City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the City of Roswell Mayor and Council meeting of Monday, June 27th, 2026. I am Mayor Mary Robichaux and I would like to introduce my colleagues and council members present. First, we have Mayor Pro Tem and Council Member Sarah Beeson. Next, we have Council Member Alan Sells. Council Member Christine Hall, Council Member Jennifer Phillippe, Council Member Erin Brumley, and Council Member Christopher Zak. I will now turn it over to City Administrator Randy Knighton to explain how the meeting is run. Mr. Knighton.

Thank you, Mayor Robichaud, and good evening, everyone. In accordance with Section Chapter 3.70 of the City Code, the City Council shall hold regular public meetings. The purpose of city council meetings is for the public to participate and speak on agenda items, which constitute formal decisions by the elected body. These items are listed on the published agenda, which can be accessed via the city website prior to the meeting and at the back of the room as well. Public comments and questions are essential for Mayor and Council to consider as they contemplate each decision. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please fill out a comment card and provide it to one of our staffs at the back. Ms. Karen Zittimer is at the back. She has comment cards. If you would like to speak on an agenda item, please be sure to receive one of those comment cards. We would like for you to fill those out to ensure an accurate record of the meeting. And those individuals wishing to speak will be called in order of those comment cards being received by our city clerk. We ask, of course, that everyone will direct your comments to the mayor and council. We look forward to a very successful meeting this evening. As a reminder, if you have any electronic devices, we ask that you would place those on silent at this current time. And also, if you need to have an independent conversation, we ask that you would exit the rear doors to the vestibule area. As always, we appreciate your presence here. and we look forward to a very productive meeting this evening, and thank you for joining us. Thank you. Mayor Robichaud.

Thank you, Mr. Knighton. We would like to now welcome Executive Pastor Namadi Hinachu from the Realms of Glory International Church to deliver the invocations.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, and honored guests, good evening. We're all standing. Let us pray. Father, we thank you for this moment and for the privilege of gathering in the city that belongs to you, and for the men and the women who have said yes to the responsibility of leading it. Tonight we ask for wisdom and the kind that sees clearly, that decides rightly, and serves genuinely. We pray for unity in this chamber and for the grace to find common ground even in complex moments. We pray for the city of Roswell, that it will be a place where every person who calls it home has the opportunity to flourish, where families are strengthened and communities are built, and the future is shaped with care and intention. May the work done in this room tonight reflect a genuine commitment to the good of the city and everyone in it. We trust you with what happens here tonight. In Jesus' name, amen.

I would also ask that everyone please stay standing as we take a moment of silence to honor a long-term Roswell resident who passed suddenly on Saturday, Mr. Doug Curling. Thank you. I would now like to invite Roswell resident Calvin Asbury up to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Mayor Robichaud, Council, City of Roswell, please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance 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.

So I'm gonna go a little bit off script. So before we begin tonight's agenda, I wanna take a moment to remind everyone that the fiscal year 2027 community budget survey closes tonight at 11.59 p.m. So you still have time if you haven't taken it. It takes less than five, I'm sorry, that means that you have less than five hours to share your voice on the survey to let city leaders know which services and investments are most important to you as we plan next year's budget. For those of you here in council chambers, you'll find the QR code Everyone can see it, it's back in the back, in back of the room, so it'll take you straight to the survey. If you are watching from home, the same link is available on our Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Nextdoor pages, or you can visit roswellgov.com backslash budget to find the link to take the survey. It only takes a few minutes and we wanna hear from as many residents as possible before this closes tonight. We have had this open for over a week, but so far we have only about 850 respondents and we would love to take that number well over 1,000 before tonight's deadline. So please consider taking the survey if you haven't done it so far. So next is the consent agenda. City Clerk Long, are there any speakers for the consent agenda?

Mayor, there are no speakers for the consent agenda.

Does council have any comments regarding the consent agenda? Do I have a motion to approve? Motion by Councilwoman Beeson. Second, Councilmember Zack. All in favor, please raise your hand. Vote is unanimous. Next is the regular agenda. City Clerk Long, please read the first item.

This is item number 10510, approval of the transmittal of the annual update to the capital improvement element presented by Jackie Dybul, deputy director of community development.

Good evening, mayor and council. This is the annual update to the capital improvement element. As stated, cities that collect impact fees are required to submit a capital improvement element annually. Our program that uses the impact fees are recreation parks, transportation, and public safety. As we know, impact fees are a one-time payment when they are allocated at the time of a building permit. Each year we are required, as stated, to send in this capital improvement element update. From last year, what's being removed? Projects that have been completed under transportation, Hartscrabble Phase 2, Oxbow Road, The pond repairs at Roswell Air Park will be finished this fall. And new station for the Fire Station 28, since that has changed and is a little bit different than what it was going to be. It's a different plan altogether. What is being added is State Route 9, 120 at Hill Street, and Recreation Center and Park Asset Improvements and the Cultural Arts Center. On your list that you have, here's an example of what it looks like based on some of the items on the list. Here's the recreation page. We also are required to send the fiscal year 2025 impact fee fund indicating what was used. We ask that you approve the submittal of the annual impact, the annual capital improvement element for submittal, transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs for their review and approval. Do you have any questions for staff?

City Clerk Long, are there any speakers for this item?

Yes, there is one speaker, Jason Yowell.

OK, I've looked at the list. I don't have it with me. But there are a few things that stand out. One, I'm disappointed to see Oxbow being taken off because it's a hazard. And when the bollards were proposed, I said, Don't do it live with it because if you put the bollards in they'll never come out and it'll never be done and Here we are. That's how it's gonna be I also noticed that there's seven million dollars for an underpass at Highway nine I'm hoping that isn't going to be done because that is a literal money pit. Let's see, I saw $5 million for Founders Park, otherwise known as Mimosa Hall. I don't know where $5 million more is gonna go to. I mean, I suppose there are more trees to be cut. Then I noticed there's $15 million for park acquisition. I can only think of one parcel in the city worthy of acquisition for more park land, and I'm glad to see that there's money for it. I think you all know what parcel I'm talking about. Beautiful parcel, river frontage in the middle of Azalea Park. The fire stations, just in general, I'd stop spending bond money. It's not like we have an epidemic of houses burning down. It seems that the issue is more EMS response, in which case I think we'd be better served doing satellite facilities for EMS to put them more centrally located to where the response times have been perceived to be inadequate. Building entirely new fire stations, what a waste of money. I just don't see the utility in it. There's so much more, and I wish I had brought the sheet, but I forgot to bring it. But those are the main things. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other speakers? There are speakers for this item. Does Council have any comments or questions regarding this item? And just to be clear, Jackie, I just want to make sure, this approval does not constitute any firm budget commitments. It allows the projects to be eligible only for impact fee funds, and that will be determined by this council during the budgeting process which ones would qualify or be on the final list.

