City Council - Regular Meeting

No microphone yet. It's 8:30. I hereby call this work session to order. Please join me for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

We'll observe a moment of silence. [snorts] Thank you. Now we'll have the oath of office for city council post four. Michael, join me at the podium. Land.

Repeat after me. I, Michael, I, Michael, do solemnly swear or affirm domly swear or affirm that I will faithfully execute I will faithfully execute my duties of city council member post my duties as city council member of the city of city Georgia of the city of city I will uphold my responsibilities I will uphold my responsibilities with integrity integity dedication and [clears throat] diligence dedication to serve our citizens. To the best of my ability. to the best of my ability. I will support and defend I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

Constitution of the United States of America. Constitution of the state of Georgia and the charter of the city of city. City. I do further swear I do further swear that I am not the I am not the holder of any unaccounted for public money. unaccounted for public money to this state to this state or any political subdivision of any political subdivision or authority thereof or authority thereof. that I am not the holder that I am not the holder of any office of trust of any office of trust or trust under the government or trust under the government of the United States of the United States or any other state

or any other state or any foreign state or any foreign state which by the laws which by the laws of the state of Georgia of the state of Georgia I am prohibited from holding I am prohibited from holding and that I am otherwise qualified that I am otherwise qualified to be a public officer to be a public officer according to the constitution according to the constitution and the laws of the state of Georgia and the laws of the state of Georgia. I duly affirm I dy affirm that I will act at all times that I will act at all times in the manner manner defended the trust and confidence the trust and confidence placed in me by those I serve placed in me by those I serve I will take pride in all my endeavors I will take pride in all my endeavors

and will treat my [clears throat] subordinates I will treat my subordinates peers and constituents peers and constituents with respect with respect so help me God so help me Congratulations [applause] [applause]

family and then I'll do one with smiles and take a couple more here and I have you come By the way, the the agenda that you sent out last week is different than the one that's online.

Whoever sent it out, the city sent it out, but it's different than the one that's online. I was lucky to have Suzanne called me and go, "Did you know that was a change?" I said, "What? Right. But that's

one two. [clears throat] Just make sure this is off. Yep. I just texted

I just texted. Next on our agenda is selection and oath of office. Mayor prom. Can I get a motion? I'll second that. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose. Motion carries. Miss Brown, meet me at the podium. [clears throat]

You want me to hold it? Yes, please. Register and repeat after me. I, Suzanne Brown, I, Suzanne Brown, do solemnly swear or affirm do solemnly swear or affirm that I will faithfully execute that I will faithfully execute my duties of mayor prom my duties of mayor prom of the city of peach city Georgia of the city of city

will uphold my responsibilities I will uphold my responsibilities with integrity with integity dedication and diligence dedication and diligence to serve our citizens to serve our citizens to To the best of my ability, to the best of my ability, I will support and defend I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. the Constitution of the United States of America the Constitution of the State of Georgia the Constitution of the State of Georgia and the charter of the city of Peach Tree City and the charter of the city of Peach Tree City. I do further swear I do further swear that I am not the holder that I am not the holder of any unaccounted for public money of any public money. Do this state to this state

or any political subdivision or any political subdivision or authority thereof or authority thereof. that I am not the holder that I am not the holder of any office or trust of any office or trust under the government of the United States under the government of the United States any other state any other state or any foreign state or any foreign state which by the law by the laws of the state of Georgia of the state of Georgia I am prohibited from holding I am prohibited from holding and that I am otherwise qualified and that I am otherwise qualified to be a public officer to be a public officer according to the constitution according to the constitution and laws of the state of Georgia and laws of the state of Georgia. I duly affirm I do affirm

that I will act in all times that I will act at all times in a manner be fitting in a manner the trust and confidence trust and confidence placed in me placed in me by those I serve by those I serve I will take pride I will take pride in all my endeavors in all my endeavors and will treat my subordinates I will treat my subordinates peers and constituents with respect. So help me out.

Congratulations and thank you [applause] Could you grab a quick picture, please?

All right, big smiles, guys. One, two, and three. Take a bunch here. One more. One, two, and three. Thank you so much. Uh, public comment. Thank you. And I can hardly hear that microphone. Yeah. Uh, thank you. Agenda changes, council.

No. No. None. Uh, and we do have Laura Johnson with us today. She might not be on the cameras, but she is down below and she is voting as always. Uh, consent agenda items A through [clears throat and cough] J. May I get a motion? Yes, Madame Mayor. I'll I'll make a motion that consent agenda items A through J be approved. I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I.

I. All opposed. Motion carries. Work session discussion item A personnel policy revisions Dr. Tia Alston Big. Good morning, Madame Mayor and Council. Um, this item before you uh are recommendations to revise our current personnel policy um for our uh city employees. We have um quite a few here and I want to just go through these at high level. If you do have any questions, I'm happy to take those. Um so the um first item is emergency pay. Um our policy that uh speaks to um how we govern ourselves in the event of extended emergencies. Um the change here is to provide um double pay for all hours worked for our employees. our promotions policy. We want to revise that to allow city employees to be promoted during their probationary period um if there um is an opportunity and that helps us to improve improve our flexibility for um hiring and retention as well and selection of the best um city employee for these vacancies. We also want to revise our merit pay policy so that a promotion no longer disqualifies someone from receiving u a merit increase. This also helps with retention but more so with morale and it also encourages our employees to um try to or you know um to uh basically submit for a vacancy um to be promoted. um helps them encourage them to do that

when we um improve this policy. We also want to revise our disciplinary policy. We had uh two levels of oral discipline in our policy that just doesn't make it just doesn't make sense. And so we want to eliminate one level of oral counseling. It's the same thing as an oral reprimand. And this also brings us in line with um clear enforcement as um well as having a solid documentation trail for discipline. Our police overtime policy um we are revising this to 84 hours instead of 86 hours. Um we're currently operating in this manner already and we just want to make sure that the language in the policy reflects that field training officer pay. Um we are recommending one additional hour uh for each day of field training and that recognizes the training workload as well for those field training officers. Take-home vehicles, we're recommending that the charges to our city employees uh are to be removed, which is also currently how we're operating. We just want to make sure the language reflects that. And we also updated some positions in that policy as well that uh currently have take-home vehicles already. bereavement leave. This policy um initially uh stated calendar days for bereavement leave and we want to change that to hours because we have different shift personnel and so that also helps us to um be in line with our uh clarity of our policy and practicality of our policy. We have also recommended to add um Junth as a a holiday um to keep us in line with the federal calendar as well. And then lastly, our retirement awards and parties policy. We increase those values um due to inflationary adjustment. And

so um we want to make sure that we account for that and we think we have done that with this policy rewrite. So, if you have questions on any of those uh recommendations, what I will say um is that these um recommendations help to bring us in line with um I will say best practices, helps to bring us in line with um legal compliance and as well as give us a competitive advantage um as a city as it relates to recruiting and retention. Can I ask you a question, Dr. Tab? Is there anything in here that is unusual or aberrant?

Absolutely not. I will say that we've done extensive research on these policies as well as partnered with our um directors and assistant directors for their feedback as it relates to operations. And so, um most of these revisions, um to me were long overdue. But again, it also brings us in in line with current day local government practices and and again just helps us to stand out. Um and and just to be, you know, in legal compliance. We always want to be in legal compliance with any policy update. I don't think any of these recommendations um from an HR uh opinion are, you know, far-fetched or out of line or or anything, you know, way over and above what, you know, our target market other cities are are doing. So, we just want to bring ourselves up to speed.

All right. Council, any questions? I have just one comment.

Yes, sir. [clears throat] Most of us were on holidays for the last couple of weeks up shows up this this shows up in our mail like oh my gosh 140 pages of documents we had to read and digest of which your portion was 21 pages I think it's 21 or 22 pages of fine print. I would suggest that there does not I don't have a problem with them per se at this point. I've read them only once, but I do know I'll have questions on them that um I don't think we want to get into here. We may get into with the city manager after the meeting. So, I do appreciate you doing a lot of work. It's just a nice surprise when you come back from the holidays when you haven't done any work and then on that Monday you get this document of 140 pages and be ready. So, just a for next year maybe.

