for 21 years with her husband Chris. They have four children together and she has been an absolute pleasure to work with over the years and I think she will be a tremendous asset to the committee.

So with that I will open it for a motion. Mayor I'll make a motion to approve the appointment of Julie Martin to the trails committee. Second. Okay. I have a motion from council member Haney and a second from councelor Jacobus to approve Julie Martin to the Milton Trails Advisory Committee. Do we you want to do that old school? We're going to do this one old school. Mayor. Okay. Uh all in favor please say I. I I Any oppose? That is unanimous. Congratulations, Julie. If um if you'll come on up, I'll swear you in.

Can you take the ball, too? I do solemnly swear and I will faithfully perform the dutyfully the Milton Trails Advisory Committee. Milton Trails Advisory Committee that I will support and defend the charter thereof and defend as well as the Constitution as well and laws of the state of Georgia and laws and of the United States of America. America.

Congratulations. Council, come down. Do a little picture. Fancy. Oh, you want to bring it out?

Go for it. And one more. Thank you. Okay, we will now move on to reports and presentation. Will the city clerk please sound the item?

Mayor, that item is a proclamation celebrating the career and retirement of Bob Bushimi and the extraordinary impact he's made in Milton. It's agenda item number 26105. Mayor Jameson.

Thank you. Tonight, we want to recognize and celebrate someone who has had a lasting impact on our community. As our city architect and previously the community development director, his influence is quite literally all around us. He not only helped shape how our city looks but also how it feels. We are grateful for the legacy you are leaving and we all wish you congratulations on your retirement. Whereas Milton is beloved in part due to exceptional individuals who understand what makes it unique and work tirelessly to maximize her talent, knowledge and passion for the public good. And whereas Bob Bimi stands out as just such a pivotal figure, having left his mark on Milton in a myriad positive ways. And whereas he joined as city architect and went on to have a leading role in the design and construction of most every major construction project in Milton's history. And whereas this includes spearheading the design of Milton's one-of-a-kind city hall, fire station 42, Milton City Park and Preserves Community Center, and the public safety complex, including fire station 44, Milton Municipal Court, and Milton Police Headquarters. So Bob, I'll just say every building in Milton. Is that fair? Okay. Whereas each detail mattered to Bob, whether it means incorporating features that first responders love, finding ways to save taxpayers money, making sure contractors follow through on every punch list item, or relentlessly promoting Deerfield, Crab Apple, and Milton as a whole. And whereas what mattered even more was how each project fit into Milton's identity, community vision, and overall story. And whereas Bob brought that same approach and impact to countless private

projects, working with partners so that their look, feel, and high quality fit well within Milton. And whereas with his unparalleled attitude, aptitude, and energy, there has been no better public servant, worker, or ambassador for Milton than Bob. Now therefore, we the mayor and the city council of the city of Milton celebrate Bob Busimi wish him well in his retirement and express our heartfelt thanks for everything that he has done for our community. given under our hand and seal of the city of Milton, Georgia on this 13th day of April of 2026. Good evening, Mayor Council. I just want to say thank you. Um Milton is truly part of my soul. Uh I've been here since the beginning and with great council support, great leadership. I think we've done a lot. Um, sorry, a little tearary, but I just want to say thank you. It's been a pleasure.

I was going to say

I'm have y'all get in the middle too if you don't mind. I don't want to be like that.

I mean, I could have went, but you know,

you're in here.

Okay. And here we go. one. Thank you so much. If you will please call the next item. Mayor, that next item is a proclamation recognizing April 20th through April 25th as Georgia C's Week in Milton. It's agenda item number 26106. Mayor Jameson.

Thank you. Council is honored to recognize Georgia C's Week and the important role our city plays in serving and strengthening our community. Whereas the Georgia Municipal Association launched Georgia Cities Week 27 years ago to showcase valuable programs, projects, and services offered by municipal governments. And whereas these local governments spearhead much of what contributes to high quality of life such as safety, security, activities, outdoor spaces, and a well functioning transportation network. And whereas the theme of this year's edition is love your city. A testament to how engagement, achievements, and services can foster a strong sense of pride and belonging among citizens. And whereas the city of Milton loves our community, knowing that it's men and women drive so much of what this community makes such a special and beloved place to call home. Whereas Milton looks forward to connecting with our citizens during several public events over the course of the next week. And whereas the f the festivities will kick off with the horse theme, meet the neighbors, then conclude with a public celebration of the environment and newly expanded Milton City Park and Preserve Trail during what will also be our Earth Day event. And whereas in between, we plan to give special chances to interact with Team Milton members, all while continuing to offer the attentive, effective, above and beyond service that our citizens deserve. Now therefore, we the mayor and the city council of city Milton recognize April 20th through the 25th as Georgia cities week as well as express our appreciation for the love between our government and our community given under my hand and seal the city of Milton, Georgia on this 13th day, April of 2026.

Have a few committee members and staff that want to come up for this picture. All right, committee and staff, come on up.

Hello. Nothing blocks. Nothing. He's so right. He's so right. Tom's gonna block me though. I have no complaint. No complaint.

Hold on. You're missing one person. She's coming around the corner. Steve, she was never heard of. How come we have There she is over there. One more. Please don't leave. Thank you.

Oh boy. I'm not bowling.

I I'm I I just looked. I didn't say a word. Say a word. A word. Okay, please say on the next item. Okay, that next item, mayor's proclamation recognizing April the 22nd as Earth Day while nurturing and celebrating the environment. Agenda item number 26 107.

Thank you. This proclamation recognizes the importance of caring for our environment and the shared responsibilility we have to protect it. Whereas people love Milton for its unique natural beauty and access to special outdoor spaces which are both worth preserving and whereas these speak to the unique connection that our residents have with the environment, something that we celebrate every day and especially on and around Earth Day. And whereas the United States first marked Earth Day on April 22nd, 1970 with global recognition coming two decades later. And whereas the city of Milton has joined this celebration throughout its history, understanding the value of protecting and promoting responsible environmental stewardship. And whereas Milton recently rose to gold level green community status for our government's efforts to support and safeguard the environment for generations to come. And whereas this month we will give residents opportunities to connect with nature like a guided Providence Park hike, earth focused toddler Tuesday, electronics recycling event, and a horse theme meet the neighbors at a city green space. And whereas Earth Week's highlight will be April 18th when all can come to Milton City Park and Preserve to celebrate the expanded trail, learn about the natural world, and take part in activities. And whereas we are excited to join our neighbors in these upcoming events as well as in our yearround commitment to the environment. Now therefore, we the mayor and the city council of the city of Milton recognize April 22nd, 2026 as Earth Day in Milton and invite residents to the many environmentally minded activities planned throughout April. And this is given under my hand and seal of the city of Milton, Georgia on this 13th day of April of 2026.

This Ranger Jim, we got more. I was gonna say

you can't get one. Do you want me to start tearing them? No, no, no, no, no. Because they hand them out separately. Okay. He doesn't know anything about nature.

Okay.

Perfect. One, two. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Okay. Okay. Mayor, our next reports and presentation item is a proclamation honoring the engaged graduates of the city's 2026 Citizens Government Academy class, the ninth cohort. It's agenda item number 26108. Mayor Jameson,

thank you. Programs like our Citizens Government Academy give residents a deeper understanding of how our city operates and how they can play an active role in shaping its future. Congratulations to the ninth cohort class on their completion of CGA. Whereas Milton Citizens Government Academy gives attendees an interesting valuable behindthe-scenes perspective on how our city government works hard to serve our community. And whereas this interactive program began in 2018 intent on harnessing citizens curiosity and commitment to Milton by sharing insights and information so they can be even more knowledgeable and impactful. And whereas over eight weeks CGA students visit municipal facilities and learn firsthand from Milton leaders about all aspects of city government's operations as well as the why behind them. And whereas the academy prioritizes active open engagement with city leaders featuring fluid conversations, eye-opening questions and answers, and hands-on activities. And whereas the 2026 class has been particularly engrossed week in and week out as demonstrated by their attentiveness, questions as well thoughtful critiques and suggestions. And whereas we are grateful for the sincere dedication of this group which represents a cross-section of our community and look forward to seeing how they contribute significantly going forward. And whereas they graduate as well-rounded, well-educated ambassadors for Milton and not to mention as potential future public servants. Now therefore, we the mayor and the city council of the city of Milton honor the graduates of Milton's 2026 Citizens Government Academy class and express appreciation for their interest in and dedication to our city. Given under my

hand and seal of the city of Milton, Georgia on this 13th day of April of 2026. Congratulations. Now pass it on to Mr. Tom. Emily. Miss Emily. I gotta keep you on your toes. You know, it's good. I like that.

All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. It is my pleasure to introduce to you the ninth cohort of our Milton Citizens Government Academy graduates. Over the past several weeks, these residents have spent time with each of our departments, asking phenomenal questions and getting a real look at how our city operates from day to day. This group has been incredibly engaged from the start. They've showed up every week ready to learn, leaned into conversations and brought a genuine curiosity that has made every session better. It's been such a fun group to be around. And tonight, Milton gains a group of thoughtful and informed ambassadors. First, I'd like to thank our city staff, all of them, uh, for dedicating their time, sharing their expertise, and making this experience so meaningful for our graduates. And thank you to our mayor and council for always supporting this program. It truly makes opportunities like this possible. And unfortunately, and I say it every year, I need to get caps and gowns. It would not be a true graduation without a class speaker. So, I would like to introduce this year's Mike Toto. Good evening, mayor and council members, um, and all the staff who joined us throughout these eight weeks. Now, I'm Mike Toto, and when Emily asked if I wanted to talk about my experience, well, I didn't hesitate to say yes. Now, I hope my fellow classmates agree that this was a great experience. We were all impressed with how well everything was organized and presented. Uh, now speaking in public isn't easy for everyone. So, I want to thank everyone who gave it a try. Now, from meeting the mayor and staff at the first class to

the last session, we learned a lot about how the city works. The fire department and the police department were the main road trips of the course and we would like to thank the entire staff for taking the time to give their presentations. It was funny seeing the competitive nature of both those departments. During the fire department presentation, one of the class attendees, well, they asked about donating food for the firefighters or the police. And when we were informed, everyone loves the fire department. So we eat all the do donated food. But unfortunately, not everyone feels the same about the police, so they have to throw it out. Now, everybody laughed, but that's sad and funny at the same time. Right. One of the one of the classes was HR and finance.

Yep. I know your excitement right now. I did wonder myself how exciting that would be. Bernardet Harbble, the deputy city manager, was so informative and enthusiastic. How could you not stay focused on the topic? It was really great. So, I want to thank you for that. I won't take up too much time here, but I do want to stress that this is a great program to get to know your city, and it is our city. Now, I hope this program continues and it's it's a special way to learn about the community. On behalf of behalf of the Citizens Government Academy attendees, we thank you all for your dedication and hard work. Good night.

Thank you. Emily, Emily, just remind them to come in. Hey, I'm totally

I get the joy of reading names aloud. So, I will at least first preface this to say I am so sorry if I mess up anybody's names. I try really hard. Um, for my graduates, I'll call your name. I'll hand you your certificate. you'll grab the proclamation from the mayor and then stay up here and we'll do a lovely group photo. All right, let's begin. Uh Christopher Bighgam, we have a few who can't make it today. Debbie Debbie Calibro,

she's here. She's here. Milana Drawn, Laura Floyd, Kelly Gould, Jimmy Holden, Cole Hollands, Ben Kopaka, Sarah Moone, Melanie Moore, Shirana Narajin, Melanie Bob Ransine, Debbie Cerna, Donna Schelise, Joanne Sullivan, and Mike Toto. And additionally, we have Barbara Owens who is part of our class of 2025, but due to a scheduling conflict, she came back because she had missed the last few sessions. So, she has completed her course. So, Barbara Owens, come on up.