That is correct. The only thing this does is indicate that these are eligible to use impact fees if you so choose to approve a project. That is all.

Thank you. Do I have any council comments? Do I have a motion? Council Member Phillippe, do I have a second? Council Member Sells, all in favor? Passes unanimously. City Clerk Long, please read the second item on the regular agenda.

This is item number 10500, approval of the transmittal of the 2045 Comprehensive Growth Plan presented by Michelle Alexander, Director of Community Development.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you so much for all of the work, dedication, and this great community and having conversations about the comprehensive plan. We're here tonight to talk with you about transmitting a draft of this document to the state for review. Before we do that, we'd love to show a video, a little bit giving some of the voices of the team that worked together as a stakeholder committee. to put this plan together and give us, work with us to put the plan together and to give guidance throughout the process.

The City of Roswell is nearing completion of its Comprehensive Growth Plan for 2045, a long-range roadmap that will help guide how our community grows, invests and preserves what makes Roswell special over the next two decades. As part of this process, I wanted to take a moment to give our community a closer look at the work, conversations, and collaboration that go into developing a plan like this, which is updated periodically to help ensure we are planning thoughtfully and responsibly for Roswell's future. I also want to recognize and sincerely thank the members of our comprehensive growth plan steering committee, along with the residents, business owners, stakeholders and of course, community members who shared their time, ideas and perspectives throughout this process. These committee members have spent countless hours discussing opportunities, challenges, priorities and important tradeoffs that will help shape the future of our city for years to come. This video highlights some of those conversations, reflections, and perspectives shaped throughout that journey as we continue working together to help shape Roswell's future.

Roswell's comprehensive growth plan for 2045 is a long-range, community-driven roadmap that will guide how our city grows, invests, and preserves what makes it special over the next two decades.

Building on past plans and recent efforts like the Transportation Master Plan and Economic Strategy, this process brings together residents, stakeholders, and city leadership to identify priorities in infrastructure and economic development while preserving our neighborhood character.

As a part of this effort, a stakeholder steering committee was tasked with evaluating key issues, economic opportunities and trade-offs to help shape Roswell's future.

Throughout this process, stakeholder committee members were tasked with identifying the biggest opportunities and biggest risks for Roswell's commercial corridors.

Yeah, I think the biggest opportunity is to Allow us to reshape the city of Roswell. I know I've lived here for over 30 years and I thought this was a big opportunity to share ideas and understand where the city is really going economically.

I think our biggest opportunity as it relates to the commercial corridors in Roswell is to create some of the live, work, play type structures. That's clearly a driving force within the commercial growth industry as I see it.

I think our biggest opportunity in Roswell is in our industrial flex character area. That's because we have a combination of hospitals, office, warehousing, and these areas are in high demand.

I think the biggest opportunity for the commercial corridors is just the ability to grow in a disciplined fashion that is comfortable within the comprehensive plans of the past and the ones that we're projecting in the future. The biggest risk is quickness to the marketplace, the opportunity, It's there, the risk, it's there, but we can minimize the risk by bringing in professional management and ensuring that the tasks that are prescribed are followed.

Based on what they learned, they were also asked to consider what they would like to see done differently in Roswell's commercial corridors over the next 15 years.

I'd like to see Roswell grow. I think it's important that we bring in more commercial businesses to ease the tax burden on the citizens of Roswell, but also to keep up with the pace with the economy. I think that's important because we always talk about, you know, not a lot of jobs here in Roswell. How are you going to bring jobs? You got to bring in some type of industry.

I'd like to see many more mid-market businesses in 15 years. We really need these as economic drivers. That will be the reason that everyone in Roswell will thrive.

I'd like to see Roswell expand its commercial base to a point where it alleviates a lot of the personal property tax on private property and moves it into the commercial sector. You can do that by bringing quality commercial applicants to the table.

Along the way, the planning process itself revealed new insights and perspectives for those involved.

I think what surprised me most about the planning process was the diversity of individuals at the meeting, the different ideas and how we shared ideas. So I think there was some disagreements, I think there was some agreements, but I think the conversation was so important.

Yeah, I think what surprised me most about the planning process, probably two things. One, just to become aware that the commercial space in Roswell is as limited as it is. And then secondly, to see the demographics of our population. We've got an aging demographic. One of the things that, you know, we've thought a lot about is how do we attract younger demographics to our city so that as we age out, you know, we've got a good basis of residents to replace them.

What surprised me the most was the willingness of government to listen, to listen to steering committees made up of Joe and Mary Citizen, of selected members of the council, of professionals within the city of Roswell, and the leadership of Roswell itself. and let that exchange result in some changes to the presentation materials. So it was good to see it was healthy, it was unbiased, and it was straightforward.

They were also asked to reflect on what they would change about Roswell today if given the opportunity.

I think if I could change one thing about Roswell, it would be expanding the Canton Street idea. It's great to have the one, two blocks of businesses, but if it was expanded maybe one or two blocks out, I think we would attract more people into the city of Roswell.

If I could change one thing about Roswell, Honestly, it would probably be to see more civil engagement from our residents. I was one who's guilty of not being as engaged before I joined the committee, but I think transparency comes with engagement from the citizens. That's the thing I'd like to see most is for all citizens to get engaged in the planning process.

If I could change one thing in Roswell today, it would be that we have a more strategic focus on economic development. A lot of my neighbors started expressing concerns that we were being left behind. And I think that we really started changing that and I hope that we stay on that path.

Ultimately, they were asked to distill everything down to what they believe is the most important thing about the comprehensive plan that they would want their neighbors and the community to understand.