Thank you. That's the only comment I had. Do you have any questions so far? Not at this point. I will have them though, but I don't have them. I just haven't I haven't had the time to really digest everything because it came as a surprise. Any other comments, council?

Yeah, I do. Um, I had I had several questions with regard to the change in the take-home vehicle issue and got a an email from Justin explaining some of the things that had happened. It's a little nebulous in the email with regard to exactly when some of the stuff was changed. Here's my overarching issue with all of this. When we have a written policy in place, if there is a decision that's made anywhere along the trail that we're going to do something that's contrary to what's in the written policy, then either I think we need to change the written policy to reflect what's going on at that time as opposed to stockpiling all of these changes until we have enough that it comes forward as you know a a major document change like this. Maybe in the days when things were not done as electronically as they are now and as easy to change, maybe stockpiling things before policies were changed in writing and then having them printed up to hand out to staff. I don't know what the the reasoning was in the past, but I know now it's so easy to change a policy to bring it to council one at a time as something comes up and something needs to be modified. That way the council that decides that this needs to be changed, it gets done in public on the day as the policy gets changed in writing to reflect all the changes and then there's no dispute like me finding out that the take-home vehicle policy of the employees having to pay that that was changed during a former city manager. That's quite a while. That's a long time to have the written policy not reflect what we're doing. And to me, that's that's not acceptable. But I think we can fix that very easily by

just making the changes as they occur. I agree with that. As I I think I stated in my email, too, that I agree with that. I I do not want to do that moving forward. And that's that's why we have a shopping list of all these things that need to be upgraded in a manual. And it's really just an awful lot to look at and and kind of come to grips with. And you know, it's not like, oh, well, we need to change this. It's like, no, we changed this quite a while ago. We just didn't codify this into the policy. And that's one of the reasons we're bringing it forward, Councilwoman 2, is because for me, I want to be I want it to reflect what we're actually doing, right? Is I don't want to sweep that under the rug, per se, or anything like that. I want it to actually reflect. If we change a policy, we change it.

I agree. That's it. Comments, Miss Johnson? No, I think any questions that I had on this um um were answered previously. So, I would be in support. Mr. Polich? Likewise. Thank you. All right. Can we be ready, Mr. Holland, in January 15th meeting? Um that really depends upon this guy to my right here. If he can answer the questions and get the information that you're you're in town and everything. Oh, yeah. Okay. Then the answer to that is yes. All right. Um, do you want to just table this until our January 15th meeting then? We aren't asking for a motion. It's just a discussion item. Okay. No motion necessary. I know, but it was it's meant to be a discussion item and then voted on next meeting.

All right, that's fine. Thank you. We'll revisit in January 15th city council meeting. Appreciate it. Work session discussion item B, introduction to upcoming text amendments. Shayla Reed. Good morning, mayor and council. Okay. Good morning.

All righty. Um, so before you, there are six um updates on various text amendments that we have either been in discussion with directly with you or two that we're bringing to you as an introduction today. Just to give you um insight, I have provided in the staff report there is a um summary of each item. Council um summary gota Excuse me, sir. Okay, my apologies about that. Okay, so there are six items before you. Um, the first four are items you've heard of and the latter two are going to be ones that I introduce to you tonight. The very first one is the sign ordinance. So, we've discussed that about how parapet is defined and how it allows for roof signs. At this time, the planning commission has provided a recommendation for you and we're scheduled to bring that before you um in the next couple of council meetings so that we can finalize that text amendment. And you'll see that I've given the um status in bold. So, that'll help with the conversation. the cosmetic tattoo and micro blading that has as well has gone before um the planning commission and they're ready to bring their recommendation to you and that is in an upcoming meeting as well. So those two are ready for action and we'll bring that in the next few council meetings. The next two items are currently with the planning commission and not ready to move forward at this time. That would be native and invasive plants. They're still discussing those items and you'll [clears throat] see that at their planning commission meeting. They're still figuring out the language for that and we're allowing for that to give a little bit more time on that one for native and invasive. Next, you'll see the short-term rental. That is an item that is coming up to the planning commission for their consideration that you have initiated back in August and we'll be moving that one forward in their January meeting. And the latter two are two new items. So, I'll give a little bit more

introduction and information on those to give a little um background. So, the parking ordinance, the planning commission has asked that The planning lo

the planning I'll speak loud. The planning commission has asked that we consider there be an opportunity for short-term rental. Sorry, I said short-term meant parking. Um the planning commission has asked that we give consideration for golf cart parking in our parking ordinance. We do not currently regulate golf cart parking. And they feel that if we're connecting or making a requirement to connect to commercial properties for our paths, we should also allow for there be regulations to allow for at least um they mentioned a recommendation of five parking spaces for golf carts. So, they are asking to bring that to you to allow for there be an opportunity for you to initiate that if you're interested in moving that one forward. The latter one um is one where we found that proposed developments have had an opportunity where we're seeing LED lighting to be proposed in new developments. Our code currently restricts that. However, that is the new standard for lighting. We've seen that over the last at least close to a decade. Um so our code has not been updated during that time to allow for there to be LED lighting. So staff is asking for there be an opportunity to initiate that particular text amendment as well. Ma'am, Madame Mayor, that concludes my report.

Um, can I ask you a couple questions? Of course. Yes. There is a possibility that because the way the calendar falls in February during our winter break that we might pull the February 19th meeting ahead by a week. Can we still accommodate that on these two items, the cosmetic micro blading and also the short-term rental? Yes, ma'am. We just need to advertise now. Okay. Okay, I'll do that. Um, I have one more question. the UDO committee, they're going to be will they be addressing like golf cart parking and LED lighting as part of this whole project?

Yes, ma'am. That was actually what they called a um kind of like a quick win for them. That was one of the items that they felt we couldn't wait until the adoption of the UDO. So, they wanted to identify some of the projects that we could have as a text amendment now before the actual UDO's adoption. So, yes, ma'am. That was brought to them for that reason. All right. Thank you, council. Any questions? Yes, madame mayor. I got um a couple of questions. When it comes to the short-term rental, um are we in time for uh the rentals to be put out there for people in our city who want to rent their properties for the upcoming World Cup? Is it I see you've got it February 19th approval. Is that still enough time for the county to take care of it?

That's over the summertime. So, we do have enough time now. So, we'll be moving really quickly. It's in the planning commission this month and council for the following month. Good. That's one question one. Question two, I I I like the idea of the of the golf cart parking. Okay.

But [clears throat] there are other mobility issues here in this city and I'd like to at least highlight that if you're going to be able to put in parking for golf carts. There's no reason why at that same time you can put in some type of bike racks so that people riding their bicycles, they can park maybe in front of the golf carts. And there's a bike rack there. So, I I just want to make sure we include all the people in this city, not just those who ride golf carts, but also who ride bicycles. And as you know, there's quite a quite a few people in this city that do ride bicycles. So, if they could include that,

I mean, it's not a big deal, but it's something that is going to service those people who ride bicycles in the city to have a place to park their their bicycles. That's a great inclusion. I failed to mention that the city manager actually asked that we look for the entire parking ordinance to see where there's amendments needed for the entire area. Okay. Okay. That's all I have, Madam May. All right. Any other questions, council? No, I was just wondering whether or not there was anything. There's there's no parter [clears throat] portion of this that we have to do a consensus on to move forward or to put in front of the council because the way the one was worded, I forget which one it was now. That do we need to do a consensus on the latter two? The latter two. Okay.