Did I miss one? Miss anyone? Oh, there you are. Didn't see you there. I'm so sorry. I'm the worst. Uh, Sarakamar Topen. May I just ask you to scoot a little bit to the center? Thank you. Okay,

just one more. Just one more. Thank you. That's good. Thanks. Appreciate Hey, will you please tell the next item,

Mayor? That next item is the Freedom Park long-term vision discussion agenda item number 26109. Our parks and rec director, Mr. Tom Mavine. Got to move this up. Good evening, mayor and council. Tonight, I'm giving a high level overview of Freedom Park, where it stands today, why this conversation is coming forward now, and some thoughts around what the park could become in the future. The purpose of tonight is really to bring a couple related items together in one conversation. First, I want to give you a snapshot of Freedom Park as it exists today. And second, I want to share the opportunity that exists to reimagine the park over time in a way that may better reflect its purpose and location. Ultimately, staff's looking for council feedback and guidance and the general direction of the park. Freedom Park is a small approximately 1acre pocket park located on the corner of Web Road and Deerfield Parkway. It's highlighted in green and the image you see here. And currently it includes the armed forces flags, the peace pole, the memorial plaque and monument, a very short walking path, a bit of green space, and an outdoor exercise equipment circuit. It was originally intended to function as more of a pedestrianoriented space, so it does not have dedicated parking lot. The park does have meaningful elements already, especially from a monu memorial standpoint, but its current layout is somewhat limited in how it functions as a broader community space or perhaps more importantly as a more intentional destination within the area. The reason this is coming forward now is because there's been some recent council driven feedback expressing interest in whether the park could provide more specifically specifically whether it could be more intentionally honoring freedom military service veterans and fallen soldiers.

At the same time, Freedom Park's location within Deerfield will have redevelopment over time that is expected to increase traffic visibility and overall activity. With the future active athletic park nearby as well, this area is going to continue evolving. So, this felt like an appropriate time to step back and talk about where the Freedom Park should evolve along with it. What is going on? There we go. I don't know what happened there. At a high level, there appears to be an opportunity for Freedom Park to become a more intentional and welcoming space than it is today. That could mean creating a park that still honors its memorial purpose, but also feels more multi-generational and usable for a broader range of people. Some of the opportunities could include stronger military and veteran recognition, a more respect respectful tribute to fallen soldiers, additional quiet seating and shade for picnicking or reflection, memorial focused features, interpretive or storytelling elements, and improved paths and gathering spaces. I've also taken some time to visit and look at a few similar parks and memorial spaces in the area that helped reinforce that even smaller spaces can still feel meaningful, welcoming, and well thought out. I took some pictures and they're included here in the slide. This is not intended to suggest that staff has any concept in mind because we really don't. But we want to frame the types of opportunities that could be considered if council would like to continue exploring them. There are a few important considerations to keep in mind as part of this discussion. First, there's no immediate fiscal impact associated with tonight's presentation. Any future costs would depend on the scope of what direction council may want to pursue. Access and parking would also need to be considered inclus including the possibility of a partnership with the neighboring property where the old city hall is located. I have had some early

conversations with those neighboring property owners and those conversations they have been receptive to the idea. If staff does continue evaluating future improvements at the park, a formal timeline would be established and I can come back with better idea of what that looks like in a future council meeting. We we would want that planning and outreach to include the parks and recck advisory board, veteran groups, nearby stakeholders, and of course the community. So that planning process is thoughtful and well-rounded. At this point, staff's recommendation is to proceed through the thoughtful planning process for Freedom Park if council would like to continue continue looking into the future improvements that are there. The goal would be to make sure any future concept appeals to mult multiple generations from kids to seniors and honors the park's memorial purpose while also considering its role in the evolving Deerfield area. As noted on the slide, the alternatives are really either to leave the park as it is now or to continue exploring an even more broad reimagination of the space. So, at this point, my presentation's concluded and I'm happy to receive feedback and questions. Mayor,

thank you. Any council questions, discussion?

Personally, I think it's a great opportunity for us to to reimagine the park when we open up the athletic fields and everything. It's a it'll be close enough for parents to take their kids over there, show them. I think it's an opportunity for us to we don't really have a spot where somebody can take younger kids or even adults and appreciate uh what veterans have provided us and I think that's a great opportunity to do so. I think also adding a you know the opportunity for some lunch, you know, people to go have lunch. It's just right now it's not very inviting. I mean, there's really, even if you park in the parking lot next door, you can't you got to trip over the junk to get to it. So, we, you know, it has to be a whole package, but I think it's a great opportunity for us to take advantage of something we have and just add to it, make it better quality.

I'll echo a lot of that. I agree. I support your recommendations. Um, I think you said it well. intentionality is what that area needs to both honor and educate the community. Um, does gym equipment belong out there? Maybe not, right? Let's truly dedicate it to what it's there for. Uh, it's our fallen heroes and reimagining that, particularly in light of what is going on in the Deerfield area being reimagined. The time is perfect. So, I support that. Any other council questions? No. Appreciate it, Tom. Thank you. You'll be you'll be hearing from me again on this. Good stuff. Thank you. Okay. Well, city clerk, please stand on the next item.

Mayor, that next item is a presentation providing an update on the city's advancement to the second level application for the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Recreational Trails Program for Improvements at Birmingham Park. Agenda item number 26110. Our parks and recreation director, Tom Meline.

Good evening again, Mayor and Council. This presentation provides a quick update sharing some good news on a grant opportunity tied to improvements at Birmingham Park. We recently received notice that the city has advanced to the second round of the Georgia DNR recreation trails program group grant. That's really the key takeaway from this evening as it moves us beyond the competitive portion of the grant process and puts us in a great position moving forward. And before I move too far into the presentation, I do need to thank a couple staff members of both Michaela Burke and Jen Young who are here in the audience tonight for their critical involvement in the successful completion of this grant application. For a little background, we've had a really strong track record working with DNR over the past several years. That includes projects such as the restroom, pier, and ADA trail at Providence Park along with the recent trail work at Milton City Park and Preserve. So, this isn't something new for us. It's a continuation of how we've been approaching park improvements. Staff is always looking for opportunities where outside funding aligns with projects we've already identified as priorities and we pursue them. The project itself focuses on Birmingham Park and includes a few key improvements. That includes a restroom at the trail head, ADA parking to support it, trail improvements, and a bridge repair on the yellow trail. These are all fairly straightforward improvements, but they go a long way in terms of how people experience the park. The restroom improves usability right away for more users, such as families with kids, and the trail and bridge work help address longer term maintenance needs. And while we know that infrastructure such as restrooms are not always necessary at all parks and green spaces, Birmingham Park will certainly benefit from it. In fact, the trail prioritization plan already identified it as a need within the park system shown here. In terms of where we are in the process, council approved staff's completion of the pre-application last year, which we

submitted in October. And in March, we were notified that we advanced to the second round. That's really the milestone again that we want to share tonight, getting through that first phase of the competitive part of the process. And as we move into the second rounds of applications, it's essentially housekeeping and submission of official paperwork. If everything continues on track with DNR, we would anticipate a grant agreement this upcoming winter in 2026, early 2027 with a typical project timeline following that. Okay, so again, there's no financial impact tied to this item as well. Um, this just an update. However, as we begin looking ahead, the total estimated project cost is around 405,000 with the grants contribution at 200,000. The Birmingham Park Capital Account currently has 1.35 million available. So, we're in good position from a planning standpoint. As we look at alternatives, this is something we could fund without utilizing the grant dollars available or only move forward with portions of the improvements, but given that the totality of the project aligns well with the grant criteria, it made sense to pursue the outside funding. So, today is really just about sharing the update and keeping council in the loop. We'll continue working through next steps of the grant process and if or really when we're awarded, we'll come back with more detailed information including timing and implement implementation. That concludes my presentation. Happy to take questions.

Any questions for Tom? Well, I don't think we've had a council meeting since the uh second phase of Milton City Park and Preserve have been open and I will tell you that was an excellent job. Was definitely well worth the wait. So, thank you for that. Okay. Thank you. With that, uh, we'll call the next item. Yeah. Thank you for finding the grant money, too. Yeah. I hope all appreciate that. Absolutely. Mayor, we're going to move into the first presentation. That item is consideration of an ordinance to amend chapter 4 of the city of Milton code of ordinances regarding alcohol, beverages, and associated fees in appendix A. It's agenda item number 2611. Mayor Jameson.

Okay. Do I have a motion on the first presentation item? Mr. May, I'll make a motion to approve agenda item 26-11. Second.

Okay. I have a motion from Council Cranmer and a second from Council Member Cookerly to approve the first presentation item. All in favor, please place your votes. All right, that is unanimous. Okay, there are no public hearing items. We'll now move on to zoning agenda. Will city clerk read the zoning rules and please sound the items? Mayor, when the mayor and county city council consider zoning agenda items, including reszoning petitions, zoning modifications, use permits, variances, ordinances, resolutions, and text amendments, the following procedures apply. The applicant and supporters will have a total of 10 minutes to present. The opposition will have a have also have 10 minutes to present and may use any remaining time for rebuttal. The applicant may reserve time for rebuttal and as the party with the burden of proof make may make closing remarks if time remains. All speakers will be called in the order in which the speaker cards were received. The planning commission has reviewed the items and forwarded it to its recommendations to the council. No new materials may be submitted at the meeting unless requested by the council. All materials should have already been submitted to the community development and included department and included in the council packet. Any opponent of a reasonzoning action within the two years prior to filing the opposition has made campaign contributions totaling $250 or more to a local governmental official considering the application must file a disclosure with the governing authority at least 5 days before the planning commission meeting. Failure to comply with state law constitutes a misdemeanor. Therefore, if you have contributed $250 or more to a council member and have not filed the required disclosure, the city attorney strongly recommends that someone else presents your position. Our first zoning even agenda this evening is let me get to it.

Consideration of RSZ 2601 for a text amendment to article 8 use provisions article 11 and article 12 admin I'm sorry article 11 environment and article 12 administration of the United unified development code for the city of Milton to update notice requirements for public hearings to match revisions to state requirements. It's agenda item number 2683. Our zoning manager Robbie McDonald. Good evening, mayor and city council. Tonight, uh we're going to discuss this first text amendment. It is uh in the unified development code requires a minimum 30-day legal notice for zoning actions such as resonings, use permits, text amendments, and primary variances, which exceeds the minimum required by state law. The purpose of this text amendment is to update the legal public notice requirements for zoning actions by reducing the minimum notification period from 30 to 15 days which maintains compliance with state requirements and improves the process times. And in this uh table below you can see uh clearly the current requirements and the proposed uh amendment uh requirements or proposal for uh the new 15 days that had been previously 30 days for minimum and then the maximum res remains the same at 45 days. The benefits um of this change are uh consistent alignment with state requirements, greater flexibility for scheduling public hearings, and it also maintains the legal public notice requirements. Um for this process uh in public hearings there was no attendees at the January community zoning information meeting and at the planning commission meeting on in February they

unanimously uh recommended to approve uh the text amendment as presented. And so I'm here to answer any questions you might have on this text amendment. Any questions for Robin on this? Do we have Oh, go for it. Is 15 days consistent with other local municipalities as well?

Um, that's the minimum. I would say most um do have 15. Um for some of the uh zoning actions there was some difference between 15 and 30 and originally we had 30 just to give more time and then last year we changed um the action for demolition permits to 15 to allow some more flexibility for uh the builders. it just took a long time for 30 days. And then um now that um the state regulations changed to 15 for all zoning uh considerations or actions were just following that to 15 and uh in order to to one to be compliant as well as two to make it a little bit easier to get through the process. This is part of the state of Georgia's general assembly's ongoing tweaking with the zoning procedures law and it's made a lot of governments have to just keep up like every other year we're having to keep up with our timing. So a few years ago they changed the code to require zonings were always 1545. That was always sort of the guard rails on zonings. But then they changed variances like quasi judicial actions. They changed them to 30. So now to our poor staff uh around the state we're having to figure out two different tracks. There's a 30-day track and then a 15 45day track. And it really began to become a problem. Now I spoke with the author. I know why they did it. And the reason was because the quasi judicial track, you're supposed to create a record during that 30-day period. They wanted to give you more time to put the record together, but it doesn't make it any less confusing. So what this is is a common sense going back and making a common track of 15 to 45 for both variances and zonings.