Yeah, I think what's the most important thing I'd like my neighbors to know, it's important that they get involved now because it's important that decisions are being made and that as much input for those decisions is also known. I think it's important that more buy-in we get now is going to be important and down the road we don't have to worry about why did you do this or why not this. So it's important to get involved.

So I'd say the most important thing I'd want my friends and neighbors to know about the 2045 Comprehensive Plan is that it's not a plan that says we need to wait till 2045 to do things. It's a plan that sets an overarching strategy for how we should be thinking about doing things today to get to a spot in 2045 that looks and feels like something that Roswell would want.

The Comprehensive Growth Plan for 2045 reflects the voices, priorities, and vision of the Roswell community.

As the plan moves towards adoption, it will serve as a guiding framework for decisions that shape our city's economic growth, unique character, and the residents' quality of life for years to come.

On behalf of the City of Roswell, I want to once again thank our steering committee members for their dedication, thoughtfulness, and service throughout this important process. Comprehensive planning works best when it is shaped by community voices, honest conversations, and a shared vision for the future. This plan reflects the collaboration of residents, business owners, community leaders, and city staff who care deeply about Roswell and the future of our community. Thank you to everyone who contributed, participated, and stayed engaged throughout this process. Together, we are helping shape a strong and thoughtful future for Roswell for generations to come.