So, that would be the parking one and the LED lighting. Yeah. We're asking I'm asking for a potential motion either today or at the next meeting to initiate the text amendment process. You need a motion for that on on those two items only. The other ones have been initiated already by you all. But even now that I brought up a suggestion on adding the the uh the bicycle parking there, is that going to slow down the process or do you just say an amended with a bicycle? I don't even need to say that because all you're doing is initiating text amendments to the parking ordinance and to the lighting ordinance. Okay. Can I get a go to planning to to discuss? So moved. Can I get a second? Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Uh so we just moved those two forward to uh to the plan next planning work session discussion item C. Cross town tunnels design. and Dave Borowski.

Good morning. Dave Morowski, city engineer. Uh I think this project will will uh a lot of people are going to be happy to see this moving forward. Uh for so for discussion uh the one of the 2023 lost [clears throat] uh projects was to evaluate our existing corrugated metal tunnels in the city. And specifically they emphasized the ones on cross town. uh most folks probably know them by the the Taco Bell tunnel and the the region's bank tunnel uh to be looked at and uh potentially replaced with bigger wider tunnels. So we uh we we started by doing a feasibility study for these these two tunnels to see if it was possible to put bigger tunnels in. And uh the feasibility study did come back and said that that we would be able to do this uh without significantly you know raising the the road profile for for cross town. So that was that was a good thing. Uh the the feasibility study estimated this to be about 1.4 million for for construction. So the next step in this process would be for us to actually do the the actual engineering design and everything and create construction plans. So uh during this phase, you know, we're going to survey it. We're going to do all the uh necessarily necessary hydraulic modeling [clears throat] and stuff because these things are practically in the flood plane uh where they're where they're located and and we're going to redo the path connections to them to make them uh better because I think everybody knows how goofy the the entrances are to some some of these these tunnels. So, we're going to fix that uh and whatnot and make them

uh ADA compliant. So, we've been working with Pond and Company on this uh because they're they're one of our uh uh associated transportation engineering firms that we have we've worked with and uh we we'd like them to to do the design for these. Uh they gave us a proposal for uh $300,000 to to do this for these two tunnels with an expected timeline of 12 to 18 months. And as I said previously, these projects are funded in the splast uh the 2023 splast for the

for the tunnels themselves and then the uh yes for for uh project 28 in the uh 2023 splast. So we will uh be bringing this back next council meeting for for an official vote. This is [clears throat] just a heads up of what we would like to do and and answer any questions that y'all may have. All right. If I may, um, the design is $300,000. That's for the pair of them. That's for both of them. Um, sorry, what was that again? That's okay. The $300,000 design is for two of them. Yes. For both. And the $ 1.4 million is each. Yes. Yes. And these are [snorts] concrete box tunnels then.

Yes. We're looking at at Yes. Replacing with concrete about 14t wide. Will the uh ceiling height of the concrete box tunnels match the existing highest point on these corrugated tunnels? Uh they'll be higher. They'll they'll they'll be 8 foot tall. That's that's kind of the the bicycle standard is to be 8 foot so that you can get through without knocking your head off. [laughter] Okay. And they always when I'm running they always have water in them. Are we we're going to be able to address the drainage issues? Yes. Yes. We want to get water out of them more efficiently than what they're doing right now. Okay, that's all the questions I have. Council.

Yeah, Madame Mayor, I've got a question that maybe you can answer. Is the number of carts that uh we have in the city that cannot fit through the existing tunnels? What What is that as a percentage of the total number of carts that we have? We we don't know. I mean, we, you know, we don't know how high people's golf carts are. I mean, there's a good many now that now that they're coming out with the higher golf carts, people raise them.

Correct. I I I figured that was going to be the answer. The reason I bring it up is we've got what 12,000 carts in the city. Something like that. Maybe maybe we have 5% or less of the very large golf carts. Maybe less than 5%. I'm just estimating. That's why I asked that question. But now we're going to spend $3.1 million to fix those tunnels so that the big carts can go through where what about the other 85% of the carts that need golf cart paths on the east side where we're missing golf cart paths over there in the north side and some on the south side that need to be built. We're prioritizing building tunnels instead of taking care of golf carts for the 95% of the golf carts that are on the road or on the path today. Seems like it's a little disparaging.

So, here's the answer to that. It's a spa project. That's okay. We don't have to spend it right away, do we? But you have to do it. It's never going to [cough] Can we use that money to build some of the cart paths? It's only for tunnels.

This is only for tunnels. This is this specific project is improvements for corrugated metal path tunnels for existing corrugated ma metal [clears throat] tunnels to be upgraded to double-sided ones. And here's the reason. It's not because of the the reason for this project back in the spos because I was with the group is not for higher golf carts. That's not the reason for these projects. The reason for this project is is because especially the Taco Bell tunnel is one of the most heavily trafficked tunnels in the city. It actually has the same numbers as the McDonald's tunnel under we did traffic counts when we when we prioritized this. The Taco Bell tunnel has the same amount of traffic going through it as the as the tunnel that goes under 74 at McDonald's. And it's very dangerous. It's it's only 6' 6 in high. I have to lower my head when I walk through it. Um even lower golf carts scrape the top of it when they go under it. You would know that. Um

Councilwoman Brown. And have you scraped it? Yeah, I have too. And um really it's for sight distances [clears throat] because you can't the Taco Bell tunnel and the other tunnel across town you cannot it's a you're gambling when you go down to them uh to see if anybody else is coming. And making them double wide and where you can see as you're approaching them just makes it so much safer and allows people to cross without having, you know, cross each other without having to go one at a time, back their carts up. uh just because of the volume that go through these tunnels. It's not about the the height of the carts at all. That wasn't even I don't even think that was discussed when we were uh prioritizing this project on the SPOS with the SPOS group.

Any other questions or comments? Yeah, I I do I want to follow up on this. Um, in the issue of of uh prioritization, uh, this one has come out of the blue in my opinion, uh, where we've been talking about fixing and building golf cart paths all over the city, which we've been waiting for for certainly five, six, seven years, and now all of a sudden, we're going to be building tunnels or fixing tunnels. I I just think the prioritization might be a little skew. No, the the approach is these this is for design of the tunnels. It's not for construction yet. And the paths you're talking about on the east side

and Sar Road and some of these other paths that we prioritize that aren't sposed, they all have already are already in design or already finished design and we're acquiring property. So the east side paths are happening like they're in design. Um so then those are SPOS as well. They're different ones. So I mean this is for design and all the other ones that you're discussing are also in design already. Okay. matter of prioritization, at least in my opinion, but uh that's why we have a council. They're being prioritized as well. All right. Any other council member comments? No, I ripped my rainfly on the the one. So, we all have Yeah. So, just had one.

I mean, I understand the importance of it. I I like Clint wondered where in the grant pecking order this really should fall, but the fact that it's a specific splice line item is a different measure for me. So,

well, as as someone [clears throat] who utilizes tunnels as a kid riding a Taco Bell, it's the same exact tunnel. And you know, when I was growing up here, we didn't have raised golf carts. So, I know raised golf carts isn't one of the factors, but even if we say it's 5% today, I'm thinking about 10 to 20 years from now when we may even have more enhancements to golf carts that we're not prepared for, we don't envision right now. So, as from an infrastructure standpoint on the core feature of Petri City, I I find it as a very necessary improvement and hopefully there's more tunnels that we can improve in the future. Thanks, Council Member Johnson.

Yeah, I would say likewise. Um, if and if you lived here in the '9s, there was a flood like we never saw. And that tunnel was [clears throat] full to the top. It was a river through there. So, I mean, I think all of us I can't go through that tunnel without Yeah. hitting my rainfly. And I I'm happy to see that this is this is being addressed. All right. Uh item next work session discuss discussion item D transportation improvement program grant application grade separated crossing to connect Booth and Macintosh high school areas. Dave Borowski.