Makes a lot of sense. And just historically too, I I don't think we changed the variances at all. We just kept it at 30. Well, when it comes to some state laws, you just hold your breath, it'll change back. Yeah. But traditionally, we've always had that longer. even when the state only required 15 days. I think for a long time we believe that we wanted some more time for the public to know about it. But now we've kind of we kind of put our toes in the water with the demolition permit and seems like it's working pretty well uh with the notification. So we're just moving everything to 15 makes all the public notices a little bit easier to track uh for staff and so

right. Thank you. Any other questions for Robin? You have any public comment on this? We do, sir. We have two in opposition. Two in opposition. So, none in support. I have none in support. Okay. If you'll please call now. It's 10 minutes per side. So, 10 minutes for opposition. Okay. I'll invite Mary Kron to the podium.

Mary Kron 600 Hickory Milane. Um, while I agree that we want to look for ways to streamline processes, um, what I want to really focus on is the primary variances that would be impacted by this as well. For a lot of these other things, zoning, um, things like that, they're going to go to CZIM and then, well, CZIM could be planning commission. For other things, it could be um the design review board, but for a primary variance, you have public notification and then it goes directly to the board of zoning appeals. So potentially, here's a scenario. Somebody travels, lots of people travel in Milton. You leave on a Monday and notification goes up on a Tuesday. You're traveling for three weeks. You come back during that 15-day period. The Board of Zoning Appeals has already heard this variance and approved it. Under other circumstances, they've got that 30-day minimum, and I think 15 days is just too short a time for something like a variance that needs notification to be given. In addition, I would point out that under the um under the public notification for primary variances under J2, it says that the um notification or location in the public street frontage of the subject site at least 20 days but not more than 45 days. So that would also have to be changed then to 15 because it doesn't make sense to put it in 20 days if your notification period is 15. So that would need to change. And then also on the next section under that on I the sign must be mounted and posted. So again it's that 15day versus a 20-day. I would ask you to seriously consider while it might work for other things because you are going to have CZIM. You're going to have planning

commission. So you do have a longer period of time to make yourself knowledgeable about a change that's occurring. with BZA, you don't have that same and it could be something that could be very impactful for citizens. I appreciate your consideration. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. I invite Julie Zoner Bailey to the podium.

Good evening. My name is Julie Zoner Bailey and I reside at 255 Hickory Flat Road, Milton, Georgia. I have concerns with the proposed amendments which would lessen notification to citizens in the community from not less than 30 days to not less than 15 days. While this is presented as aligning with state revisions for notification requirements, it is my understanding that the city of Milton and actually no municipality that we do not have to align with the state on this notification. Instead, the city of Milton can and should have in place ample notification periods that align with the values and commitments of the city of Milton to provide as much notice as necessary to allow for community involvement, engagement, and full transparency. Since its inception, the city of Milton has always prided itself on adequate public notification and citizen engagement. Reducing the notification timelines to a mere 15 days would have the opposite effect, making it more difficult for citizens to be made aware or for citizens to have adequate time and notice to provide input before an amendment goes before a body for consideration or before a primary variance goes to the board of zoning appeals as one example. 15 days is simply not enough time. Please consider maint maintaining the current not less than a 30-day window allowing more time for citizen awareness and involvement. The city of Milton has been recognized for citizen engagement. Let's make certain that our notification timelines adhere to this critical value of our unique citizen centered community. Demolitions are woefully different from zonings and from variances and from major amendments to the code that we follow. Process should not trump community involvement, nor should it trump notifications to citizens that have a desire to be involved. Thank you for your consideration and I would ask that

you please maintain the 30-day versus moving that to the 15-day. Thank you. Thank you. No other public comment. That concludes public comment. Okay, I'll close public comment. Uh, any questions from council? Uh, quick question on the sign on the 15 and 20. Is that going to pose any issues with this motion if we approve the 15 days and our ordinance is 20 days on a sign? I haven't had a chance to review it. I'd have to turn to my experts. I don't think I see a a built-in conflict. The sign would simply have to go up. Oh, I guess my question is if we approve this, are we going have to change the code in a future meeting? It would make sense to

Okay. Built in conflict, but it could. We don't want to add to confusion. So, other than consistency and consolidating some of these down to similar days, what is the benefit of 15 days versus 30 either to citizens, developers, whomever it may be? I'm going to answer at least with respect to the current twotrack system right now. I I think that is a a benefit. Uh everyone understands that there is a common 15 45day you know requirement. I think that's adds just a take away the dual track system.

Robin, what are you seeing in um real real world scenarios when residents are applying for things like council Haney just said? I mean, as one of the commenters made, we actually have other meetings for the resonings, use permits, text amendments. It's a very fairly long process that we are required in our own code to have a community zoning information meeting that does allow for an extended amount of time for review. Um, in regards to the board of zoning appeals, uh, we do have a required meeting for a design review board courtesy review. So for instance, um the DRB occurs on the first Tuesday of the month and then the the board the board of zoning appeals is the third Tuesday. So there's actually an additional meeting um that's published about an item. So for the design review board um I think uh for the applicants you know obviously in the variances they would prefer that but at the same time I guess it is a consideration um that was brought up by the speaker about having enough time but I would also add like I said before we do have the DRB um meeting that happens before two weeks before

so 15 days knowing there's DRB there's BZA there's a CESM also possibly or we do not have a CZIM um but that says minimum um I think that you know if you know usually we try to get the the letters out um more than two weeks in obviously way more than two weeks in advance because we want to let them know about uh the DRB as well but um I mean that is a consideration for council So zoning is how many days today um like the process. So how many what's the notification?

Oh, it's 30 days. But it's but it's also a little bit moot because we have the community zoning information meeting prior like a month prior to the planning commission. BZA is 30 days today. Today it's 30 and 30 they kind of mirror and y'all are correct. Yes. Okay. So, the recommendation is to go to 15 and 15, which is what state law has allowed us to do. Makes I understand how it makes sense. I just want to make I'm okay with the 15, especially especially on the zoning, but I want to make sure we definitely change the code on those signs because I can see that

right. I mean, this is a this is at the end of the day, this is a policy policy preference because the speaker was correct. I mean, we we have the right as local government to elongate. We we just can't go less.

And I I think to the point is when the the zoning, you have CZIM, you have planning commission, you have council, two council meetings. I kind of understand that. And I think um to the speaker's point, the primary variance could pose a little bit of an issue, but we have DRB, so I think that's I understand to keep it clean. I know for staff's perspective, you want to keep it the same. It, you know, doesn't make mistakes. And I think we're fine with those as long as we clean up that signage. I have a question. Um, Miss McDonald, what are the sum total of our announcement efforts? Is it all mail?

No. So, we have Well, there's a Appenpaper, the Milton Herald. It is required uh to be published for those days prior to the publication as well as letters. Um, for the board of zoning appeals, our code only requires I believe it's 300 ft adjacent to. So you're really only getting the adjacent properties. Uh they're sent letters uh notification of the meeting and the request. In regards to um the um the other items like the resonings and use permits um we send out I believe uh like 15 days before the CZIM and then it's published in the newspaper 10 days as well as a sign going up. So, that's why there's plenty of notice um for the reasonings and use permits. With text amendments, it's just notified in the newspaper because we're not going to post it anywhere. Um there's no letters that go out. It's just the newspaper for text amendments.

But nearby properties are mainly just contacted by mail. It is. And let me just correct myself. So in the primary variances it's 30 um 300 feet but with resonings it's I believe it's five or 600 feet but you have to meet at least 70 70 property owners. So what happens is if you only have 10 property owners we go out until we reach 70. Um and that's our own regulation. That's not state law. Um so

do we have email addresses on the tax roles? Do we have those anywhere? Email addresses. Can we put any creativity in this for announcements like in any of the city news that Mr. Battello sends out on a regular basis? Oh, well, there's lots of communications that occur um with all the meetings and uh explanation of what's being requested. So, I don't know. I mean, yeah, if we we have a few thousand people. Yeah. What So, not everybody, but it is somebody. What frequency is that? I get them, but I don't It depends. I mean, usually a few times a week, we have something that goes out.

But for these types of items, there's there's a regular cadence of those types of of posts. Okay. So, what do we have? How many? 20,000. What are we up to? You mean in the email on Facebook? Oh, uh 22,000 something like that. Yeah. So, we have 22,000 people there. Um we I don't know what we have on our constant contact email, but that is another way in addition to the regular uh US post office that we try to connect. All right. Any other questions for Miss Robin?

Robin, the downside of keeping it at 30 days today is what I get the upside value and just being aligned with state law and the like, but what's the operational downside today by maintaining 30 I mean, I think it's to be consistent with the um with the current uh DRB, not for just for the uh demolitions. And I do believe it would help with the overall schedule of a reasonzoning or use permit or text amendment. It would uh shorten it a bit overall because of the reduced 30 days. um advertising for each public hearing.

Can I add to that a little bit? Yeah. So when when when when when we start to look at the advertising for these various um meetings and depending on what they are, it's a labyrinth of

trying to work through that schedule to try to to make sure that you are advertising correctly based on whatever the item is. Some uniformity would be helpful. It could it would prevent errors. It also creates public expectations. So because everything's the same. I hope I think I think the downside specific to what you're asking is it creates variability that could create unknown expectations and staff errors. Um whereas uniformity does the opposite. My my only concern is between my time on DRB and my time on council, I haven't heard from many people that are I mean, yes, I've heard from people that our time to get things approved. I'm in the process of a project myself right now can be ownorous. I think more outcry comes from lack of communication or things that have changed that people didn't know or weren't expecting and would rather heir on the side of overcommunication and elongated the time frame for more citizens to know what's going on than shortening it. That's just my take on it. I mean, I just think back to our first quarter on city council was because of some poor communication of what was what transpired, right? I mean, I've seen I can think of a greenhouse that went up in a neighborhood that was because of some bad communication that um somebody may have removed a sign that was supposed to be up, right? So, there's there are things that happen that if anything, I would want to protect all the citizens around then expedite the process for the one. Is there is there a balance to get to maybe not 15 but 20 25 and you drive consistency across your timelines at a higher number than the lowest minimum threshold?

Is that even possibility? What what I posit and my conscience was just on my shoulder. Um if if we're truly trying to seek uniformity, make everything 30. See, that's kind of where I'm going at. I'm fine with it beingif 15 and 15, but if we're going to do 15 and 30, I'd rather be 30 and 30. Like, I just want What What's the downside of that? If we have uniformity on 30, do you see a downside to it?

I mean, I think the downside is still trying to meet the public uh require the advertising requirements. Um, and 30 days is a long time. um in you know so versus so just to help everybody out here let's do this 30 days on the demo when does someone who's been you know you know residents been here wants to tear down a old old uh an old structure on their piece of property when they walk in the door and they give you the piece of paper give us the time on how long we're talking about

currently it's 15 days but let's say it takes um a week to process you know to to receive it and Then also the other point that's not been spoken about is for our legal ad it's a whole week in a rears. So they come in a say come in April 1.

Okay you come in April 1st and they've already missed the DRB for that month. So it would be for the next month. So if it's only 15 days, they're for sure going to get on the May 1st Tuesday meeting versus if it's 30, it's going to be two months because we have to wait a whole week for something to be published. So let's say they came on a Monday on May 1st. We get it into uh Appen Media on Thursday for the following Thursday publishing. And it's always a week ahead. So then you've already lost 30 days. You're already like what May 10th, 12th and you've missed that next DRB meeting for 30 days. So then you have to go another month and that's a bit ownorous just to take down a structure. And so that's why we changed it originally for that scenario. So that's the answer for the 15-day DRB. Let's do primary variants.

Well, and but I think it's but I think it's also important like no demo there's very few demos that get denied. Correct. There's a to my knowledge we've had one demo denied in what period of time? We're not 18. Yeah. It doesn't so long time, right? So well since the DRB has had that power to do it and I don't remember. So to expedite the process on something that is almost always approved I I get that. Yeah. It's the other where it can be contentious that maybe 15 doesn't make sense. So give us that variant. So give us that same example you just did.

Okay. I mean it's No, that's fine. So um let's say that the deadline because it takes a little bit more processing for a variance. So, um, a variance or a primary variance.