Thank you so much for that, and I'd like to mention the names of the stakeholder committee. Starting with our chair was Councilmember Allen Sells, Councilmember Christine Hall, Bill Wilkinson, Jay Corona, George Crumley, Deb Ewing, Ward Green, Jeff Jablonski, Denise Rausch, and Claire Snedeker were the members of the stakeholder committee. So just to put a framework for those who haven't been involved, I know we had a great engagement and especially these last few weeks when we have the draft for everyone to dive deep in and again, thanks everyone for their intention and intensity in making sure that we're getting this right. The comprehensive plan is required by the Georgia Department of Community Affairs, the DCA. It provides a vision for development and investment and basically the way the state law works is if you're going to have zoning and you're going to get to enjoy home rule and make decisions over zoning decisions and land use, you are required to have a comprehensive plan. So it's a required document for everyone to have. And it has topics that are essentially the umbrella. It's the umbrella of all of your master plans, whether it's a transportation master plan, culture, recreation, and parks plans. All of your different plans get rolled into just that, this comprehensive vision. The goal for our particular plan is a little different than it has been in the past. We really focused on building on the economic strategy and your previous comprehensive plan and really making economic development the driver of the conversation and having all your data that you needed to inform your decision making and conversations. and it also looked at infrastructure investment, and we just wanna make sure that the Comprehensive Growth Plan reflects the vision of this council and mayor, and so we're excited to move forward with the draft that you have before you. This is just the set of topics, so it covers everything from Transportation, housing, community facilities, natural and cultural resources, economic development, and recreation and culture. So there's quite a bit to this document. We also thank all of our department counterparts. This is, well, community development is the custodian. It's really ownership by the director of transportation, the director of parks and recreation, all those who have community facilities, whether it's police, chief, fire, the whole gamut of our departments and the environment and public works, of course, as well. Just a reminder for folks where we've been. So we've been working on this for about a year and we started having meetings in August of 2025 with the stakeholder committee. We've had since then three community events. We were slated to have just four stakeholder committee meetings. They signed up for four, but they were actually six. So we expanded their scope as we got towards the end and made sure that the draft has everything in that the stakeholder committee was wanting to see and they helped prepare quite a range of edits that we shared with council as we put together a final draft to present before you. This is just a reminder for folks of all of the different community meetings and community meetings that we've had throughout the year. We also had a community survey and there was about a little over a thousand people participate in that. So that was a great turnout letting us know how we were doing with the character areas, which are very special areas that are specific geographic locations in the city. And each one of these character areas has its own vision statement and it's the basis of the land use policy. So the survey looked at quite a bit of the activity centers, which are a special kind of character area. That's our economic seed, our specific areas for focusing on economic development and growth. Specifically, the five areas that we established through this document is the Holcomb Road 400. It's really the largest redevelopment potential to support target industries. There's the downtown. We all know how special the downtown is and it's supporting target industries in a small scale environment. As it relates to technology, we're looking to uptown to support aerospace and our technology target industries. East Roswell, we know that it has a few underperforming retail, so we're looking to, besides that, as we have in prior comprehensive plans, this isn't new, this is a desire to see those underperforming retail turn around and bring value back into the community. There's also the Midtown area where there's also redevelopment, underperforming properties for some time, for decades now. So we're looking to see how this jump starts our investment and rehabilitation of these areas in the activity centers. The key was that the success to Roswell is really tied to the five activity centers. Not only that, but there are some specific redevelopment sites within the activity centers that that's going to be key to unlocking the whole potential for the activity centers. We didn't focus on every single site, every single parcel. We focused on a couple strategic parcels, and we're recognizing that once these move forward, then that will be sending the market what it needs, signals about what great investment Roswell is. So redevelopment, as always, has been a big important part of our economic development planning and the primary way that the city will seek to attract amenities. And redevelopment is specifically and strategically and very importantly only appropriate when there are the right transitions and buffers to protect existing neighborhoods. And so that was a big focus also with stakeholder committee that we had strong language about transitions and proper buffers as they move away from the activity centers. So the four activity centers of the Hulken Bridge Road, I'm just gonna walk through these maps. I know many people have been at the community meetings and you've seen these for at least two to three of the full set of community meetings. The Downtown Activity Center, the Midtown Activity Center, and they have a core area and a transition area, so they are specific to say that in the core areas where we understand we need some high intensity, that's where we have an economic driver, but around it has to be transitional and to have both all the transitional uses so that you're tapering down to adjacent surrounding character areas that are the residential areas that we are making sure that the comprehensive plan protects and includes language about the buffers and transitions. The Uptown Activity Center, this is where your primary employment hub is located. We're looking forward to the transition of some of the vacancies there into the primary and predominant area in North Fulton for aerospace. We have PBS and we have other new and inviting investment in this area and a lot is being placed on the change in this area and the intensity that's allowed here. The East Roswell Activity Center is, by its location, less intense expectations. However, there are redevelopment areas that are desired to change over and would require to look at how the best to put in there and to have the right transitions to neighboring and surrounding character areas of the residential type. So there has been discussion, we understand, and so I'd like to address, if I could, some of the comments that we have been receiving about some of the minor adjustments that are proposed on the peripheries of some of the character areas. These were made following logic of a set of specific parcels. They were very discrete and very intentional and very focused, and I understand it's important to be clear and transparent that we show you and walk through what each one of these were so that's what we're going to plan to do with the detail of the specifics of the next slides so i just wanted to celebrate how at the end of that of this process that we actually were able to continue to protect and even expand the character areas that have residential as their primary primary use, there's a total net gain of 336 acres that were not previously in residential character areas and now there's expanded another 336 acres So we wanted to walk through where these are located so folks can see very clearly where the locations are. The first one on the estate residential, there was none. So this is just a go-by slide to let you know that we looked at it. There was no changes that were comprised there. Let me make sure I can use this. I guess it doesn't, it won't. All right, so it doesn't help, I guess, council, but just there are a couple of spots where there's red outline where things changed. In this case, where I'm pointing to right now, they changed to residential character areas. That's the primary on the right-hand side. You see that set. On the left-hand side, there was a small parcel on the periphery of the Parkway Village location. And it's one parcel that was split, unfortunately. Part of it was in neighborhood and part of it was, excuse me, part of it was in suburban residential and part of it was in Parkway Village. And so we just made the whole parcel into Parkway Village. So that was what that shift was about. And that was a church property. It wasn't... that was of church property. The suburban, the other areas that I mentioned where we have in the suburban location, there were three areas that were moved into residential character. For the neighborhood residential, There's areas surrounding the downtown activity center, and specifically up near the, in the transitional area. And again, transitional is within the activity center. Within the activity center, but it requires that you are stepping down and tapering down so that you're compatible and the language is clear that you're compatible with adjacent existing character, which varies around the city. It's meant to be sensitive to the context. And currently, these parcels are all zoned and ex-parcels. There's the soccer complex, the old Roswell Cemetery, and so now they all line up within the downtown activity center within the transitional area. Further along by City Hall here are NX and Civic Zone parcels that are currently occupied with commercial and new townhomes on Myrtle Street and Zion Circle. And then there are NX zone parcels, the Wellness Center and the other side of Groveway and Oxbow now also within the downtown activity center. So we wanted to walk through to clarify what was shifted and so you'll see the logic behind it was these were either already or being used as commercial, or they have some other transitional activity on it, such as the wellness center, which is city properties. There's also one parcel, the Vaughn property, it's known as the Vaughn property, and I'm gonna zoom in a little bit on it. It is currently zoned DX, so it could have, if I write on the DX parcel, a variety of housing styles, and it's RS-12 on the bulk of it, along with Civic. Anything that happens here would have to go through rezoning. That means that would have to go through public advertising, public hearings, two public hearings, and it would be a decision based on council and mayor for whether or not to grant whatever would be proposed. And aside from that, in the neighborhood residential, I'm just identifying that the parcels that were added into the neighborhood residential area And then there was the East Roswell Park that was removed. And then in the active neighborhoods, the changes there was where Liberty Lofts and townhomes are, it's zoned DR already. And now it's activity neighborhood, active neighborhood. The East Village, there was a slight shift on the East Village. And then overall, all of the tweaks on these combined to an increase of 336 acres of net gain of total acreage that is now in the residential character area. So thank you for letting me walk through that and make clear where these parcels are located and what was different from the prior residential character areas. Staff recommends approval of the transmittal of the comprehensive growth plan draft version that has the environmental language proposed by Councilmember Phillippe, which we heard, and the residential character area language and photos from the 24 comprehensive plan. That is the version B that is a file called postcommittee edits 2045 with 2040 text. Since then, since we put together our presentation and the draft, it has come to our attention there are four areas that we need to house cleaning. We'd like to bring to your attention and make sure we put out as part of the motion if you're interested in approving the document is on page 151. There was missing from the Holcomb Bridge Road, Georgia 400 activity center, you know, our highest, the regional destination, our highest density, it didn't have RS-12, so that was left off. There was a bullet on a nine on page 159 where the text box was moved, and so we need to just move the text box so that you're able to see the full sentence, which is the sentence that's in all the rest of the activity centers. The most important one I want to make sure we're clear on, page 159 and page 174 and 175. So 174 and 175 is a table. It's a table that talks about what is the compatible zoning districts for the respective character areas. So it's a table that summarizes, consolidates everything that's in this plan under each of the character areas individually. And so the version we have is erroneously has in the core area where you want to have the most intense and you don't want small, single family, is to remove RS6 and RS4, and then we just need to add into the transitional area RS6 and RS4. So there was just a reversal. And then we had an error. We were instructed to change the word when we ever saw that had the word subdivisions listed in the plan. We were asked by council and stakeholder committee to make sure we changed it to say neighborhoods, because not all neighborhoods are subdivisions. And so we found we're grateful that we were for community assistance in identifying that we had left one in still there. So we're recommending to correct that as well. So these are final edits that we're recommending you approve along with the approval of the 2045 draft version that includes the 2040 language and photos from the 2040 comprehensive plan. Thank you.

Thank you. City Clerk Long, are there any speakers for this item?