Yes. Uh this project uh well uh the ARC they uh put out a call for for transportation projects uh last month for their upcoming fiscal years 27 and 28. And specifically, they're they're requesting scoping studies or construction projects that that have u intersection safety or pedestrian uh related things with them. Uh in addition, they specified that the construction projects need to cost at least $4 million. So, we uh in in wanting to apply for for this this grant, we reviewed our projects and uh basically uh went through all of the the Splash projects and and all of our other projects to see what would meet these requirements. We came up with with the the Splash project for the the bridge crossing for connecting Booth Middle and and uh Macintosh High School. So, we uh would like to apply for for that project for a grant. Uh the the the grant window closes January 23rd. So, it's kind of tight and we've got several things that we we will need to submit and and one of them is a is a resolution of support from city council. We we included a draft in in in your packet. We anticipate total project cost of around $10 million with a local match of two million. And this would include the this this total cost would include the bridge and the path connections them to the bridge all the way to uh the Peach Tree East Shopping Center. So that's that's that's why the cost is so so high. Um, and since they're splice projects, we'll we'll have uh money available for for

the match. Faget County has graciously agreed to sponsor uh the city in this application. We'll basically do all the work uh with the assistance of a consultant. Uh did my mic and uh the county will function as the funding agency to distribute the money to city uh from the ARC. There's actually uh there's actually two splast projects. The bridge is in the 23 splast and the uh the cart path connections are in the 2017 splast. the there should be there will be adequate funding for the uh the bridge match, but we may need to transfer some funding from uh the 2017 SPLS contingency just to cover that portion of the the project. So, uh we'll at the next meeting we'll we'll bring this back for uh appro uh to request official approval of submitting a a grant application. Uh, were there any questions on this at all?

Council have questions. The only question I have is if if there's still money left from the 2017 splast, can you find out before we sit down and make a decision how much contingency money there is is remaining in that so that we know what we're pulling out of there and what still remains. Yes, we can work with finance on that. I [clears throat] think I already have a spreadsheet on it, but yeah, I'll send it to you. Okay. Any other questions, council?

Yes, madame mayor. I've got a comment to make and see if there's an answer to it. This comment, uh, most of these type of uh, uh, funding and grants are tied to a number of questions that are asked in the grant application. One of them that is asked is the safety issue. And in this case, obviously, it's a bridge that's going to connect two schools. But they also look for proof. Why? Why do you need that? Is there or are there crash data at that and around that area between golf carts and pedestrians and Highway 54 that we can include in this document to show that yes, there's a safety issue here, not just the convenience issue of getting students from one side of the street to the other side of the street in a short distance. So, if there's some type of crash data or accidents or whatever you're calling them to put into the document, that will help to strengthen our position so that we can get this. I understand that's the way the feds do it when it comes to federal uh uh federal loans. They look for crash data. Do we have that, Dave?

Yes. If if you recall uh few weeks ago or or month or so ago, we worked with the county with the safe streets for all program and uh one of the things [clears throat] that came out of that was that corridor was listed as a I can't remember the the name of it, high impact corridor or something uh that relates to pedestrians and safety and things like that. So that's we'll be including that in the the you will include that into the Okay. So, there is there is a safety aspect that is being put into this. That was really my my general, you know, thought on this. So, thank you. Yes. Any other questions?

I had a question. Um, would a decision today um help the process if you're on a time constraint versus in our next meeting? I mean, if he's saying Sure. I think it's time. He's saying the the deadline was what? January 23rd. 23rd. I mean, I wonder if we just move forward with this one. You all can vote on this tonight. We can vote on the resolution also. Yes, ma'am. Yes, sir. Okay, Madame May, let me make a motion. Oh, please. Yeah. Madame Mayor, I make a motion that we approve the resolution that is attached to this document and grant application

and grant application inclusive of the crash data that I brought up to make sure that's in there so that we can get this uh completed in time. Can I get a second? Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Work session discuss discussion item E resolution TIP grant application for the state road 54 corridor study.

Yes, this is uh a second application along the [clears throat] same uh the same thread as the previous one with uh going through the ARC and the the the TIP funding. This one is specifically for just a scoping study slash uh traffic study for the the 54 corridor. Basically going from from Fagatville all the way to uh into uh Kawita County on 54. The uh we're we're working with Faget count. Faget County is taking the lead on on this particular uh grant application. and and partnering with us, Fagetville, Fyet County, Kawita County and whatnot. So, several jurisdictions will be involved in in this and we have basically have to do the same resolution of support for it. The uh we don't have a complete cost of this study at this point. In talking with the county, we're thinking it's going to be around 500,000 uh for the study split among, you know, several jurisdictions. So, the the match should not be significant for for us, but we're wanting to move forward with this this project as well. Were there any questions on this?

Uh, similar to the previous discussion item, would it be helpful to have a motion today? and you know that this has been a a pet project of mine for a very long time and uh I have been pushing this. So I'm so glad that we brought it to this point. So I'm certainly in favor of this to move forward. And Madame Mayor, do you want me to make the motion to please? Madame Mayor, I'll make a motion that we approve the resolution and the grant study for the project. Has it got a number on it yet? I'll just say the transportation improvement plan grant application for the state road 54 corridor study. Second.

I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Uh next item F, public participation ordinance. Before we start, council, what what do you want? You want to make it four minutes and eliminate the 30, right? I think I've talked to everybody. I was going to do a whole presentation. I can bypass that willingly. If you want four minutes and third and eliminate the 30 then let's just move forward with that. Any comments? Not at all. I can certainly be in favor of that. What do we need to make that change? Jasmine Justin. Just a motion stating such ordinance.

I'll do the motion. I make a motion that we amend the public participation uh policy in our [clears throat] um charter ordinance um to allow that each citizen making a public comment has four minutes total and that the uh provision that restricts it to 30 minutes be removed completely. Second. I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose. Motion carries. Thank you. Looks good. Yeah. I'm looking for the next line item number. Give me one second.

Uh next item. HVAC replacement purchases for fire station 84. New agenda item A.

Yes. Uh on on this one, we're actually uh we are requesting uh a council approval of this today. Uh we would like to replace uh two split systems uh at uh our fire station uh 84. They're they're definitely in need of replacement. Uh we want would like to go through our current mechanical uh contractor that we had uh approved at some pre uh previous council meeting. Uh the cost of these two new split systems is $40,574 through Shoemate Mechanical and uh we're just requesting approval to purchase those. All right. Can I get a motion? [snorts]

Madame Mayor, I move that we approve the purchase of two new split systems in the amount of $40,574 from Shoemate Mechanical under the terms of our annual contract. I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose. Motion carries. New agenda item B, fiscical year 25, budget amendment, mefield paving, Jonathan Miller.

Good morning, mayor and council. Uh, this item is [clears throat] approval of a change order to the paving contract as well as a budget amendment. So staff's prepared cost estimates for not only paving me drive and other areas throughout the me complex but um also a new road that connects to the lower lot that we've been needing for a long time that comes off of Rockaway Road. Uh the estimates were developed using unit prices from the 2025 paving bid. So we're still using paving prices that we got at the beginning of last year for this project. Um, and then, um, we've we've completed all of the original contract roads in the paving bid. So, those are done. And when you take that into account, what's left in the actual paving bid, and we have a a budget amendment to uh, put $595,000 back into the paving bid, that is the LAMIG money that we received in that second round. So that's additional paving money we received from the state um

from from the ARC sorry no lame. So the local maintenance and improvement grant that we get that's usually an annual thing but the past two years they've done an additional application where we could get additional funding. GA it. So usually we do it once a year but the past couple they've had extra funding so we've applied for those those second you know. Thank you

hits. Um so with with that and what's left in the actual paving bid after everything's completed is about right under a million dollars. Um to complete the projects at ME it's about $1.3 million. So we're we're asking for council to approve the budget amendment and also approve a $400,000 change order to Atlanta Paving to to complete those projects. Council, any questions?

Yes, madame mayor. I've got question on this one. We had that new entrance on the south side going in. I remember discussions on that in previous councils that that was um going to be adjacent to the building of the uh town homes that are in the property that's along um Rockaway Road. And I also remember that there was going to be discussions to split the cost of that particular portion of the road between the town home uh developer and the city. I don't remember any conclusion to that discussion. I believe Justin has Justin.