A prime. Well, that's one and the same. Not an administrative, but a primary variance. Variance, something that goes to the board of zoning appeals, um, that requires a ZPL or currently we have 30 days proposing for 15. But let's say if you're doing 30 and they submit it, I don't know what Michael's deadline is, but we'll make it May 1st that they're supposed to submit for May 1st. So obviously they also are required by code for it to be reviewed by the DRB for all primary variances. Okay. Um so for 30 days you're not going to make it for the June well you could possibly make it for the June meeting depending on where it falls in the second Tuesday of the month. So maybe some months you could make it but some months you wouldn't. May 1 could be a July,

right? It would be a July 2nd Tuesday of the month with 30, but with 15, it would be reduced down to um the second Tuesday in June. Okay. And I think a lot of this is what you're referring to is like with these demo permits and other things. These are our residents trying to have, you know, a efficient government, but we also want to be transparent. And so I want to make sure when we talk about this primary variance issue, they still have an opportunity at the DRB level also. So I think that every primary variance goes to DRB. Correct. Correct. There has to be a courtesy review. Okay.

I mean what we can I mean yeah I mean we could make sure that in the letters that we send the letters even before the DRB instead of just before the the BZA so that they have three weeks before and a week before the DRB. So technically we're more than 15 days but it you know we make sure that they know about it and then maybe in the newspaper we keep it at the 15 days because we have a whole week in a rears or however you want to say that you have to wait a whole week before something gets published. That would never And there's the sign. And there's the sign as well. Robin, if you did that, that would never potentially exceed the 45, right?

I'm sorry. If you chose to do the notification for the DRB meeting as opposed to the BZA meeting, you wouldn't exceed the 45 requirement. No, that's not I I can't help but have a little heartburn about this whole mail thing. Yeah. I advocate that we switch to FedEx because, you know, it's going to get there and it's tracked. I mean, if you're going to do a short run, how can you the mail can take 10 days across city? That's why I think what Rob was saying was if you're going to mail it, you better mail it before the DRB.

Yeah. But that's we're still talking about human task and human this. If it's f look it'll all be great if no one has to say I didn't know and we don't have any record of of informing people. I mean I know it adds some cost but it's CIA. Some jurisdictions require registered mail, USPS. We don't at this point, but other jurisdictions that's their normal process. Well, and important things. Why wouldn't we? I mean, I just what what stirs people up more than just

out of out of the loop? And and most of the people out there in a slumber and and good for them, you know? I mean, from a staff from a staff perspective, council does not want to go for with this. Would would it be more efficient for y'all to have the 3030 or do you want to keep it at 15 for the demo? Well, if I believe and maybe the city attorney can correct me, but if you choose not to approve this text amendment, it would remain at 30 except for the

demolition permits would remain at 15. And would you prefer, and where I'm kind of getting at is if council is not going to go forward with this, would you prefer to have the demo switch to 30 or we going to keep it at at 15? I would staff would prefer it to be 15 because I think that that's what the development community has gotten used to and is very happy with that and I don't think we've had any issues with Okay, fair enough. Any other is it currently 15 days from BCA? Well, for the demolition, it's general for variance,

right? It's 15 days from the public hearing, which technically is at the board of zoning appeals. But what I'm saying is we could send the letters even uh more in advance to make sure that they know about the DRB. Yeah. BZA meets the second Tuesday. No, the third Tuesday. Third Tuesday. The week after DRB. Yeah. Usually two weeks depending. Most times it's two weeks after the DRB. Could you not make the 15 days from DRB? Does it have to be

Well, that's not a public hearing. So, um I'm just saying from I mean, we could add something to the text and say that's how we have it in resoning that we say there's a certain many number of days required before the DRB. I guess I'm just thinking if it's 15 days from BCA and DRB meets two weeks before that, people would find out a day before DRB that something was coming down the pike. Is that is that right? Oh, for the DR uh for the Yeah, for the DRB. I mean, potentially. Yes. Depending on how fast or slow the mail is. If I That's

Council Member Jacobus and Steve somehow. I I I'm okay with the 15-day if we change how we send the letters. I I I think Carol makes a great point. I've mailed stuff to coming and it's taken 15 days to get there. I mean, it's just crazy right now. And so I think if it's that important, if we're going to do 15 days, we've got to make sure they get that letter. And I think sending it overnight, having them sign for it or or making sure that it's there is critical. I would rather keep it at the 30 days probably than if we do that any serious just because you have a reasoning in like

the Deerfield area that that could be like 20 grand in FedEx fees or something. I mean, seriously. So I think I mean we've sent two to 300 notices for the Deerfield area for a reason. Then I think we keep it at 30 days on Would you allow us to take another look at this? Um and for now because there were also some important points brought up by the council tonight that I think is worthy of further discussion as well in addition to what we're looking at regarding the the number of days. And I think I like to spend some time with this. We've been a little consumed by the AG1 that I think this would be I think this is worthy of that time.

Would you prefer a deferral to a certain date or how do you would you like us to make that motion? And just real quick because I just to kind of recap I think mayor said it correctly. We want to drive to efficiency but not by giving up any amount of transparency or communication. I would from my perspective I would prefer not a date certain just because for the very things we're talking about with respect to to advertisements etc. Um can staff simply just review this perhaps provide some informal feedback and back to you and we can advertise correctly and bring it back. So you're good with just a deferral to a future date?

That's right. Okay. Good. Okay. Open up for a motion. All right. I'll make a motion to defer agenda item 26-083 to a future date. To a future date. Second. Second. Okay. Have a motion from councelor Cranmer and a second from councelor Jacobus to defer agenda item number 26-083 to a future council meeting. All in favor, please place your votes. Mayor, just so the gathering understands, we will have to revertise it, be back on a formal published agenda. This will this something regular mail. Yeah. There's no mail with text. I know that.

All right. To all 43,000 residents. Thank you. Okay. Uh will you please call the next item? Mayor, that next uh zoning item is consideration of RZ 2602 for a text amendment to article 8 use provisions of the unified development code for the city of Milton with respect to limited food service restaurant in the crab apple form base code use table and section 8.5.14.13e and to amend section 8.7.1f regarding tasting rooms. Agenda item number 26084, Robin McDonald.

Good evening. So, the purpose of this text amendment um is to remove the limited food service restaurant of part one. There's two parts to this uh text amendment, but the first one is to remove uh this use from the UDC. The removal of this alcohol license category for limited food service restaurant has already occurred in chapter 4 alcohol of the city code. Therefore, making the two ordinances consistent. So, I'll review with you how it appears in the UDC. Here on the left is the use table. You can see the striketh through in red for the limited food service restaurant as well as as its uh um standard uh reference for the standards. And then on the right here uh we've eliminated it as number four and renumbered the remaining two items and then skip down to E. And you'll see the definition has been struck as well. So basically this is just making uh the right hand talking to the left hand being consistent between alcohol and the UDC. That's that part. So the second part of uh this text amendment um the purpose is uh is to provide consistency between the UDC and chapter 4 alcohol in regards to uh the farm winery or Georgia farm winery use permit to include standards as required by chapter 4 to be reflected in the subject use permit. So if you look at the um area to the right on the bottom number K and uh this has been amended to state the tasting room must be located at least 50 ft from any adjacent residential property lines and no larger than 2500 square ft in size. So this

would make this consistent with what is contained in chapter 4 of alcohol. And um there were no attendees at the January CZIM and this item was unanimously approved by the planning commission at its February meeting. So okay. Okay. Any questions for Robin? Hearing none. Any public comment on this? There is, sir, there's one. I invite Van Copeka to the podium. Okay. Oh, you you don't want to do it this one. Is it?

Okay. Go talk to him. Okay. I'll close public comment and I'll open it for a motion. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion we approve agenda item number 26-084. Second. Okay. Okay. I have a motion from Council Member Cookerly and a second from Council Jacobus to approve agenda item number 26-084. Please place your votes.

Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay, you'll please call the next item. Mayor, our next item is consideration of RZ 2603 text amendments to the unified development code regarding minor plats and AG1 standards to the following. Article two, general provisions. Article three, agricultural districts. Article six, special purpose districts. Article nine, site development. Article 10, streets and improvements. Article 11, environment. Article 12, administration. and article 13 definitions. It's agenda item number 26092. Our community development and public works director Sarah Leers and our deputy director community development Tracy Wilds. Mayor, members of council, Sarah and I are here tonight to recap the research that we have done on the AG1 lots. To give a little background, the staff did evaluate AG1 lots. Um, and when we did so, we identified two distinct considerations. First is how is land subdivided and the other is how is land developed and today's building trends and the development patterns have warranted uh separate evaluations of both of those distinctions. I want to recap our timeline. On February the 9th the moratorum was extended. Since that time, throughout February and throughout March, we had many public input meetings and that has led us here tonight to this presentation on the 13th.

I will add that this is a compressed timeline that typically between the CZIM and planning commission, there's typically a month between that and then a month between planning commission and the first read. But we did did meet all the advertising requirements and compressed this as much as we could um especially with holding a special called meeting for that that first presentation item. And I will say also that that first month, so from February 9th till really the middle of March, we spent reaching out and really researching those trends and what the community felt concerns and issues were um to to set up opportunities to address those. So to echo what Sarah just said, we wanted to summarize what we heard in these public input meetings. And to do that, we pulled the transcript scripts for each of these meetings to make certain that we captured um all of the information accurately that represented um anyone's concerns, their suggestions, key elements. We wanted to make sure that we documented those appropriately. And so when we listened to those meetings and this input input, we actually identified those back to the categories that we have subdivided or looked at within the information. And so this list shows where we started with this with the moratorum and with the what we were seeing as far as trends. And those first four that were identified were lock coverage. We looked at the variances and the the inquiries we were getting about people exceeding their lot coverage. Uh the building area, making sure those lots could accommodate everything that's needed for it to function. natural area. That had to do with concerns we were hearing from

adjacent neighbors about construction and from the the site development as well as the home construction and where it was occurring on the lot relative to their established um privacy and and rear yards. And finally, uh in that primary list was the minor plat process. And so we wanted to take a look at what that process requires and if there were opportunities to maybe um request more information upfront to help better inform lot sizes. And you can see the alignment with the public input. Again, we we took those transcripts and we said, you know, which of these concerns align with with these focus areas and you can see the ones that were were very strong alignment with what we heard from the public. The secondary items here are items that came up through our public input. So, we heard a little bit more about maybe the issue isn't so much with the minor plat process, but it's verifying the things that are built um that making sure they align with what was approved on the plans. Another item that came up in the public input and we'll talk more about this is a agricultural tract exception a way to to um look at subdivision while retaining a larger tract. And finally, as we started looking at all these sections of the UDC, we did notice a few minor modifications that we internally identified just for cleanup related to those two categories. So, as we go through the next slides, you'll see these numbers at the top. So, we're going to highlight all the topics that that um go under lock coverage first and then you'll see the other eight as we work through this. Another item on each of the upcoming slides will be our recommended phasing. So, the phase one is the priority items that really address the the root issue that that was identified and really what

we what we heard again from public input. The phase two are a little more complex. They may need a little more input. Um, planning commission, it was a lot of information that we presented to them. So, we did look at which of these topics may be better fit to run back through planning commission and really give additional public input and refinement on. And as we go through these slides, we'll try to try to identify which ones again a reminder as to which ones we think are would be a quick win tonight and some of those that are going to need likely more input. Okay. So, as we look at lot coverage, the first item that we're looking at under that is the definition of imperous. Again, impervious definition is any material that water cannot penetrate through, cannot infiltrate. So the existing code right now includes three definitions for imperous and it's all related uh to these three different items stream buffers, storm water management and lot coverage. And so the proposal would be that we would create one unified definition that encompasses all of those components from the three different definitions into one. It would clear up some ambiguity. um it would provide some consistency as we refer to imperous surface and ultimately just creates one clear definition. One other thing we included as a as an item in this list under imperous cover was the last one that says other surfaces determined to function as impervious based on their impact on infiltration. So that's going to still allow some flexibility with some of the gravel materials that do still allow infiltration that aren't driving surfaces. So we did make that

clarification to to still have that flexibility um not necessarily for driving gravel surfaces but for other uses of gravel. Okay. The next item under lot coverage is the minimum and maximum lot coverage for AG1 lots. So, as a reminder, in the code right now, any lot that fronts on a private street has a maximum of 25% impervious coverage. Any lot on a public street requires a 20 or has a maximum of a 20% maximum coverage. So, in this example, um this is a subdivision. All of the lots that are within this subdivision on a private street would maintain a maximum 25% lot coverage. That proposes some inconsistencies with our rural viewshed. The rule viewshed ultimately is along a public street which maintains a maximum of 20%. So the proposal would be to change the maximum lot coverage for those lots that are that any property line abuts the public street to maintain a 20% maximum coverage. So, in this example, you will see for a subdivision, the private street has 25%, but the front three lots have a property line on a private street, a property line on a public street. And so, those three lots would be required to have a maximum of 20% coverage. I like to use the example when we look at architectural requirements, even for subdivision lots, any lot that fronts that public street is subject to architectural review. This would be the same concept applying that to that to that use. And a last component related to lot

coverage is it's actually tied under um section five where we talk about asbuilts but every plat minor plat final plat in this case it would state what that maximum allowed lot coverage was at the time of the plat. So these numbers that you see on this screen would also appear on the plat plat documents. So while that section of code is under once we get to number five, I just wanted to bring it up that bit lock coverage is going to be reflected on all plats going forward. That's right.