Yes, Mayor. We have 17 speakers. The first is Jennifer Donlan.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. First of all, I'd like to sincerely thank each of you for the time you've dedicated to this topic on top of your full-time jobs being parents or grandparents Volunteering you also have this wild thing called life going on like the rest of us Things that do not stop or do not care if you have 20 phone calls and texts to return so thank you for being public servants and giving up the very limited free time you have to read hundreds of emails on the comp plan alone to research review and compare to meet in person with residents thank you for that at the june 29th open mic another resident spoke reacting to comments made at the june 23rd committee meeting which prompted me to respond to him We appeared to be on opposite sides of the conversation. Before long, a small group of people capitalized on these public comments and had labeled him as giving the far right perspective and me as far left. We had somehow become these sort of symbols in someone else's narrative, even though we had never met. So we decided to meet. We sat down, had some food, maybe a beer. We listened. We asked questions instead of making assumptions. We discovered we're both originally from Kentucky. We love our adopted home Roswell. And while we don't agree on everything, we agree on something very important. We want what's best for this city. At the following committee meeting, we sat together on purpose, not just because it was crowded. Those small acts, while they may seem insignificant, taught me something I hope all of us can remember tonight. Roswell doesn't need more echo chambers. It doesn't need more labels. It doesn't need neighbors being told to fear one another or assume the worst about people they've never spoken to. It needs leaders and residents who are willing to have difficult conversations with respect instead of suspicion. Whatever decision you make tonight about language maps or amendments to the 2045 comp plan, those decisions matter, but the way we've navigated this process matters too, because a comprehensive plan isn't just about land use or economic development. It's also a reflection of the kind of community we want to become. I believe, and I think the majority of residents believe, that strong communities are not built by people who always agree. They're built by people who choose to stay at the table when they don't. My hope is that tonight's discussion reflects not only thoughtful planning, but thoughtful leadership. Leadership that invites conversation instead of division, curiosity instead of assumptions, and collaboration instead of camps. because that's a Roswell worth planning for. Thank you.

Thank you. City Clerk Long, next speaker. Dave Woodrow.

Mayor Robichaud, members of council, I think it is poignant, fortuitous, I'm not sure what the word is I'm searching for, but that I am able to come up here and speak after the very articulate Jennifer Donlan. And we did sit together, and I made sure that my wife knew what was going on before all that happened, particularly in a public place. I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak. And I would echo her comments. Thank you for the tremendous amount of work that all of you have done, all the work that staff has done. I'm not sure that everyone in the audience realizes it, but essentially what you have done is review and study and compare two 200-page-plus documents. Quite a task. This has become a very complicated and even contentious subject. I would say that there is no need for anyone to become contentious about it. There is every need for the citizens, though, to be informed in a timely and transparent manner. It is incumbent upon all of the citizens of Roswell, and I am grateful to see the great number of people we have here tonight engaging in this conversation. So it is not just your job, it's ours to provide feedback, thought, suggestions for you, our elected leaders. I was at the planning committee meeting and that went on for about four hours or longer, which everyone should know is a testament to your dogged determination to get this right. And there was a lot of confusion when the 2045 plan update was presented. A number of people on council, on staff, seemed to be surprised by some of the changes that were made from the 2040 plan to the 2045 plan. These new and significant changes with words and phrases that many of them were ambiguous. They're not well defined. And this is in fact a legal document that we are submitting to the state. And therefore, words are important. Particularly, there was a section on pages 124 and 125 concerning housing. And I'm not sure where the changes of those words came from. Again, some members of council seemed surprised. Staff seemed somewhat uncertain, but I don't want to pin that on them. They've done a magnificent job. I frankly I suspect just in my opinion that maybe just maybe that the consultant that was used on this project got just a little bit out of their lane and that happens with consultants and certainly in Roswell we have some history with consultants the best I can tell from the maps and it's hard one area King Road from hardscrabble and to Cox Road given some of these changes that were initially proposed, could have hundreds of new homes. The traffic, the storm water considerations, and we're just not ready for that. So my ask, and I think the ask of many others, is to go back to the housing language that was in the 2040 plan, which as I just understand from Michelle, is essentially what the staff is recommending. Again, this document is not a zoning document, but it is a legal document that lays down the guidelines for future zoning. It's good to take a pause on some of that new language that was in there. Housing is important. It will always be important. But I think that we need a lot more time to study this, to get it right, and so again, my ask would be to hit the pause button, go back to the 2040 language along with the additional language that Councilman Phillippe has proposed, and make sure that we have well-defined terms that are critical. because I don't believe that some of the most important new terms originally proposed were well-defined, and Roswell's batting average against developers and their attorneys is not good. Let's make sure we get these terms defined as you study it in the future. Thank you, and again, let's go back to the language in the 2040 plan. Thank you very much.

City Clerk Long, next speaker. Sean Wright. Sean Wright.

As you said, I'm Sean Wright, Thank you so much, Madam Mayor and Council Members. Thank you for, first of all, honoring Doug Curling. Regardless of any political differences, we all know he loved Roswell and the people who lived here, and that was well deserved. Even to a man who he never knew, who ran for office at one time, he gave me time, his patience, to explain many things, and I owe Doug a lot, even though we didn't agree on much. We remained friends for many years after that and I appreciate, Mayor, you doing that tonight. I think it was very appropriate. Thank you for a wonderful plan to address Roswell's commercial corridors. However, I'm concerned about a potential gap for existing residential language. Because the focus was on commercial corridors, existing neighborhoods seem to be missing the protections that were included in the 2040 plan. Because the 2045 plan replaces the 2040 plan, I strongly support placing those nine pages of language regarding residential protections from the 2040 comprehensive plan into the comprehensive plan for 2045. At the committee meeting, many of you said no protections were changed, but I asked at that meeting, and I'll ask again, was a land use and zoning attorney consulted? If so, what is the expert opinion? I appreciate all the work and vetting that went into this and the people who invested their time and efforts. However, I'm concerned that although there has been many people providing that input and vetting, that the appropriate specialized legal counsel may not have been consulted, and we may not know for sure. How can we be certain that the less than one page of wording gives equal protection to the nine pages that comprehensively protected existing neighborhoods? At the committee meeting, this question went unanswered and so far tonight, and maybe I missed it, it seems to still be unanswered. Lastly, if there is no difference, in that language, why oppose placing the nine pages of existing neighborhood protections and include it in the 2045 plan? What harm does that do? What's the harm in eliminating our concerns while addressing commercial corridors? Thank you very much for your consideration and your time this evening.

Ms. Wright, we did check with legal, and there is very little language, but as you can see, because there was concern, we are replacing the 2045 language regarding neighborhoods, that's the staff recommendation, with the 2040. Is that the area you're talking about? So you're actually adding the nine pages? Well, we have to vote on it. I'm saying staff, if you see, I think the slide is still up there, is it?

Yes, I'm just confirming that's the case.