That's still going to happen. Um I went I think it was after the retreat last year where we talked about this and I did go back and talk with Richard Ferry with Scarboro. They did agree to [clears throat] pay for part of the driveway because uh the way it was designed last year was they would also do a curb cut off of Rockaway. We as a city wanted to eliminate that curb cut because we don't want, you know, curb cuts every 100 ft from each other. So, they did decide to redesign and come off of our new driveway once we construct it. We did ask them about possibly them doing the paving for us. um got with Ted really couldn't do that. I'm the problem.

But it actually I think it's cheaper with us using Atlanta paving. It's gonna be cheaper for us to use at our contractor than have them do it. Um so what we're going to do I've already talked with Richard Ferry. We we're going to go back to them and eventually bring an agreement before you all for them to reimburse us for their portion of the driveway. So yes, they are going to reimburse us.

So it's not split. It's just a partial reimbursement. It's going to be based on I think what we decided to base it on when we talked with them was how much they're going to have to pay for that curb cut they were originally going to have that le that led into the into the uh apartments. Take how much that would have cost and put it towards our driveway um which was a couple hundred,000. So they will be giving us a portion of that driveway reimburseed

uh in an agreement. Question for Ted. Um, are we on legal grounds here that we're going to be having other than verbal conversations, something that's going to be trans, you know, we're going to be getting trans uh um transporting money over to us? If they're going to want to use our access point, which they are going to need to, then we're going to have the agreement ironed out. And and if they don't, then we won't grant them we won't grant them the use and the access. Well, if that that would then they'd be back trying to get another curb cut. Correct. For their own. That would be the other side of this, right? Which we control.

Yeah. We also could deny that. But ultimately, there was no way with the public works bidding law to fit it into them doing the work without bidding it out. Agreed. But um as far as their portion of payment is what I was really looking for and that was what we originally had talked about is getting going going to split it but it's not going to be split and we'll get a portion of it back. I I don't know because we aren't done with the negotiations yet. Okay. So should we move this forward without that negotiations done and that's a council question. Yeah. We've got it covered. We're legally protected. I think so. Only because we'll deal one way or the other. We need to build this road for access,

okay, to the park. What we get back later can we'll figure out, but ultimately they're going to need the access. So, I feel pretty good about what we're doing. So, if they don't they don't comply with us, we can deny them [clears throat] access there. They're going to have to deal with a curb cut and that's going to require some engineering aspects to it. Okay? I don't want to say that we could flat out deny it, but there would have to be some grounds to do so. Okay? And I'm not an engineer.

Talking with them, I'll tell you they want to come out of the new driveway. That's what they want. And we will negotiate with them about what they will pay. We already have a little, but we haven't we haven't finalized it like Ted said. Justin, did they indicate why they wanted to use our driveway instead of the a dedicated one? Not having to do I think they agree with us that doing a curb cut up there is doesn't make sense for traffic. [clears throat]

All right, council. Any other questions? We have the uh recommendation in our council packet on page 104. Can I get a motion? Madame Mayor, I make a motion that we approve uh agenda item 01-26-02 uh budget amend fiscal year 25 budget amendment for me field paving in the amount of $400,000. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose? No.

Motion carries 41. Thank you. New agenda item C. Appointment of board member to the Faget County Development Authority. I have Jasmine, I have your name next to that. That's correct. Yes, mayor. Um, in council, we are asking for council to approve a designate to serve on FCDA. The uh current board member Jim Coul, his term ended on October 1st. However, um the bylaws do does state that the mayor and council shall appoint one taxpayer residing in Peach Tree City to serve on the FCDA for a term of four years. So, this individual once you all appoint, we will notify FCDA and they will serve um the remaining time of the because no one was appointed, Jim has continued to serve, [snorts] but as of this time, we're asking for you all if you're ready to uh submit a to vote on a designate to serve.

Thank you. Can I get a motion? Madame Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we appoint Councilman Clint Holland to the FCDA for a term of four years or the remaining term of four years. I guess I can second that. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose say no. No. Uh motion fails. Two three. Can I get a different motion? Um, Madame Mayor, I move that we appoint Virginia Gibbs to um be the board member for the Fate County Development Authority. Do I have a second? Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All oppose. No.

No. Motion carries. 32. Thank you very much. Public hearing a variance request from rear setback 103 Harris Halt. Shayla Reed.

[clears throat]

Do you have to read something? I'll do the protocol afterwards. Mayor Good morning again, mayor and council. The item before you is a variance at 103 Harris Halt. The property is on R1 single family residential as shown here on the map. Um you're seeing here on the site plan where the um home has been constructed. It was constructed as your staff report identifies back in 1976 I believe is the date. Um during that time we have identified that we believe that the um existing deck and porch was constructed during that time in the 70s. Um we're seeing that there has been no um outside of the building permit there's been no additional um uh permits or requests for those two different structures. Um during that time when it was constructed was en encroaching into the 30-foot setback that was required back in the 70s. um they have asked for a new building permit to repair the existing porch and deck as it has aged. And so um as a protocol to our policies and procedures, well take it back the ordinance as as a protocol to the ordinance, we have to ensure that everything is existing is within compliance, which is why the applicant has asked that we reduce the 30foot setback requirement for this structure for the rear to 17. Um here you're going to see where that aged porch and deck is shown for the site. And that concludes my report, Madame Mayor. And the protocol is as follows. When the public hearing is open, members of the council will become hearers. No action on their is no action on their part is in order until the mayor declares the hearing

complete. The city staff has presented the request and has provided an assessment of the compliance of code. The mayor will then allow up to 10 minutes for speakers on each side of the issue to present evidence. No individual member of the public will be given more than five minutes to speak. Time limits may only be extended by a majority vote of council and will be divided equally between those supporting and those opposing the issue. The mayor will recognize the applicant and those supporting the issue to present evidence. Remarks will be limited to a total of 10 minutes. Next, the mayor will then recognize those opposing the issue to present evidence for up to 10 minutes. Prior to closing the public hearing, city staff and the public will be given the opportunity to ask questions of either or both sides of the issue. When the mayor and council are assured that the presentation of evidence is complete, the public hearing shall be ended and the council may then debate the issue and render a decision. All speakers of the public are asked to follow these rules. One, please wait to be recognized by the mayor. Two, come to the microphone and state your name and neighborhood prior to making remarks. Three, keep individual remarks under five minutes and do not repeat comments. and four, address all comments to the mayor. Thank you.

Thank you. With the presentation complete, I'll open the public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes Ah, is the applicant here? And do you wish to speak? Sure. You can take the microphone and you can fix it to be more comfortable. Thank you. Speak into it and see what happens. I think we've got you. I'm Danny Marcato. No, she's not. Can you go turn it on? Hold on.

Sure. I'm Debbie Mado. I own the house. We had trees hit the deck back in May, so it's actually been damaged. And while looking at that, determined that there were some code issues. The structure has been there since 1976. We are fixing it, replacing it in the exact same footprint. We just

Thank you very much. Uh with that, I'll open the public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor? Seeing none, is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I'll hereby close the public hearing. Council questions, comments um the only comment I'd kind of like to make at this point is there are five properties that share a border with this particular property. Um there are letters of support in the packet from um 203 double trace and 105 Harris Halt. I would have liked to have seen letters or hear a comment from the other neighbors, but lacking that we have to proceed.

Yeah. So, any other comments? We're replacing or she is proposing replacing existing on the existing footprint. Uh to me that means it's high time. This was built in the 1970s and we certainly encourage our neighbors to improve their properties. Any other comments, council? Um, it looked like the homeowner maybe had a comment to in response to Councilwoman Brown's comment. Was there something? Would you like to comment on that? Sure. Take the microphone for me. One more time.

We actually got letters signed from the people on either side and the lady directly behind me that it's her property line. The other two don't really get that. No, that that wasn't in the packet though, was it? Two were in that I saw I think she's Thank you. Okay, go ahead. All right, council. Any other questions or comments?