And this is this is the last item under lot coverage. These were some incentives that came up through public input. The one on the left is a large lot incentive. So for lots that are three plus acres um it whether it's a public or a private frontage um as an incentive for that larger size lot uh we would propose to do a 25% lot coverage. The item on the right is again came up through public input that if a lot was subject to a 20% lot coverage, the ability for if if additional impervious was needed for that lot to create an area within their lot that would be used for some sort of agricultural purpose. At that point, they could request to the BCA on a set of criteria that would help determine if it was a legitimate use and the the applicability of it and the ability for it to remain an agricultural use to possibly get a 5% um increase in lot coverage. We did feel like this one does need a little more public input, a little more um looking at the proposed code to just make sure it works for the purpose that that we would be proposing here. So that's one we're recom we have the code drafted for that but we recommend deferring that one to to further vet that that and look at all the all the parameters to make sure it does work as as intended. Okay. So, as we look at AG1 lot area, uh it's important to identify break down the components of a of a lot. And that's what this graphic is hopefully going to achieve. So, when we look at our lot size, we have a lot size that's a minimum of 1 acre, 43,560 ft. So, the graphic to the left shows

that ultimately you want to use the entirety of of the lot in gray. Now, the lot size um uh meets that. When you look at your lot, you want to look at what the usable area is. That's represented in blue. So, in this ex example, the blue area is all of your usable area outside of a stream buffer or an easement. And so you'll see in this example in the back right corner of that lot there is a stream buffer which would not be a usable area that can be that can count towards lot coverage. In this usable area you are you can put things that would support the development of that lot. um septic. You can do grading. Um any storm water type uh structure that is needed to support what's going to be built on that lot can occur in this blue area. Next comes the buildable area. This is any vertical structure. So this is your house, the pool, um driveways, um any any type of thing that wants to be built on the lot can occur in this buildable area. Um let let excuse me let me go back to usable area. When we look at the blue area we have identified that as a 30,000 square foot area minimum and that is in alignment with Fulton County. Fulton County requires an applicant to have 30,000 usable area unrestricted um for septic locations. And so this usable area that we've identified would match that requirement. The buildable area in pink would be a 20 or 25%. And then our lot coverage comes next,

which is the actual uh purple, which shows the the house and the driveway. So, quick question, Tracy. What's being ch what's what are the what what's our code now on on these right now we haven't truly identified the at least in our code the usable area portion so this is new it is we've talked about the buildable area and when we talk about build buildable area we've not necessarily spoken to the blue area which is the which is the blue

cleans it up it Let me see. And we wanted to ensure that that buildable area can hold at least the lot coverage that's allowed on the lot. So making sure that at least 20 or 25% depending on what that lot coverage is, at least that portion of the lot is also buildable. And just for clarity, the buildable area 20 to 25% of the lot size, not of the usable area. So we're not shrinking their buildable area. Okay.

Sorry, one more question. Okay. So, if if a property if that stream buffer was any larger, would they not be able to build on that property if they didn't meet the 30,000 square foot minimum? Potentially. Potentially. when when a lot like they do have to receive um a an inspection from Fulton County to confirm that they have they wouldn't get approval from Fulton County if they were anything less than the 30,000 square feet or that just means that the lot needs to get a little bigger to have and that's because of septic requirement correct okay

okay so some Some of the re feedback that we received um regarding natural area was um a concern for clearing and privacy um especially from existing homeowners when there is new subdivision subdivision construction or home construction. So the objective here was to preserve a natural area during construction. Um so we have three slides that that are graphics that will come after this but a couple of things to keep in mind. We wanted to offer some sort of a temporary setback during construction to accommodate or to consider existing neighbors um that are adjacent to the property. It would be an undisturbed buffer that's during construction with limited disturbance, no disturbance while construction is underway. And then once construction is complete, then that buffer will be lifted and the setbacks will function as they appear in the code right now. So, um, we're going to talk about minor plat street frontages, um, natural areas as they relate to rear to rear and rear to side setbacks and then side to side to rear and side to side to backyard privacy. So the first example we have right now any new minor plat that proposes AG1 lots are exempt from the rule viewshed. So the proposal would be right now with that with that application it means that a lot can be developed and the entire frontage cleared on that lot because there's no requirement to meet the rule of viewshed. The proposal would be to have a natural a 20 foot natural area along the frontage except for a 50- foot access area that allows you to penetrate

the site perpendicular, do all of the construction, all of the clearing and then that 20 foot natural area would be maintained. Um so the construction entrance in the driveway in the 50-foot access location and the natural area would remain undisturbed um understory um sort of in a natural condition um if the area is nonveated. Now there could be some requirements just depending on the situation the lot that perhaps some some plantings would be uh introduced um or suggested at review and it would mimic the viewshed requirements right now. So question today major plat 60 ft rural viewshed minor plat zero this major stays at 60 this is 20

that's correct that is correct and can can plantings be made in the 20 foot or does it have to remain exactly as it is? No certainly the plantings could occur in the natural area the you just can't take anything out of it.

That's correct. The rural viewshed's intended to be unintentional, right? To not be very organized, to appear to be organic. When we meet with applicants, we encourage them to have plantings that are in groups, um, and to occur very naturally, um, not very formal and organized. You know, one tree every 30 feet on center, nothing like that. We want it to mirror the requirements of planting in a viewshed right now. And is it the same requirements as the 60 foot rural viewshed regarding secondary septic systems and all that stuff? That is correct. Because so they can disturb it for septic. Correct. Or

even in the on the minor plat frontage for the 20 if septic if that is the only place primary can go. We did allow an exception that it could go within the natural area if that's the only place that works. And of course secondary primary primary primary. Yes.

Let me go back. So the minor plant, we feel comfortable tonight giving it a a green light, so to speak. Um that we think that this would be uh something that we could are confident to move forward with tonight. The next item though we feel like might need uh a little time to review. This would be a suggestion for any new rear construction to an existing rear or side. So in this graphic the aerial depicted on the left uh shows houses that are built on the northern lots that are existing and developed. They have a existing tree buffer in their rear property line. The lots on the south side are undeveloped. And so the idea of the natural area buffer would be to apply a 50-foot temporary construction buffer while construction is underway. There would be no disturbance prior to that CO I'm sorry, prior to the con the CO of the house. Once that permit is issued though, that 50- foot buffer would be lifted and that 50 foot rear setback would function as normal. So the premise here is just to protect the existing homeowners from construction noise seeing it all that.

That's correct. And the and the ability to go into that 50oot buffer and clear that whole area. Now, once the construction this the certificate of occupancy is issued and that buffer is lifted, a a resident may want to go selectively into that 50 foot, but they will they will require a permit and follow all of our requirements as if they were getting a normal permit. Mhm.

The next concept for a natural area buffer would be any new side construction to any existing rear. So in this example, the aerial to the left shows that there are lots on the off of a private street that are developed and they have a rear property line that is adjacent to a new construction underway that has a 25- foot side setback. So this is a 25- foot side setback to a 50ft rear. The proposal here would be to implement a 40-foot temporary construction buffer along that side property line for the new development and again until construction has completed and then that buffer would lift and the 25 foot side setback would be active. Yeah, I can already think of some. This will be deferred, right?

Yeah, we are proposing this. It's yellow. Okay, cool. Like that. Like that. This caution caution. Yeah.

And this side just is some things that we ran across looking at as we started looking at minor plat requirements. Um, we found some additional sections that that needed some cleanup. First of all, the preliminary plat section actually had some references to minor plat. So, we didn't want to confuse the fact that minor plat follow their own process. They don't go to planning commission or follow a traditional preliminary plat. So, that first bulleted item is simply removing any references to minor platinary plat section. The second one is under a section that just governs procedures for how plans are submitted. And so some items that we already obtain at various points in the process um are now tied to minor plat submittal. So the Fulton County Health Department does have to sign off on all minor plats. So there is some level of analysis that happens and plans that are submitted to the county. So, we are requesting that whatever plans, whatever reviews or approval plans have been done for the county also be submitted to the city. That'll just give us another look at soils and slopes and just help us as we're looking at what proposed lot layouts are. And the last one is any shared items between lots. So, on some of the um large lot minor plats, there might be a drainage pipe or a driveway that's shared by multiple homeowners. So just verifying that location as part of being a shared item for the development. Again, these aren't aren't changes to things that we don't already receive. They're just putting them at a point in the process that allows for a little more review of that minor plot. Okay. And section five has to do with asbuilts. So an asbuilt is actually a record of what is actually built on the lot. So it takes the plans and then it

looks at what was actually done and then makes any adjustments to represent what was built in the built condition when the the home and the driveway are completed. Quick quick questions s just for purposes. Now from five on are we going under unfinished business? Is it I know it's all one presentation, but is that fair to say that one through four were C under zoning and now we're talking unfinished business?

So there is there's um two items under five that are in the building code under unfinished business, but there's also two items under five that are in the UDC. So five is split between unfinished business and the UDC change. Okay. Um, six, seven, and eight are all within UDC. So, this is the only one that has a piece of the unfinished business. Okay. So, going forward, are we good like going through one presentation together and then because we're going to have public comment on both? I mean, is that fair to say you give that? Okay, let's roll. Let's go.

Okay. So, similar requirements in that building code as well as the the UDC. First thing we do and I mentioned this on the lot coverage is the the final plat requirement. So the blue box on the the left talks about stating maximum allowed lot coverage and then if an asbuilt survey is required that's noted on that plat. So the the blue box in in our site plan example shows this is a 1acre lot 20% lot coverage and it lists the square footage that's available for lot coverage at the time that that building permit is obtained. So, we already know what that maximum lock coverage is. Then the then this we'll go with this example site plan. So, then the the home begins construction. And in this case, it's it's going to be constructing the orange outline around the the foundation of the house. And when that foundation is at a critical point, when it's either within 5 ft of a setback or an easement or it's within 5% of the maximum lot coverage, we would request a foundation survey. So before the the walls of the the building go up, once that foundation is laid out, a survey would be done just to make sure that it's within the setbacks and that it's not substantially larger that would would risk it um going over lot coverage. So that is that's the first step and that one is actually only part of the building code. So that's going to be that unfinished business item is the requirement for the foundation survey. Once the the home is constructed, once the driveways in the pool, pavers, any patios, at that point an asbuilt survey would be required if that lot coverage is greater than 10%. So, if the construction's happening on a large lot, a 10acre lot, and they're only at 6% of of lot coverage, they wouldn't be

required to do the survey um to verify conditions only if they're greater than 10%. And what that asbuilt survey does is it shows all the impervious surfaces. So, it shows the house, the driveway, again, the pool, the the pavers, picks up all of those, and then it provides the lot coverage calculation. So it takes adds those up and divides it by the total law area. It'll confirm the setback compliance and state the remaining coverage. So in this case, the green box here showed that 20% was allowed and then it adds up the building as well as the other impervious which equates to 15%. So there'd be a statement on at the time of the certificate of occupancy that says this particular lot has 5% coverage left. So if they wanted to come back and do something, we already know they have 5% left.