Well, it still has to be voted on, but I'm letting you know, after verifying with the attorney where there was very little, I mean, there really wasn't that much, there was not difference. He said we could go either way pretty much, but he suggested with the concern that staff recommended 2040 language is replacing the 2045 language specific to all of the neighborhoods. I'm not sure if everyone can read and see that with some other very minor changes. I'm just letting you know we did think of that. Thank you very much for listening to all of us. I'll be happy to share. I don't have an email address for you if you want to see the legal opinion. You've had about four emails from me, so you should have it. I apologize. I apologize to that, sir. No worries. We've got a few coming in these days. No, I understand. I just want to let you know. For those of you who do see up on the screen, that's what that last line means as the staff recommendation of replacing that.

Thank you for confirming.

I was wondering if you wanted other pages that I'm not aware of. Thank you.

As long as those nine end up in there, I am happy. Thank you.

City Clerk Long, next speaker.

Good evening, Mayor and Council, and thank you so much for replacing the text with the 2040 language. I do want to question some of the process and the trust and transparency. When I attended the late April meeting, there was about 300 people in this chamber. And it was great to see the turnout. And during that meeting, it was asked, are there any changes to the residential single family neighborhood areas? And the consultant said no. And he, I'm quoting up in media right now, it's not redeveloping single family neighborhoods, Bosman said, it's reinvesting in the commercial centers and thinking differently about what the housing component of that can be and should be in the future. So I was very concerned that at literally the 11th hour that there were some undefined terms put into the 2045. And I actually went to look at those terms and at the DCA website, could not find what those terms mean. On the comp plan section of the DCA, they give you a definition of all the terms that they have. None of those terms that were now included in the 2045 were there. How interesting that that language was changed after the meeting where it was the trust of the people. You said that there was going to be no changes to the single family and it was going to be basically adopting the 2040. I actually have a real-world example of experiencing living next to a grandfathered, missing middle triplex in the Mill Village. So the Mill Village is down by the Roswell Mill across from the square. Our neighborhood consists of approximately 95 properties, downtown house, and RS residential, the overwhelming majority of which are owner-occupied single-family homes. This triplex is owned by a landlord who does not live on the property. And over the years, we've experienced repeated problems with the tenant turnover, poor property management, noise issues, and criminal activities such as drugs and theft that have negatively impacted the surrounding neighborhood from this single triplex, one triplex in a neighborhood of 95 other properties. The most serious incident occurred in 2024 when a tenant, Brian Betania, was arrested and charged with kidnapping and two counts of related child sex abuse material. During the police operation, our neighborhood was effectively locked down for approximately three hours while law enforcement respondents and residents were unable to leave their homes. No one is suggesting that every rental property or every tenant creates these kind of problems. However, this experience demonstrates the very real risks that can arise when absentee-owned high-density rental properties are introduced into established family neighborhoods without adequate oversight and accountability. When the city discusses expanding missing middle, workforce housing, housing choice, these undefined terms, or increasing residential density, residents deserve an honest conversation about both the potential benefits and the potential consequences. For those of us who have lived through a situation like this, the concern isn't theoretical. It is based on firsthand experience. Before changing the future-guided planning policies that open the door and encourage additional high-density rental housing in established neighborhoods, the city should carefully consider the impact on public safety, neighborhood stability, property values, and the quality of life for the families who call these neighborhoods home. Thank you.

City Clerk Wong, next speaker. Karen Parrish.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Karen Parrish. Most of you know who I am. Tonight's not simply a vote on a comprehensive plan. It's a vote on Roswell's planning philosophy for years to come. I'm going to move this because I'm kind of short. The comprehensive plan grew from the 2024 Economic Development Strategy. a strategy that promised to strengthen our commercial districts, create vibrant activity centers, attract employers, and grow our economy. That is a vision that many of us here, most of us here, support. But somewhere along the way, housing shifted from supporting economic development to becoming the economic development strategy itself. If a project doesn't pencil out, we add high density housing. If an aging shopping center struggles, we add high density housing. If a site is called catalytic, we add high density housing. Before long, housing becomes the answer to every economic question. That is not stewardship. Roswell is not a blank canvas waiting for someone to redesign it. Roswell is already a remarkable city. It is made up of safe neighborhoods, historic homes, mature trees, planned communities, and families who invested here because they believed those neighborhoods would remain neighborhoods. Opening residential zoning does not create another master plan community. It creates incremental redevelopment driven by market opportunity. One parcel, then another, then another. Master planning creates places intentionally. Incremental redevelopment changes places opportunistically. Those are not the same thing. Every city needs places that evolve and every city also needs places that endure. That is why I ask you to adopt the version restoring the 2040 neighborhood protections. But please, by all means, don't stop there. Define the missing middle and define other vague housing terms that were included throughout this plan. Clarify where housing actions H.1 and H.2 apply. State plainly that these housing initiatives are intended for activity centers and redevelopment areas, not established estate, suburban, and neighborhood residential neighborhoods. Protect detached single-family homes as a desired long-term component of downtown, including our historic neighborhoods and the Mill Village. And make it unmistakably clear that stand-alone residential density is not Roswell's economic development strategy. During the June 14th meeting, one council member stated that she wanted to change Roswell's demographics, particularly the number of residents over 60. As a 64-year-old resident, I found that statement deeply troubling. It raises an important question. How does a city government intend to change the age demographics of its residents? all that's right not jobs not economic development but high density housing because the city has become the authority to tell people where to live and where to work that's just not realistic and it's truly offensive i attended a recent public forum on a portion of the twenty forty five comprehensive plan and was told repeatedly not to worry my neighborhood would not change with this plan. The last time I heard that the city had a plan and not to worry was in 2014 when Roswell City Council adopted a form-based code zoning model that erases density as a criteria in redevelopment altogether. I won't make the same mistake of trusting that statement. So I have one final request. In the future, let residents see the complete comprehensive plan draft before it reaches this chamber for adoption. Give them time to read it, to understand it, to ask questions, and to participate while meaningful changes can still be made. A comprehensive plan should never surprise the people who will live under it. Transparency isn't a presentation. Transparency is giving the public the whole document before the decisions are effectively made. Words outlive every one of us. Words. And years from now, future councils, future planners, future developers will not know what was said in this room. What they will only know is what was written. Write clearly, write precisely, and write exactly what you intend because no one should have to guess what this council meant. Stewardship is not resisting change. Stewardship is deciding where change belongs. Thank you.