Yeah, I mean just when I was looking at this, I had the question of whether this was existing with the house originally, but you're saying yes, it was. Yeah, I think it was built so so far back that we don't necessarily have the the paperwork on that, but um but yeah, agreed. Some of these some of the homes in this area predate our ordinances and I think this could be one of those situations. All right. Uh can I get a motion? Uh madame mayor, I move that we approve um public hearing 12604 variants request for rear setback 103 Harris Halt. Second.

I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you for coming in today. Public hearing B2605, variance request for new curb cut 479 Crab Apple Lane. John Schnik.

Good morning, Mayor Council. Uh my name is John Schnik. I'm the assistant city engineer and I'm here to present on this variance for uh the curb cut at 479 Crab App Lane. [cough] So, you can see here the property is marked with the red dot. It's in uh zone R43. Um the property currently has a driveway all the way on the far right side of the image and they are requesting to put in a new curb cut more centered on their property. Um, this being a collector road, the city ordinances require all curb cuts, all residential curb cuts on collector roads to acquire a variance before being installed. Here are some images provided by the applicant of the view from their current driveway location and the view from the new location. Thank you. And then the last thing I'll mention is that as part of their application, the applicant did obtain a site distance survey from an licensed engineer evaluating the site distance at the new location as opposed to the old. Uh the engineer measured those and also measured a third location uh approximately in between the two loca the two the existing and the proposed. The third location or what's mentioned as location two in the engineers report is the one that meets current uh requirements for site distance. Uh if council decides to move forward with this variance s staff recommends that you limit it to location two as the chosen spot for the curb cut because it meets all the safety requirements.

Okay. Thank you. is the applicant here and would you like to speak? Yes, please. [clears throat]

Could you get closer to the microphone? I can't even. That's better.

The driveway put in in 1978. 1978 it was there was no school, there was no power line as there was no golf cart path. Uh unfortunately now the circumstances are when you pull up on our drive in or leaning out as you get to the path you have to to see to the east you have to go across the path. So we have had a number of um close calls really more so with golf carts, kids on bikes because you again you cannot see uh due to the elevation the power lines the the trees the retaining wall at the higher elevation. Now moving that out is is really too much. You got water meters. You'd have to let all you'd have to move the power poles. It's [clears throat] it's it's a lot of work. So, we also are in a situation where if you look across right at Crab Apple Elementary School and the crosswalk there is uh uh school time school traffic. You can't get out left or right of my driveway for about a 30 to 45 minute window. So, moving it made sense. We we had to wait. We've reszoned uh the property had been all reszoned. It was a 10acre initial spread. We moved it. I had to open I merged two lots so that we could then uh move the driveway, which is when I found out it's a neighborhood collector road requiring some sort of variance. Um we've we did the engineering study. Uh we'd like to move at 95 ft. We have

about 300 feet of road front. There's there's not a lot of uh um other neighbors in back. I got neighbor across the street and next door to us are all uh in favor. They they've built in similar times and they they know uh what what what we're up against. I just want to move at 95 ft. All the engineer mentioned 47 feet. 47 ft just came out of uh the engineering studies saying that you can meet a 330 ft view east and west whereas the 95 ft I can't see 330 ft east but I think it was 260 280 ft cars are not really an issue for us it's I can see as I get out it's it's crossing that golf cart path that really is uh um our big concern.

Thank you. I I noticed in the council packet the recommendation from staff was that location too. Are you agreeable to that? Certainly better than what I have. So it it would be much safer to be moved out. We would like the 95 ft. Um 47 ft was just a number the engineering report came up with that met uh a dot thing which I don't believe is a written require I can't imagine many homes in P Street City have a 330 ft left or right out of all their driveways. Is that a yes? I'll accept that. Uh yes as long from where it's at. Yeah.

Thank you. Can I ask you a question? If you don't mind, stick around since you're there. Um, or should I wait? If you don't mind, if you don't mind, um, go ahead and have a seat, but don't go far. Uh, with that, I will open the public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor? Seeing none, is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition? Seeing none, I hereby close the public hearing. Uh, Council Member Brown, can you step back up to the microphone, please?

Thank you. I I drove past your property. I looked at this. I agree. You guys have definitely got a a problem getting out of your driveway, but you're almost directly across the street from the entrance to the elementary school. Correct. Okay. So asking this, you know, the elephant in the room is the elementary school at this point. So would it be better for you to move the full 95 ft away to avoid traffic from the elementary school, even though that's not the best sight vision, whatever it, you know, I mean, yeah, great question.

So So moving at 95 ft, what that does is also puts me out of of the traffic lines. So even at 47 ft at school time letting out, I can't get out. I can't go out of my driveway and go east from from my existing driveway. At 47 ft, I still have cars lined up down Crab Apple. At 95 ft, I'm past all that. It's level. I can see everything I need to see. But Crab Apple is is a two-lane road. You're still sitting there at at traffic time. Is that true? They line up. They're stacked up on the road both ways. Yeah. Um picking up kids. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I I didn't go past your house during school time. I went, you know, over the Christmas vacation, but I could see and I know so many of the other schools have, you know, where traffic gets backed up out onto the street. And that's why I wanted to clarify that. So, it's your opinion that the 95 foot would be better for you for consideration, not just the 45 ft. Yes. Correct. Okay. So, I think we need to kind of like take that into a good point because uh you know clearly school's in session 200 days a year. So, or 180. Yeah.

Can can I get a staff comment on that fact? I I I can see in our recommendations that the following conditions would need to be are recommended as being adopted. And one is the curb cut should be at location two. Okay. I I guess I we all probably want to understand that recommendation a little better. Yes. Location two is the one that the consulting engineer is recommending because it meets the site distance requirements. The the 95 ft does not. The site distance requirements for cars on the road. Yes. Yes. I'm not sure that's the issue to your point.

You know, are we at liberty to to approve the 95 foot. And what are the implications? The implications is that uh council would be approving something that doesn't meet engineering standards. Well, what he has right now doesn't meet engineering standards either. Correct. Under under the current circumstances. So, right. But with the opportunity to correct that, right, it's uh it's uh location 95 or it's location two, which is the 47 or whatever it was.

Dave, taking a look at this drawings here, it seems like the 95 ft uh opening is going to give you a larger sight line than a 47 foot one. Did I Did I misunderstand that? Yeah, the the engineer says that location two, the 45 one, is the one that meets it.

Right. I I heard you say that, but I didn't get an answer. And if you move it another 45 ft down the road, is the sight line a problem at that point? And having driven over there, it doesn't appear that that's going to be an issue of a sighteline. Maybe it wasn't tested by the engineers for a sight line, but at the same time, it appears to be um a pretty good a pretty good location for plenty of sight line in both directions. He did evaluate it and Oh, he did. It's not in the report. And it's in the report and it says that it doesn't meet the requirements. It doesn't meet the requirements of sighteline. Correct. Wow. I I I can talk to that real quick.

This is the report. Yes.

From the 47 ft line back to the 95, there's about a two to two and a half feet uh push back. So, so what he's saying the the site engineer and we had a surveyor come out as well is that although you you don't clearly get a direct sight line couple more feet back on the road to achieve the 330 ft you know it still gives me what two I think it was in the report 260. Again, our issue is not uh is not with the cars in that regard. We don't have any issues looking left and looking right and seeing vehicles coming. What it does give me is the sight that I need to cross the path and bikes and carts.

Thank you. Good explanation. On page 139 in our packets, we've got that letter. Yeah. I just don't uh what I'm on what I'm seeing on that particular page is a sight line on from two different locations. Is that what I'm reading? Location one on the left side of the drawing. You want to pull that up? It's the last page on this so you can everyone else can see what I'm talking about. I guess we're not okay. Um so what I see is that the site and line the sight line on uh location one is the one at 45 ft. Is that correct? Location.