So I'm sorry for the questions because on this one, I'm not as familiar with the building code. So this is new today. These requirements are new. Is that correct? Yes. So give me some real world examples of the issues that y'all are facing.

What why this is being uh required? So I can give you an example. Um the development right over here off of Lacoma. So Echo at Crab Apple that is a development that is tight. So we are requiring foundation surveys and as it's critical in that situation because from a building standpoint those structures can't be any closer than 10 ft without additional fire protection or fire rated walls um for those houses. So in an instance like that, we would want to make sure that that five that within being within five feet of the 5% that is needed. So in situations like that, we work with the builder to let them know upfront that that foundation survey and likely an asbuilt uh will be required for those. Likewise, if there is a structure being proposed within uh a short distance of an existing stream buffer or an easement, we want verification that that structure is indeed outside of that easement. Now, if we're looking at a three or five acre lot property, you have room for error, so to speak. But on one acre lots, especially if there are restrictions on the lot, there could be problems. So we want to ensure that the foundation survey andor the asbuilt is done to confirm lot coverage and then to confirm location of the proposed structures

measuring twice cutting once. Exactly. We'll say to you in evaluation of the trend data we did find a few instances where the plat said exactly 20% and we did a little spot checking. That's

kind of what I was getting at and did find some var variances in uh in the number that was actually built. Okay, this next one is an item that this one is a a yellow light that we feel like needs a little more little more looking at the the proposed language to make sure we didn't didn't leave anything out, didn't aren't missing some unintended consequences. But this is a a neat idea that came up through the public input. And right now we're calling it the agricultural tract exception. And it really relates to being able to subdivide a larger parcel more than once through the minor plat process. And by doing that, we're tying it to a larger tract remaining at least 10 acres and somewhat mirroring the the Kuva program where if that track stays stays in place that that there can be additional divisions of one one acre to at least one acre um carveouts from from that larger parcel. Um, again, a little bit more work to do on this one, but did want to bring it up that it it came up through public input and seems like a a good pairing for something we can do that's similar to a CUVA. And the KUVA is a conservation use value assessment. It's a uh tax um program that Fulton County Tax Assessor manages that allows lower taxes on a larger partial if it's um maintained in that size and function for 10 10 year time frame. A little bit more to just make sure our program aligns with what that how that program is established and we don't have

any anything that would would not be an allowance with that. This is an easy one, quick win. This is to clean up lake lots. Right now, our existing code says that lots that have or adjacent to a lake. Um, those property lines can go to the center line of the lake. They can also go to the center line of a common or maintain a home. We want to clean that up. we would rather or we would propose that the center line that the lots the property lines extend to the common area and not necessarily into the uh homeowners and HOA's property. So, this would be an easy cleanup and we gave it a green light. Another quick win are cash bonds. So right now uh this would be an effort to clarify our bond requirements. Quickly the city accepts two types of of bonds a cash bond and a shity bond which is also known as paper bonds. Currently the city is holding long outstanding cash bonds without timely resolution of some of these projects that they're associated with. And so the objective would be to eliminate the liability for these recurring long-term bonds and to avoid um auditors asking the same questions year after year uh regarding this amount of money. So, the idea would be to for any cash bond that is $250,000 or less, you can present a cash bond and typically the bond terms on the contracts or the agreements are for 18 months. Um, so we would want we would accept a cash bond for anything less

than 250,000 and less than 18 months. Should an applicant come in and need more than 250,000 for a bond or longer than 18 months to complete, we would ask that they either get a shity bond or transition their existing cash bond over to a shity bond. Anything left on that and that concludes our presentation. Okay.

Well, you spent a lot of time with us in small groups and I think you've streamlined it well and I agree with the areas of deferment. Um, no surprises. Thought it was well done. Thank you. Nice job. Taking the feedback, too. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Uh, so we're going to go to zoning item C, agenda item number 26-092. Do we have public I do, sir on this? How many do we have on this? We have um three in support. Three in support and two in opposition. Okay. So, we got 10 minutes aside and we'll get the clock ticking. Okay.

You'll call the support first. Is that

Absolutely. I invite Lisa Collie to the podium. Good evening. My name is Lisa Collie. I live at 14680 Freemanville Road. I'm a longtime Milton resident and a large uh lot AG1 land owner. I've watched Milton's rural character change over the years as many large tracks have been sold and developed into smaller neighborhoods. That trend is precisely why I support the city's goal of preserving what remains of our agricultural and open space identity. There are sever there are several positive elements in RZ2603 that I support. The new natural area buffers, the minimum buildable and usable area requirements, the 10-year preservation period in the agricultural tract exception, and the asbuilt survey requirements will help maintain tree canopy, visual separation between properties, and the rural viewshed that defines Milton. However, from what I've read and interpreted, the current proposals now places additional restrictions, including tighter lot coverage limits, mandatory buffers that reduce usable land, new survey costs, and stricter minor plat review on the properties that have not yet been divided. If this is mis misinterpreted and is instead an option, this needs clarification. These new standards did not apply to the owners who subdivided earlier. As a result, the remaining large lot owners face different rules when considering family lots or future use of their land. The city council placed a moratorum in January of 2026 and has conducted public outreach. However, the two public input

forums had limited attendance and the planning commission voted on March 25th to recommend deferring the item to allow additional time for public engagement. I support preserving Milton's rural character. I also believe it is important to ensure that current AG1 property owners retain the same opportunities for land use that were available to previous owners. I respectfully ask the council to divert action on RZ2603 this evening, extend the moratorum and provide AG1 land owners with additional opportunities for meaningful input before the final decisions are made. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you. Next speaker,

I invite Bill Bailey to the podium. 737 remains in this 10-minute aotment for support.

Thank you, Mayor Mayor and Council. Uh thank you Tracy and Sarah. Uh they've worked very hard at this. Uh been to every meeting and I must say that I learned new things today because this keeps moving. I think the agricultural tract exemption following the KUA is a great benefit to people in Kua like like ourselves and uh allows us to do things a lot easier and subdivide it more than once without uh jeopardizing the rur rural look of of Milton. And I think that's the whole objective of this. Now, I'm not sure which is new, which is old. Uh, and trying to follow all these sections and split section five and two and say that the minor plat needs to be deferred. I hope y'all understand more of what was going on. I've been at every meeting. I've read this thing and I thought, do I have the right document? Uh, so anyway, I I think that we need to defer this and work on it some more. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mayor. I invite Julie's honor Bailey to the podium. Good evening. My name is Julie Zoner Bailey and I reside at 255 Hickory Flat Road, Milton, Georgia. The document before you tonight covers many details on numerous changes, even some that were changed as recently as today. Staff has been working under a tight time frame, meaning the community has had limited time to review all the changes. That said, the community development department has been very open to hearing input, concerns, and suggestions from the community. They have worked extremely hard um and more time might be needed for some of these important elements. The planning commission did comment that they too felt more community engagement and time was necessary. As an aside, I would say that this certainly supports keeping the not less than 30 days notification period. If we're concerned that this hasn't provided enough time, it speaks to two uh text amendments earlier that you deferred and I would ask that you consider why that 30-day period is so critical for our city. It seems one option tonight is to approve some elements and to defer others. I'd like to address some of the items. The agricultural exception or option for minor plats is an important incentive for large lot land owners. It effectively allows someone with a large parcel to have family members build on the land via the minor plat process. This absolutely aligns with the goal of incenting large lot land owners to keep their large lodge which which benefits rural Milton. Requiring an asbuilt survey before certificate of occupancy seems vital given many examples exist of those building a home that identified what they were going to build and then later had different plan showing more built than what had actually uh come in as a plan. So I think the asbuilt is important. I do believe that some buffer requirements proposed are reasonable perhaps when you have a large home and

you have a side and a rear that are joined. I do think that some of the buffer requirements that I heard this evening could impose some ownorous requirements. Uh, one question that came to mind as I listened intently this evening that 20% if that 20% requirement for a buffer is in a rule viewshed along a public road. If that rule viewshed today has no trees, it has that the rule of viewhed is the rule viewshed. would we then be required to create a 20% buffer when the view rule viewshed doesn't really include um trees? So, that was a little confusing to me and I think it it could have some unintended consequences that might require some deferral for some more community input. Uh the varying views on whether lot coverage should be the same for all parcels of similar size. As an example, on private streets, currently it's a 25% coverage. We heard tonight that public streets are requiring 20%. Certainly, and I've been at many of these meetings, there have been people that have inquired, well, if 20% is what's required for the public street, why wouldn't we require 20% for the private street? Why are we not treating citizens, whether it's private or public? Similarly, uh, educating buyers, realators, and developers in advance of a purchase as to the requirements of lot coverage is critical. This document goes a long way in clarifying language that can be proactively communicated, but the specific steps of how that will get communicated, similar to what um Councilman Councilwoman Cookerly mentioned earlier, how are we communicating and are we doing it proactively and early enough and to enough of those end users. We need to do a better job communicating what lot coverage is requiring so that we don't have folks trying to seek variances later and after um they have come forward with a purchase. It was also noted by many in some of these meetings that the board of zoning appeals needs to uphold the four tenants of the

legally defined hardships when variances do come before them. It seems that this threshold for variance approval is not always being met at the BCA, which ultimately can undermine the strength of our ordinances. This may need to be addressed proactively with the BZA so that individuals buying lots not large enough to fit all the stuff that they want to build realize that they can't simply go to the BCA as a matter of course and get a variance. There also have been some suggestions during these meetings for addressing the scale of homes and their proximity to the street. That's not currently part of this document, but hopefully it will be something that gets uh staff's attention in the immediate. I think that that was something that was actually driven from some of your initial inquiry into the moratorum was how do you deal with the scale and some of the suggestions had been if you take that large structure 10,000 foot structure that's fronting right on the road and pull it back so that you have more um scale in mind. Uh again, it's not part of this document, but it should be um hopefully. And I I would just ask that you give careful consideration to the fact that community engagement is important. I think there's a lot of folks that support components of this, but I think the details um are important. The devil's in the detail, as we often have found in the past. I think staff's intent is is positive and good, and that there just could be some language requirements that maybe have not been caught because of the tight timetable. Uh and again I would just say that uh it's important to get it right and I know the moratorum is a concern but I think getting it right during the moratorum is equally important. So perhaps a deferral with some additional time to just ensure that we get it right the first time and that we don't have some unintended consequences. Thank you for your time and your service.

Thank you.