Next speaker.

Charles Parrish.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Thank you for the tremendous amount of work that's gone into preparing this comprehensive growth plan that you, the staff, the stakeholders have all put in on this. I've spent the last several weeks reading the document, comparing multiple drafts, reviewing the economic development strategy, attending public meetings, and listening carefully to the discussion surrounding this plan. I came away with one conclusion. I believe the opening chapters establish a thoughtful and well-balanced vision for Roswell. My recommendation tonight is not to change that vision. It is to preserve it. Very early in the document on page five, the plan explains that this update places a stronger emphasis on aligning the city's vision with its economic development strategy. It goes on to say that this approach supports growing jobs and expanding economic opportunities while continuing to protect existing residential neighborhoods and that future strategies will be concentrated in key corridors and centers. I believe those three ideas form the foundation of a plan, economic development, targeted investment, and neighborhood preservation. A few pages later, the plan states that this update is primarily focused on the economic development strategy, making it the organizing framework for the entire document. I also noticed something encouraging. The same principles appeared much earlier in the planning process. During the very first stakeholder meeting, The consultant described the city's vision as focusing growth and investment in activity centers and corridors while preserving and protecting stable single family neighborhoods. To me, that's evidence that this has been the guiding vision from the beginning. And my professional career has been spent leading large business transformation programs. And more recently, I've worked extensively with AI systems. One lesson applies equally to both. Organizations rarely drift because the vision changes. They drift because implementation gradually becomes disconnected from the original vision. Good government works the same way. Mayor and council establish the vision, staff carries it forward, future councils inherit the guidance you adopt today. 20 years from now, no one will know what this council intended. They will know what this council wrote, so my recommendation is simple. As you finalize this plan, I respectfully encourage you to verify that the implementation sections consistently reflect the principles established in the opening chapters focus growth and redevelopment in the designated activity centers and key corridors, continue protecting established residential neighborhoods, maintain the balance that has been consistently expressed throughout this planning process. I believe the vision is already there. My recommendation is simply to ensure the implementation remains faithful to it and you put a process in place for every deliverable and every action that's gonna follow to measure it back against these principles, thank you.

Next speaker.

Claire Snedeker. Claire Snedeker.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. The video we just watched was about huge progress focusing on our overarching strategy for economic development. There's a huge need for growth of jobs and commercial city revenues to take the pressure off the residents' taxes. I want to thank my stakeholder committee colleagues for a highly engaged and very intentional and well thought out focus on the economic development side of the plan. But there is a complimentary section which you've already heard about. For almost a year now, the stakeholder committee and the public, as well as the consultant and the city staff, have been working on the 2045 Comp Plan. All along, we've been focusing on growing jobs and expanding economic opportunities while continuing to protect existing neighborhoods, as we just heard. It wasn't just one focus. There were two focuses. The trouble came that it wasn't until June 15th that the stakeholder committee and the public was given the first draft of the 2045 Comp Plan, and that was just a little over a month ago. And what we noticed was that the content didn't match continuing to protect the existing neighborhoods. Instead, we got pictures of preferred use houses in neighborhood residential area, which is about half of our city, that would allow small lot development, which is up to 10 houses an acre, and Cottage Court, which is a maximum per the UDC of nine houses an acre. This is approximately doubling the housing density that's currently max of five houses an acre versus up to 10 houses an acre per the 2045 comp plan. And for the neighborhoods, there was not only the pictures, but there were changes in language. For neighborhood residential, the 2040 comp plan said that new development was limited to single family housing. 2045 said that development would remain focused on single family, which is the exact wording that would allow density to double. The suburban residential had a wording change from 40 to 45 that said development should be single family, and the 2045 said future development will consist primarily of, which also opens the door to the density that the picture showed. And then we had that followed up by the June 23rd Council Committee meeting. where there were council members advocating for subdividing lots where houses would be at eighth of an acre and eight multiplex multifamily in the neighborhood areas. So that advocacy dovetailed with the pictures and the language. And then I just want to say that I believe HOA and non-HOA neighborhood areas in our city deserve the same protections. So I think it's a fully transparent, prudent, much needed and comprehensive solution to use the actual language and pictures and diagrams, the whole pages that were in the 2040 comp plan. We said for almost a year that we were gonna continue to protect the existing neighborhoods. So let's do just that. I'm resolute on saying that this is the only way to be transparent and true to what we have told the residents. the community outreach events and and none of the questions I just like to add for the next comp plan that the questions in the community survey come from the stakeholder committee and they are focused on exactly where the plans going because I did not feel that that happened this time So let's do the right thing and use the 2040 residential section that'll resolve all these issues. 2040 was fully vetted, fully documented, with the changes all redlined, whether it was text or maps, and the maps were clearly displayed. We've been living well with the 2040 comp plan for five years, so appreciate the considerations of of working together and having a preliminary thumbs up on doing the 2040 residential pages in full and adding that and swapping it out into the 2045 plan. Let's do the right thing and thank you for letting me say those things. Appreciate all your time.

I'm gonna offer a gentle reminder. Please make sure your phones are on mute if possible. Thank you. Next speaker.

Marjorie Farr.

Hello Mayor and members of the City Council. I do strongly support the version that includes the 2040 neighborhood protection. Let's protect our neighborhoods from high density and environmental harm from subdividing lots. To subdivide lots to increase density in neighborhoods, in established neighborhoods, doesn't just alter community character, it creates real environmental harm. Clear cutting mature trees from wooded lots for additional homes increases storm water runoff. reduces the natural creek buffers and erodes the ecological stability in our neighborhoods that we rely on. Forcing destiny into neighborhoods of single family homes will worsen flooding, accelerate erosion and strain infrastructure that was never built for high density environment. Residents chose these communities for quiet streets, wooded lots, and breathing room, not clear-cut redevelopment. Roswell's tree canopies, stormwater systems, and environmental balance deserve protection. Protect our environment and focus on mixed-use development where it belongs in already cleared, underused commercial corridors and blighted retail slates. This will take the pressure off our residential property taxes. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Derek Wood.