No, location two. Okay. Location two is the one at 45 ft. Location one is at 95 ft. Correct. And the the problem is is the drop of grade on uh on item number uh what is this? number one on this side. Location two, there's a there's a big drop in grade because there's a hill involved according to the drawing on the right hand side. See the see the grade with a big hump on it? But I think what they're measuring is the sight distance for him pulling out of his driveway right

onto the road. It's dropping down on both sides. He can see further. Correct. I think part of the issue is that location one is further around the curve. It it's hard to to see. There is a slight curve that centered almost on his existing driveway. So, as you continue around that curve to location one, you get less sight distance because you're further around the curve. And that that's sort of that factors into sight distance. Location two, it sort of splits the difference and still has good sight distance to the east and they both have good sight distance to the west.

Okay. I was I was just looking at the topography there with that big bump. You're telling me that that is not in consideration. You notice on the location number two, it shows uh propert uh what is that? uh prop property grade there and it shows that there's a big hump there. What you're saying is that really doesn't exist on a sighteline. No, that's the proposed grade. The other part of the engineer's recommendation and we we put this in the staff comments is that that that little hump has to be graded out. Has to be cut out and that's at the end of the drive location too. It is on their property. It's um I don't know that you can quite see it.

It's to the east here. is just to the east. But it would be a part of the work would be taking that amount of dirt out, grading that out to make a clear sight line. Okay. I got to say, um I can't imagine a a condition under which we would opt against the ashtto standards. No. And with that in mind, I would say that I would be in favor of this with the four recommendations, four [clears throat] conditions that are shown on page one. I think our attorney is going to weigh in. I just had a question. Are is he abandoning the other curb cut? That would be that would be one of that's one of the recommendations.

I just want to make sure because that was the whole purpose of the less curb cuts on collector roads. I just didn't want to Okay. Great. Council, um does Okay. Regardless of which way we go with location A one or location two, um does anybody have any problem with putting in an additional requirement that we establish say 180 days for him to remove the old curb cut based on like 180 days is after the completion of the new driveway.

That's fine. That' be fine. I mean, it's just to make sure that because on his on his drawing and I I don't need you to get back out, but I think we got this covered. But he actually clearly identifies the proposed removal of the, you know, the currently existing driveway that's going to be taken out. Um, and since we're trying to make sure we're giving him a new curb cut, I'm just trying to assure writing that the old curb cut gets put back to a regular curb. That's all. Okay. Yeah. Anything else? Council, thoughts on location one or location two? Council? Um, Madame Mayor, what was your You just made a comment and I wasn't sure which one you were.

So, if we look on page 124 of our packets there is a list of four conditions that staff has added. I got that. And one of them the uh first one is recommending location two because it's a standard of the ASHTO which is the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials and that's one of the conditions that staff I was going to say I don't want to do anything that doesn't meet engineer engineering requirements. So, I understand that it's not the um the ultimate wish of the the property owner here, but I think, you know, we we need to go with meeting our our engineering requirements.

Thank you, council members. Any other comments? I can make the motion if you want. All right. Let's see if Justin has maybe not. All right. I'll take a motion.

Okay. Madame Mayor, I make a motion to approve agenda item 01-26-05, variance request for a new curb cut at 479 Crab Apple Lane, provided that all four of the conditions the planning department recommended or adopted as outlined in the cover memo in the agenda packet. Plus one other condition be adopted that the section of the old driveway labeled as existing concrete driveway to be removed is removed within 1880 days of the completion of the new driveway. I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I.

I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Uh council staff top picks. Um, I would like to see us revisit something we left hanging at the end of last year, and that is that massage ordinance. This is not our alcohol ordinance. It's our massage ordinance. Jasmine, can you comment on how we left it?

Yes. So, um, in 2022, the mayor and council uh, approved a revision to our ordinances that establish a regulatory fee for massages. This was, uh, at the request of the police department. we were having some issues some with massage uh establishments. So we established this regulatory fee certificate within that ordinance. It it does not allow for spas or massage locations to sell or serve alcohol. That's in uh 42-405. Uh the request has come from a well-known spa company probably about a year ago that has asked uh they do say that sort of part of their hospitality is to sell or serve alcohol um as an offering. It's mainly champagne uh or wine and unfortunately our current ordinance in the massage does not allow that. We have been in contact with our police department. They don't feel that is a problem to remove it. However, we wanted to hear from council to see if that's something you want us to explore more. Um, and as we explore it, it it may also include some addition if you all do want to look at that to our alcohol ordinance to add sort of a hospitality permit of sorts, but as of right now, no uh alcohol can be served at any location that uh does massages essentially.

Okay. Thank you. What I remember is that we have at least one retailer or commercial establishment who feels this location in Peach Tree City is an aberration. This is the only one of their chain that prohibits alcohol. And so I, you know, I'm envisioning a bridal shower or something, going in for a massage and a glass of champagne. I I council, I would like to hear from you. I'd like to revisit.

Yeah, I don't have a problem revisiting those. I'm wondering if though, and I I've heard this before, Madame Mayor, so I I'm in agreement with you, but at the same time, should we be looking at nail salons also uh for just alcohol, wine, or champagne when they're having their nails and their toes done? They are allowed because remember the issue is in the massage ordinance. And even though they do provide a slight hand massage, our massage ordinance does uh sort of exempts them from falling within the massage ordinance.

Okay. So that's two different your apples and oranges here. We're talking about uh the massage parlors are one. The nail salons are another. And the nail salons, can they serve alcohol? Yes, they can come. Just making sure I understood that. So I I don't have any issues with this at all. Council, any other comments? So, we'll draft that ordinance and we'll bring it back out of future meetings and have that removed. All right. All right. Thank you. Uh, next item under council staff topics is February council meetings. I think we have a conflict with the schools winter break schedule with our February 19th meeting.

That's correct. Also, um, so we currently have meetings on February 5th and the 19th. Um on the 5th we have actually the week before you all have your retreat January 28th through the 30th and then the next week you're having a work session. Then the following week is uh what we recommending the date to actually be. We recommend for you all to have a a lull between the the February 5th meeting and the 19th and just merge them together and have the meeting on the the week in between because the 12th. That's correct. the 12th because the the week of the 19th is when uh winter break is. So you're saying no meeting no work session on the 5th.

That's what we recommend. Yes. No work session on the 5th and no regular meeting on the 19th and merge them both together to have them. I think a couple of you also have uh some vacation planned. So that's why we're recommending for you all to move it together to February 12th. So be the 12th. So it'll be a morning or evening? Well, we're gonna It would be evening because we have construction going on. So, it will still be an evening meeting. Council member Johnson. And this is coming that the would be on the the tales of us being at a retreat together discussed a lot. Okay. All right. Sound reasonable.

My only concern is the volume of stuff that we have to address in February. Is that going to be any do we have any idea whether or not we're going to put ourselves in a bit of a bind or can we how many two text amendments do you have any uh variances you don't know um from a staff standpoint if you table stuff in January it would move to February and then No, I don't see a ton. in my head. So, we're looking at the 12th at 6 o'clock. 6:30. 6:30. Sorry.

And if you all do have work session items just to discuss, I mean, we can ask to have them at the retreat just to discuss the items if if that's because I I I do have a list. I I'm already creating a list of staff things for the retreat. So, there'll be things we talk about there, which based on how that goes, I'll have an idea of if you want to see them or not. And I can if you do I can wait till March, April. I I mean I I'm just trying to be proactive as far as like not leaving us in a bind with the February the 12th meeting going until midnight. Yeah. I don't know. Maybe we should check with Council Member Holland. Then why would you want to check with me? I don't know. I don't know.

I don't know. You have I don't mind going to midnight. It just came to me, Mr. Holland. All right. I think we're good on that. I know. Michael could take over as the big comment. There you go.