Mayor I'll begin the two that are in opposition. First I invite Mary Kron to the podium. Mary Kunk 600 Hickory Mil Lane and I guess it's a question of semantics if I'm approve if I am in opposition or approve because there are parts that I really do like. So opposition may not necessarily be the right thing. I want to thank the community development staff for the work they put into these text amendment changes. Balancing property rights with preservation of Milton's rural character is no easy task and they have done a great job and they've been so open to feedback and I'm really impressed with their desire to do the right thing for Milton. And while I believe that many of the proposed changes, including the natural area buffer, the asbuilt survey, and the definition of usable area, are good additions, I'm concerned that these and other proposed changes like the agricultural track exception are not widely understood due to a short public review period. And just to review that short period, the text amendment changes were first made available to the public on March 23rd, a little over 24 hours before the CZIM. the following day. No one in community development is to blame for this um as they've been working day and night on these changes and it's obvious that they want to get this right. After input from those who attended the CCIM the evening of the 24th, community development staff made additional changes to the text amendment language and then shared those changes with the planning commission on the morning of March 25th for the meeting that they held that evening. and the planning commission members didn't have enough time to fully digest these text amendments or think about the impact they would have on current and future property owners and the look and feel of rural Milton and they felt that more public input was needed. Consequently,

they voted unanimously to prefer to defer without making any official recommendations. They made suggestions but no official recommendations on those proposed text amendments. I think thorough review and recommendation by the planning commission on zoning changes really is a necessary step before those changes are approved by council. That's kind of like their their little the stopping point because they're so involved in zoning. Um and in addition, very few Milton residents really understand what these changes could mean to rural Milton. In addition, an issue that concerns many Milton residents and seems to not be addressed in these text amendments, something that previous spokers spoke about was and likely was due to time constraints and complexities, the current trend of building the larger homes on one and two acre lots. While they may comply with a 20 25% lot coverage and comply with the front and side setback requirements, because of their overall size, this and this, and the elevation, are they up seated up on a hill? Are they down lower? Um, some of these homes appear much closer to the street, and really seem to contradict the city's influ emphasis on the importance of our rural viewshed. Perhaps there's some way to scale setbacks based on square footage and elevation. And I think that this does need to be addressed in the ongoing AG1 conversation because it's not going to stop. And I don't think a lot of us are happy with it. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that council defer a vote on all but And now it's hard because some of these things changed changed. I think the the the lake lots and the bonds are definite go. It seems like clean up of language, but a lot of these other changes, while they're they're going to be really good when they're fully fleshed out and vetted, I think they need to be more thoroughly discussed in a public forum with subsequent in-depth discussion by the planning commission because we know that changes to our zoning laws, they really need to be thoroughly understood before

being implemented because of the lasting impact they can have on our city. And again, I want to thank you for your time and careful consideration of this and everything else you guys do. Thank you. Thank you. I invite Ben Copekka to the podium, please. How much time is that? That's our final. Your top final is 6:14 and this is our final in opposition for this item. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening, Ben Copeka 14115 Brittle Road. Um ultimately, as others have said, we had a very small amount of public comment available uh to be received in this short timeline. Uh four people attended and made public comment in the first meeting, four people on the second, and another four during the third. Uh the third input meeting was combined with the red road improvements project uh which a lot of those people intended and may have taken away from the input here. Um so how fast did we move? The proposed red lines were made available on March 23rd around noon. The CZI meeting was held at 6 p.m. on the 24th. That's roughly an 18 hour window. Uh to put life aside, review 21 pages of red lines. Those red lines are right here. When entering the meeting, another version with updates that had happened in that 18our window were handed to members as I walked in the door. Upon listening to the presentation, uh the CI the CZIM had the same opinion. We need time and we need working groups to look at this. The time here tonight to do this first reading is not enough time. Ask yourself, have you had time to watch and review these meetings? Have you had discussion with the CZIM members and their opinions and their recommendations? Um, if you are looking at this presentation for the first time, that is not enough time for a decision here tonight. Um, secondly, uh, Mr. Bill Lust stated via public comment, there's more red ink in this document than black ink. That is true. Uh, that statement alone should cause great concern and the red color of this document should visually show you the scale of the changes that are required to lift the moratorum. There are so many changes that what started out as a project to correct the AG1 minor plat process has now transformed into a sweeping change of unified development code. We have fundamentally changed the assignment. Every change this unified development

code has impacts to residents currently and in the future, not just the minor plat process. And once these changes are made, the likelihood of them being changed back is slim. The public needs time to understand these changes. um unsure of facts, but it's possible we don't do a single page of changes in a year, and we're proposing 21 changes in 90 days. Um, additionally, on a personal level, uh, for the property I bought in 2018, it's 1.75 acres. Uh, with these constraints, uh, likely this lot becomes undevelopable. Um, in closing, whichever decision you decide to pursue, whether to lift the moratorum or not, I respectfully request that you give this matter and the changes within the uniform development code uh proposed the respect and time required via public comment, working groups uh with the public and any other opportunities. There is some good within this document and this is a huge ask. This was a huge ask of the city staff to perform in this 90-day window. Please allow the public the time to provide feedback via working session with the city uh to make this a great adaptation of the code so that is effective and usable well into the future. I request no approval as this document sits tonight. Uh no decision is better than a decision that has not been given the time required. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers? That concludes public comment. Okay. I'll close public comment. Um open up for council discussion. First, Tracy, Sarah, thank you. Whole team did a great job. That was a lot of work. Short amount of time. We truly appreciate it. I will put your staff, this entire staff up against anybody. So, thank you. Um, again, moratorum ends what? June 1st. That is that what it is? It's in June. See, Dune

June 9th. Okay. All right. That's important because I think some of these recommendations for deferral are going to be well we won't be voting on that until well past that and I don't I mean just from prior council discussion I don't think we want to extend the moratorum past June I mean that's six month that's a good long time. Okay. Council discussion. Okay. No discussion. Um I think staff has done a wonderful job. They've gr they've brought up some very good points and then we've noticed there are some points I think that need further public input which are those larger items u which I 100% uh agree with. Um, so with that, I'll kind of open up it for a motion. And um, if Steve, what

how are we going to Are we going to go back through this? We have to go through one through five, I think. One through four first. Correct. That Yeah. What do we address? We are we still at zoning or are we in unfinished? We're in C under zoning and one and correct me if I'm wrong, Sarah, but it's one through four. Is that what is under C? So it's 1 through 4 5.1 and then part of 5.1 is with the unfinished business. 5.2 is unfinished business. Six, seven, and eight are back to the UDC. So, and they should follow in order in the packet that was handed to you.

So, we're going to go under zoning agenda. We're going to go through one through five point one one one. Okay. All right. All right. Had one,

Mr. Mayor. Yeah. just as we're as we're doing this and everybody has this sheet, right, that was at your station, right? So again, the objective if the council is going to take action is to make it such that the clerk can identify what we've done so staff know what we've done. So again, I just I I think we're going to need to be very careful um to call out specifically, you know, what is in front of the council and then let them fashion a motion to make sure they're capturing exactly what we want to do business with this evening. So I I'll leave that to you, but I'm just going to be watching, you know, trying to listen to make sure it's discernible what we're doing.

Can can I ask a question and Sarah, forgive me. So are some of the unfinished business items we're about to speak about for the motions. No, we would do those. We haven't gotten to those yet. I just want to make sure because we had not read that into the record yet. And um can council lift if whatever council does tonight, can the moratorum be lifted at any point in time?

Yeah, mortorium can be lifted as as adjunct to this agenda item because because the moratorum is a part of this lift or they're considered sort of the same because the moratorum is simply a part of developing this because once the moratorium is lifted then people get the full utility of this. So that'll be a point where I'm going to need to hear for everybody to make sure we've gotten to the point that we're ready to open the door again and folks come in to to secure their flats and try to subdivide property. So we'll but but when we get to that point I'm sure Tracy or Sarah will let me know at that point a motion would be in order to go ahead and lift it make it clear.

Okay. All right. Would you want to have that motion under the zoning or under the unfinished business? I mean part of part of both. I want it under this agenda item. Okay. All right. Got it. Okay. I open up for a motion from council and feel free to chime in. Sarah going to make a motion on each item that was presented to us. Correct. Correct. The grains and the yellows.

So we're starting with item number one, lock coverage article 13 definitions. So back to the slide, this is the one that created one unified definition for lot coverage across stream buffer, storm water management, and lot coverage. So when we go to the ordinance to amend this, this item is only to amend article 13 definitions for those definitions of block coverage. So this is I'm sorry, 1.1 1.1. Correct. Yes. Yes. So here is the

red line of 1.1. So we're changing impervious cover to reference the sections for shar management lock coverage. We're adding the the text that came out of the the definition for in the storm water management. We brought that up. So it's just a move of um of any material that significantly impedes or prevents natural infiltration of water. Um, so this section while it shows deleted here, it moved up to the main definition and we made sure this list of A through G included what was in storm water management as well as what was in lock coverage. So it's just combining all those definitions of impervious into this single definition at the top. And lock coverage no longer reference. It references back to this definition of impervious and not to listing specific impervious improvements within its definition.

A lot of you're actually removing a lot of that ink to make it more simple. Correct. Okay. Got it. All right. I'll make a motion. And you're making a motion on 1.1, right? Yes. One, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mr. Mayor, I move to approve an amendment to article 13 definitions of the UDC regarding lot coverage as presented in exhibit 1.1 a exhibit A 1.1 lot coverage 1.1. A motion to approve. Yeah. Yes. Second approve. Okay. Uh we're going to do this old school. Yeah. Um Okay. All in favor of council cookerly. Second, I mean motion from Cookerly, second from Kramer. All in favor, please say I.

I. Any oppose? Okay, that's unanimous. We'll go to the next one. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve amendment to article 6, special purpose districts, section 6.3D1 of the UDC regarding lot coverage as presented as exhibit A1, lot coverage 1.2. Second. Okay. Okay, I have a motion from Council Member Cranmer, a second from Council Member Jacobus to approve um the um section 6.3.2. Yeah, 1 1.2. Sorry. Council motion 1.2. You go with that, Kim.

I am I think I'm going to ask uh my clerk that we'll put this in the record tonight just as a crosspollination between what you all are doing just so there's a clear guide, but I'm tracking with what you're doing. I think my my my leaders are okay. Um, all in favor of that motion, please say I. I. Any oppose? That's unanimous. Okay. We'll move on to the next one. Mayor, I'll make a motion uh to defer an amendment to article 6 special purpose districts section 6.3 of the UDC regarding lot coverage as presented as exhibit A1 lot coverage 1.3 to a later date after returning to planning commission. Second.

Okay, Tanyy. And that's Cookerly on council motion 1.3 to defer to a later date to the planning commission. Yeah. All in favor please say I. I. Any oppose? That is unanimous.

Next motion. This is motion uh building usable area. I move to approve an amendment to article 2 general provisions sections 2.1.1 and article 13 definitions of the UDC regarding lot coverage as presented as exhibit A to building slashusable area second. Okay, that's count motion from Jacob, second from Kramer. All in favor please say I. Ianous. Move on to the next motion. Mr.

Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve amendment to article 2 general provisions section 2.1.1, article 3, section 3.1.10, and article 13 definitions of UDC regarding natural area as presented as exhibit A3, natural area 3.1. Second. Okay, I'm just I'm reading this real quick. Okay. Uh that's a motion from Kramer, second from Jacobus on approval of C of council motion three natural area. All in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? That is unanimous. Okay. Next motion.

Mr. Mayor, I move to defer an amendment to article 3 agricultural districts section 3.1.10 10 of UDC regarding natural areas as presented as exhibit A3 natural areas 3.2 to a later date after returning to the planning commission. Second. Okay. I have a motion from council Jacob, second from Cranmer on 3.2 to defer to a later date planning commission. All in favor, please say I. I. Any oppose? That's unanimous. Next motion.

Mr. Mayor, with that comes another deferral. I move to defer amendment to article 3 agricultural districts section 3.1.10 of the EDC regarding natural area is presented as exhibit A3 natural areas 3.3 to a later date after returning to the planning commission. Second. Okay. A motion from Cooker Cooker, a second from Jacobus to defer to the planning commission at a later date. All in favor, please say I. I. Any oppose? That's unanimous. Next motion. I'm sorry, sir. Confirm the second. Uh, that was Cookerly and Jacobus. Yep. And that's deferring to planning commission. Yes. Okay.

Mayor, just a point of order. So, as we're making our way through this, if for some reason, and this is of course up to the council, but if there was an interest uh approving, for instance, four minor plat provisions 4.1, 4.2, 2 and 4.3. I think that would be an order too way. That works. Okay. Next motion. You mean combining them? Yeah. 41 to 4 in English. Is that what you meant? Yes. Punch them together. The attorney just give me a moment to You're messing up my my rhythm. Okay. Did you want them combined or do you want them separate? Are you okay? You can combine it. That's fine.

All right. I'll take a crack. Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve article 3 section 12 6.2 of the UDC regarding minor plats as presented as exhibit A4 minor plat provision 4.3, 4.2, and 4.1. We also second. You good with that, Ken? I Okay. Have a motion from council member Kenmer and a second from council Jacobus. All in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? That was Kramer. Who is my second? Jacobus. I'm sorry. I just thought we need to pause for a minute.

Right. And and and what's what's happening is is we're we're getting caught up in the nomenclature. What was intended for the council to approve right then was 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 as reflected on your cheat sheet. Correct. Fair. Y did that. Y and then this will be the last one for um zoning. Yes. Okay. Are you whenever you're It'll be It's like It's part of this next section that it bounces back again, right? But we'll see it again in Okay. Got it. Okay. Correct. All right. So 5.1.

Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve an amendment to article 12, section 12.6.2 and section 12.6.4 4 of the UDC regarding asbuilt requirements as presented as exhibit A5 as built requirements 5.1 second. Second. Okay. So that's uh Cranmer and Haney to approve. All in favor please say I. Any oppose? That's unanimous. Now can um do you this is the last one for zoning? No. No. We have one more for zoning. Okay. We have six seven8. 67 and eight other. So those are Okay. So those go on both or six, seven, and eight on both? No,

no. 5.1 and 5.2 go on both. So now we're we're going to continue zoning. You will see 5.1 and 5.2 come back at the building code under unfinished. Got it. All right, Mr. Mayor, I move to defer an amendment to article six, special purpose districts, article 12, administration, and article 13 definitions of the UDC regarding agricultural track exception as presented as exhibit A six agricultural track exemption to a later date after returning to the planning commission. Second. Okay, that is uh count motion from Jacob, second from Cookerly to defer to the planning commission at a later date. All in favor, please say I.

I. Any opposed? That's unanimous. Next one. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve an amendment to article 11 environment and article 12 administration of the UDC, including section 11.43A, permit procedures and requirements, and section 12.6.4A final plat approval as presented in exhibit A7 cash bonds. Second. Okay. Okay, I have a motion from Haney and a second from Johnson uh to approve the council motion seven. Um all in favor, please say I. I. Any oppose? That's unanimous.

Next one. Mayor, I move to approve an amendment to article 10 streets and improvements section 10.3.5G of the UDC regarding lake lots as presented as exhibit A8 lake lots. Second. Okay. I have a motion from council member Cranmer and a second from council Kerley to approve U council motion eight. All in favor please say I. I. Any oppose? That's unanimous. Are we good on zoning now? Yes. Okay. So Ken, do you want a motion on the moratorum now? We have one more zoning item.

I apologize interrupt. Um the uh other or no wept under part of 4.1.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, that that's right. I think at this point, you know, we're we're sort of done with the zoning items. We have a moratorum that has been in place for a while that as I mentioned previously is part of the zoning process. That's why we put it on. And so it it you could make an argument right now that it is already lifted by operation of its terms. But I think just to make it clear, I think an a motion would be in order uh by the city council um to lift the existing moratorum barring the acceptance of applications for minor subdivision plats in the AG1 zoning district which results in residential lots under three acres in size. Um lift that moratorium. So there's no issue with that not being advertised on this agenda and us voting on it.

It's it's part of this item. Okay. Just want to make sure. All right. And and candidly, as I mentioned, it's arguably lifted by law. Operation apply anyway. This is simply to guild the Okay. All right. Um you hear the motion from so the mortorium. Okay. I was going to say, are you expecting us to regurgitate all of that? No, I was just you say so moved. Do we have to then do these two circle back to asbuilt for 5.1 and 5.2? Okay. And do we combine those two? Just do 5.2 and then it carries 5. Yeah, we're going to do that as So move would be say you want to say that?

No, I'm gonna let Doug do it. He's fine. Mayor, I make a motion to uh lift the mortorium as described by city attorney Kendra. Second. Okay, I have a motion from Haney and a second from uh Jacobus to lift the moratorum. All in favor, please say I.

I. Any opposed? That is unanimous. So, we will now move on to unfinished business. Will the city clerk please the item? Mayor, that item is consideration of an ordinance of the city of Milton, Georgia to amend chapter 10, buildings and building regulations, article 2, technical code, I'm sorry, article 11, technical codes, specifically sections 10 through 93, inspections and 10 through 94 certificates to establish requirements for foundation surveys, verification of lot coverage, and asbuilt surveys prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Agenda item number 2693.

You're all good, right? Do we have any public comment on this one? Mr. Copeka. Yes, we have one. You please call the public comment. Yeah. Uh, is this is unfinished business? Is it 10 and 10? It's five. Unfinished is five. Yeah. Ready? Come on up. I'm sorry. It's 10. 10 and 10. That's 10 and finishes 10. Support. You support opposition almost opposition. Okay, there we go.

Um, excuse me. Thank you again. Ben Copeka 14115 Road. Um, adding to some previous conversation. Uh, a foundation survey and asbuilt survey uh adds additional cost to residents uh who want to build their dream homes in Milton. um specifically um looking at another $3,000 to $6,000 of expense uh for every resident who may build new, modify their existing home or make changes to impervious surfaces on their property uh as the UDC changes are written today. Um I would ask that we try to stop putting the burden on the residents who are living here. Uh if this is made a requirement, make it a foundation survey or an asbuilt survey, not both. and potentially um finding a way to pay for this uh with city funds or a sponsored city surveyor. Um the asbuilt survey is to be used as a policing tool uh by the city. Do not place the burden um of policing on the residents themselves if possible. Um in closing, um again, thank you to Sarah and Tracy. This is a phen phenomenal work has been done and what makes it phenomenal is they have taken the time to take the feedback that was given from the public uh develop it with them and really make it a joint document. So while I'm still in opposition uh I am excited to see what the final product turns out to be.

Thank you. Thanks mayor. That concludes public comment for this item. Thank you. You know, I I will say this is one of those processes where, you know, we're not going to have 100% winners or 100% losers, but I think at the end of the day, we're going to have a a better city in the future. So, thank you, staff. Okay. Motion. Are we only doing 52 or we doing 51 again? I'm gonna leave it to the professionals there. We got counselor. I would only say we have to do what has not already been approved. So, I think we would only need to do 5.2 and 52. Tracy, that was the measure twice, cut once. That is correct. 51 has part two. The 51 had a piece that was

I do think Yeah. It's going to not be as your city clerk, I would suggest that we do that separate because it's a separate section of 5.1 for the building. Well, let's measure twice. Okay. Cut once. Better. Okay. Okay. Well, there we go. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to approve amendment to section 10-94 certificates of chapter 10 building regulations of the Milton code regarding asbuilt requirements as presented as exhibit A5 asbuilt requirements 5.1 building code. Okay. So, we have 51. You want to do 52 with it? Are you good? I'm a good reader right now.

Okay. All right. I move to approve an amendment to section 10-93 inspections of chapter 10 building regulations of the Milton code regarding asbuilt requirements is presented as exhibit A5 asbuilt requirements 5.2 building code second. Okay. Have a motion from Cookerly, second from Cranmer. Um all in favor please say I. I. Any oppose? That's unanimous. Thank you both. Appreciate it. Thank you. Hey, before you leave the podium, I want to tell you the amount of time you spent with us individually was phenomenal. It was really and in our small group, really appreciate it. Quick answers.

I only have big ones. Repetition, repetition, repetition. We just asked I asked some of the same questions several different ways and I appreciate the consistency. It was very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. And I will say as we go along with this, if we if you see anything that needs to be modified or changed, let's, you know, go through, let's I mean, we're we're not opposed to getting things done right. So, we certainly will. The feedback from you all and the public has been incredible. Thank you. Appreciate the time. Thank you.

Okay, we will now move on to new business. Will city clerk please sound the item? Mayor, that item is consideration of a blanket right-of-way acquisition approval for the State Route 140 Arnomill Road at Green Road intersection improvement project. It's agenda item number 26112, the deputy director of public works, Mr. Rob Del Ross.

Thank you, Timmy. Uh, good evening, Mayor and Council. Next item we have for you is an important milestone for the intersection improvement at 140 Arnold Mill Road and Green Road. Uh this item will approve the rightaway budget for acquisition at this intersection uh per our approved standard operating procedure and our city acquisition policy. The project will build a new traffic signal at this intersection along with widening uh Green Road and Birchdale Drive to accommodate new dedicated left turnbays and construct a 10-ft wide sidewalk connecting the Oakmont, Glen View, Parkside, and Wateride subdivisions down to the Kroger driveway. Uh this project has been in the works for many years. Uh we did not want to start uh spending city dollars on ride-of-way acquisition until we had the necessary approvals from Georgia D. Uh the acquisition team is already under contract. With this approval, staff will be working with the city attorney's office to close parcels that do not exceed our approval authority. Any justified counter offer by a parcel owner that is above fair market value plus our administrative negotiation value will be discussed in executive session. And here's a list of the impacted parcels. Uh we're seeking your approval for $475,000 for the rightway budget for this project. uh acquisition is funded through Teslas 2. And that concludes my presentation.

Okay. Any questions for Rob? All right. Any public comment? There are an answer, sir. Okay. I'll open up for a um vote motion. And we'll do this electronically, please. Make a motion to approve agenda item number 26-112. Second. Okay. I have a motion from Councilman Jacob, second from Haney to approve agenda item number 26-112. Please place your votes. Lydia, can you flip the screen? Thank you. All right, that motion passes. Uh, yep. Unanimously with Johnson is absent. Okay, thank you. We will call the next item,

Mayor. That next item is going to be consideration of final plat. The development is Lynen Creek. It's land lot 690 and 751 district 2 section 2 of final plat to revise the lot lines between lots six and seven and lot 11 in the common area. Total of 15.714 acres, a density of 0.70 units per acre. It's agenda item number 26113. Sandra Dit.

Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council. I am here to present to you a final plat revision for Lynen Creek subdivision. Um, so you may remember this plat. It has already been approved before. So like I said, this is just a revision. Lynen Creek is located on Cogburn Road just south of the Francis Hopewell Cogburn roundabout. And I sure everybody is familiar with um Countryside Pet Estates and Bethwell Community Center. It's all below that. Um, so here is a layout of the subdivision and basically the changes are to revise a lot line between lots six and seven and lot lines between lot 11 and the common area that contains the detention pond. Um, so you see these are very small adjustments. So I tried to highlight them and kind of point them out to you. Um, they're just very minor adjustments of the property lines between these properties. So there is no change in the subdivision size. It still totals 15.714 acres and the number of lots is not changing. It still consists of the 11 lots. Um so based on the submitted drawings and supplemental information, this final plat meets requirements of the city codes as they pertain to development of this property. And here is a copy of that final plat that was submitted with the revisions. Um, any questions at this time?

Any questions for Sandra? Okay. Any public comment? There are none, sir. Okay, we'll close public comment, open it for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve agenda item 26-113. Second. Okay. Okay. I have a motion from Council Cranmer and a second from Council Haney to approve agenda item number 26-113. Uh please place your votes. Okay, that's unanimous. Thank you. Thank you.

You please call the next item. Mayor, the final new business item is consideration of a waiver of conflict between the city of Milton and the city of Alpharetta Alpharetta related to legal representation by Gerard Davis LLP in connection with the proposed intergovernment agreement for inmate housing at the Alpharetta Jail. It's agenda item number 26114. Our city attorney Kerard.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I know that you seem like it's every other agenda we're having one of these. And really what that is is a testament to the fact of the collaboration that's going on um among the various metropolitan jurisdictions in the north metro. So cheers to to Milton for doing this. You all know also the drill. This is something where I think that Milton and Alfreda both derive a benefit from having one team work together on these documents. If there is truly an intractable conflict where I cannot represent your interests zealously, I'll get out of both sides. But at this point that's not the case, Mr. Mayor. Okay. Any public comment on this? There is none, sir. Questions for Ken? Open up for a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve agenda item number 26-114. Second. Okay. Have a motion from councelor Kerley and a second from Jacobus to approve. All in favor, please place your votes. Okay, that's unanimous. Uh, council have anything to report on? I I have one quick thing. I was remiss earlier in not thanking you, Mr. Crooff because I think I was there when you were sort of idea ideulating how we could do better with uh minor plats and you said you know maybe we should open this up and take a look at it and you were the muscle behind everything. So I should have said that earlier. Thank you.

Mustle muscle. I know the brains. the brain. All right, that all right. Um, with that, I'll have a motion to adjourn in executive session to discuss personnel litigation andor acquisition. Okay. Is that it? Okay. Business. Yeah. All in favor. Okay. Have a second. Second. All right. Me and then Hy. All in favor say I. I. All right. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, hold on. Hold on a moment. All right, let's reconvene. Can I have a motion to reconvene? Motion to reconvene. Second. Okay. Um, and Johnson, all in favor say I. I got it. I have a motion to adjurnn. I could second. Hy Johnson. All in favor say I. I. I. All right. Dismissed. No.