All right. Item number C, annexation study. We decided not to do it a few months ago. I think it is necessary and timely, and I'd like to see us take up uh an annexation [clears throat] study. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity. So, you mentioned previously we released um an opportunity for um an RFP for consultant to come in and give us um a view of our boundaries and see where there may be opportunities to expand those boundaries. Um so if I can just speak on I guess one of the reasonings behind such a plan. Um when you look at how our city is outlined and kind of lays there's u little land left for some of the development that we may um want to entice or or see as a city. Um example of that could be if we're looking to expand in boundaries for uh industrial or for our open space. we would want to see what or or how that plays for public safety, for example, right? How that would impact our um capital improvement elements, things of that nature. So, this particular um project would look to see what boundaries meet state law for annexation because there's a requirement that they must be um immediately adjacent by 1/8 aggregate boundary, right? And so it'll identify what are those boundaries that do that and then identify if public safety could have the response times needed for those boundaries. Um it could go into identifying whether um schools would be impacted, anything of that nature. So today if an annexation comes to staff, we'll be doing that solely ourselves as staff. I think this plan itself gives the opportunity to look at at a broader scale. So when the comprehensive plan comes about in 2027, we'll have a grander idea as to what we're seeing for our future. So that's just an idea of of what this could do for us.

Thank you very much. We had a budget line item. We had a quote that came in under budget. Is it possible we can revisit all that? So we have released um the conversation for the RFP um to allow for that boundary to uh or that study to begin again. that money if I believe a city manager is available. Yeah, it's still there. Okay. So then yes, the money is available. Council thoughts.

At a one point I I really wanted to have an annexation study. I actually ran on that back in 21-22 and then I got to the point where I don't think we need it. We know where we want to have uh annexation done. But in discussions with the mayors, you know, there's the other issues like you had just brought up uh uh Shayla that you know, we need to look at uh public safety. We need to look at other type of governmental stuff. Are we following all the laws etc etc. And then which of the which of the methods do we want to annex by? 60% 100% uh referendum all of those have to be looked at. So, I have uh changed my opinion and I think uh I would support that definitely.

Anybody else? Yeah, for me it sounds like a nobrainer especially from a planning strategic standpoint for the future of the city and what I learned during the campaign was last study was what 2015 2014 2014 from a policym standpoint that just seems a bit outdated. I mean moving forward this is a nobrainer for me. Okay. My concern with it has been and kind of sort of continues to be that if we shine the light on what we're looking at trying to annex or possibly annexing um we could have developers jumping in front of us going after that property. Yep. And that becomes a competition then that

Well, we're not we're not buying it. We're annexing. I realize that. But if if they buy it for a different use than what we're trying to annex for, that would shut us down as far as annexing it because we're not really necessarily looking to annex housing. We're looking for more commercial industrial, mostly industrial as the bigger option. Madame Mayor, may I add to that, please? Please. Um, as a part of your annexation, resoning is required. So when that application comes before you, you have the ability to determine what that land would be during the annexation for land use.

Yes. But what I'm saying is a developer goes out, buys property that would be in our way to move out of our current boundaries and then starts putting housing in there and takes away our option [clears throat] to do something else with that property or have somebody else do something else with that property. So yeah, the difference is that annexation usually comes about when someone wants on or a sewer. The sewer is a big consideration. It makes the property that much more valuable. So I I think a study is called for period. I'll just leave it at that. If we don't do a study, we don't even know what we don't know. If we need a consensus on all of a study, looks like we're going to move forward. Okay.

Question on the study. Uh how long do these typically take and can they be accelerated so that we don't have to wait until 20 27 before we get an answer? Yes sir. That that file can be completed within a matter of maybe 5 to 6 months. I mean it wouldn't take that much time. Um we will have public involvement of course. So we will have public um public hearings and public involvement. So that could be the only lengthy time there. So maybe by July 1st it could be um brought to the council. Yes. We'd have public meetings and things like that. Yes. Maybe not ready for adoption, but definitely ready for Right. Right. Not for adoption, but the public meetings and getting so the study can be done in six months. I I'm I'm in favor of that.

All right. That's all I had. Council staff topics. Any others? Um I I wrote a note dur I did not come prepared to talk about this one, but I wrote this note when we were going through the text amendments to some of the ordinances. Oh, no, Shayla. Hold on to that. Um um when we put in place back in October the moratorum and we talked about making changes to the residential zoning codes, where where are we on that? Because that's not one of the things that's currently like being slotted for the calendar and our 180 days is going to expire by April. So I just want to make sure we're like on track.

So are you asking if it's still underway? Because it is, but I'm I'm not certain what the the question would be. Are you asking to extend it or what? No, I I guess I want to make sure it's underway that you're looking at, you know, amending the ordinance. And if we're not going to be done with that before the 180 days would expire, then we as a council have an option to slightly extend the 180day moratorum. Let me defer to the city manager on that one. I don't really know on that one. Staff is working on it and we understand that the moratorum will expire in April. So we'll be prepared either to put something before council or if we need to extend the moratorum for 30 to 60 days, we can do that. Okay.

Yeah. Um but yes, staff is ongoing doing the work. Any others?

Um one thing, um and I'm not sure I'll do it for the next meeting or if it'll it won't be for the next meeting. It'll probably be Well, oh, maybe it should be for the next meeting as opposed to in February, which is going to be a major thing. and that's to um um put adopting an invocation at the beginning of our meeting on the agenda. So um just letting everybody know that I'm going to bring that forward again. Um, the other thing that I think and maybe this is something that we can put on our on our list of things to talk about at the retreat, Justin, would be um how out of sync we are with some of our appointments to boards and commissions and whatever with regard to our council. And I know I've talked to a few people about this, but not necessarily everybody that um a lot of our the terms start during one council and go into the next council. For instance, our Fate County Development Authority person was appointed by a prior council. It went the term is four years. So that really pretty much covered the entire last four years until October. And I think it should be like a new incoming council now that we have Michael and whatever. We're full counsel again. Some of those types of appointments. Maybe we should start in February or March of a year following the new council being, you know, sworn in.

So, so that's a good uh retreat topic, right? So, anything else? Council member Johnson. Oh, I did have a quick question. Back when we talked about the city of civility last year, was that brought forth by staff or was that brought forth by council? Do we remember? Because I feel like in my memory, I feel like we tabled it until the beginning of this year. I don't think it was. Is that right? I just want to you don't remember. Can we just go back and look? If it's if it wasn't brought forth by staff, I would be willing to bring it forth myself. [clears throat] Um, and we can put it on the March agenda since February. It was brought forth by staff because it was something that had already been approved two years prior and was expiring. So, we just brought it forward to renew.

Okay. So, it would be a staff. Okay. Thank you. Well, bringing that up, I I appreciate that. I was thinking about bringing that up and having that done. The city of civility. We also have, and maybe this is due is the city of ethics, which are also from GMA. Does anyone know what the date of that is? So, when it needs to be renewed? They'll remind us, but we have it. Yeah, I know we had it from before. They send us an email when it's ready to renew. Okay, good. So, we can look at both of those. Thank you. All right, council. Any others? My only question was is are you you want that you want that on the next meeting, the invocation? She's

Yes. Because because February is so jacked up already. So, got it. Just a reminder in our ordinance now, she has to submit the information prior to the date as long she discusses it as a previous meeting. So, say that again, please. She has to submit the the stuff for the packet for the meeting. Correct. And for it to be even though you've mentioned it, you still have to submit the items prior to the meeting. Yes. All right. Any other council staff? All right. Do we have exe

we There was [laughter] again something I didn't have written down. There was a an implication about uh being a bird city. Oh yeah, I said that to Justin. Yeah. Yeah. So, so um is there is there a desire for us to pursue that? Oh, let's talk about it in retreat. Okay. Put that on the list, Justin. I have a list. Do you have a list? Yeah. All right, Justin. Any council staff topics? No. All right. Do we have executive session? Yes, we do. We need to discuss personnel and real estate. Can I get a motion?

Madame Mayor, I make a motion that we adjourn for an executive session. I'll second it for for personnel and real estate. Is it for personnel and real estate and real estate? Okay. P for personnel and real estate. Do I have a second? I'll second. I mushed.