Hi, Derek Wood, Roswell. For the last 20 years, I've spent my time in innovative tech companies. And one of the biggest mistakes I see as I advise companies here in the Atlanta incubators, as well as those on the West Coast, is they stop getting into the detail to support the plan. And what I've noticed about the 2045 plan as well as 2040 is we do a good job of identifying the first step of we need younger residents to keep Roswell moving forward. But then all the plans don't seem to really use a specific definition of how do we attract this new demographic. If we're looking at 28 to 38 year olds, that gives us income. We know what they can afford to buy, what they can afford to rent. I've not seen any proposed developments that are in an affordable price range for these new professionals. The other part is their new families. What is being done to make downtown Roswell not the most dangerous place I can take my son? There's no green space, there's no water function, and frankly it's boring for him. There's nothing for him to do there. But what do we do about attracting young families if the downtown is representative of the center of Roswell? And it's one of the reasons my wife and I really loved Roswell and moved here. But without those features to make it family friendly, it kinda is empty words on a lack of action. The other part that getting into the persona, as we would discuss in a business setting, of the people we're trying to attract would be what kind of work are they doing? Now this is a really difficult question to answer because the speed of change in how we work with larger organizations, what it takes to start up a new company, what it takes to run a smaller company seems to become obsolete every three months. So there is a big look at what types of businesses are going to attract new professionals in the city of Roswell and I've seen no real focused analysis of what that would take. I come to the planning meetings. I've been honored to speak at the non-public speaking planning meetings since I'm the only person sitting out here in the pews and they figure why not. This is not my first comprehensive growth plan participation. My first was at 10 years old in 1996 and I spoke on behalf of a sports complex and a skate park and by the time I was 27 it was built and I got to skate and hurt myself there. So I understand that these are not immediate things, but that's what makes it so important for all of us to be involved today, and that's why I spend my time coming out, and I appreciate all the time you spend. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Jennifer Cottrell.

Hi.

I'm a long-term listener, first-time caller. As she said, my name is Jennifer Cottrell, and I live in the Holcomb Bridge 400 Activity Center. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I want to start out by thanking the mayor and council and staff, particularly Michelle Alexander, for all of the hours that you've put in working on this comprehensive growth plan. I've put in a few hours myself trying to make sense of it, but I know it's a fraction of the time that y'all spent and that other people here have spent. I came here for two reasons and one of them was actually to negatively comment on the way that certain aspects of this process were handled. But I've changed my mind and I've decided that 98% of the people involved were doing the best they could and making a good faith effort. For whatever confusion was caused, however many comments were misconstrued, either intentionally or incidentally, I hope that will be resolved tonight. The other comment that I wanted to make is that I understand why the subject draws so much passion. I have lived in Roswell off and on my entire life and been in my current residence for 20 years. So I know that we, the people, have been hurt before. We have trust issues. I fully understand why the homeowners are anxious to protect their largest investment and safeguard their families. Absolutely no one, disagrees with them or faults them for that. I also believe that no one on this day has any intention or desire to harm any of these property owners. They are, in fact, all property owners in Roswell themselves. So why would they want to hurt the members of their constituency? They don't. Well, not this mayor and council anyway. So for those of us who are here advocating for affordable housing or missing middle housing or whatever else you want to call it, we're only here not to harm property owners but to simply ask that the language in the 2045 Comp Plan not eliminate or include any language that would tie our hands in the future from being able to achieve a balance of housing opportunities and protect our neighborhoods. Why can't we have both? I believe we can. I disagree with a gentleman who said people in Roswell don't care about affordable housing. I disagree with the idea that looking for alternatives puts the established areas at risk. I believe the ladies and gentlemen here are capable of creating a plan and vision that will keep hope and opportunity alive for anyone who wants to live and work and love in Roswell. At this point, I really wish we had more time for clarity on this plan, but since we don't, I'd like to ask that you please transmit a version of the plan that reflects that. Thank you.

Next speaker.

Jim Walsh.

Could you repeat that?

Jim Walsh.

Good evening. I've seen many of you before and in true retrospect I will say I was on planning commission for four years. I'm not going to give a long and detailed speech here or reading something, but I think one thing we should talk about is the fact of what is the impact of this vague language that's in the 2045 plan on the current residents in a lot of the areas in this city, especially neighborhoods. If you allow, I'll give an example. I've lived in Horseshoe Bend and in that area on the east side since 2000 this time. I've been a resident of Roswell two previous times beginning in 1979. I've seen this city grow, I've seen it move, I've seen it stagnate for a while, I've seen it move forward. The point that I like to make is very simple. We talk about the language. 2040 plan very decisively explains what will happen and where. More importantly, the idea of being able to put multifamily dwellings in the middle of subdivisions or neighborhoods, whatever you want to call them, will lower property values of that area. And yes, I read the mayor's email and said we have no plans to do that right now. But having been on zoning, once it becomes part of the plan, the only way that you can move around it is by the discrepancies of how they lay out the plan. It doesn't say you can't do it. So that's a big issue to say. The other issue I would like to say is it's just very simple. The mayor talked earlier about doing a vote earlier today. I'd like to see a show of hands behind me of people that want the 2040 plan language versus the 2045 plan language. Seriously. I think that should tell you quite a bit about what this city and its residents want. Thank you.

Next speaker, Jason Yell. Jason Yell.

Well, a big component of everybody's concern is protecting single-family neighborhoods, but there's also the concern of creating new housing that's not at the expense of single-family home neighborhoods. I'd like to suggest that the minimum size for ADUs be increased, the maximum size be increased proportionate to the size of the primary house on the lot. This would increase the housing stock, but it's mainly going to be within families. I've heard a lot of people say that their kids can't afford to live in Roswell. Well, if you can build an ADU of a decent size, you're going to bring those kids home. And as parents age in place, eventually they want to downsize. But where are you going to downsize? to your ADU because your kids will be making more money and having kids of their own. They move into the big house and the parents move into the ADU. This creates more housing without compromising property values or the quality of life. Thank you.

Next speaker.

Lance Ledbetter.

Hi, Lance Ledbetter, 33-year resident of Roswell, City of Roswell, and very honored to be in this community. I'm a father of three sons who are adults themselves, and I would agree from conversations that all three of them wish they could afford Roswell. Not the case, but with time, right? And I would like to say that that is one of their objectives. They thoroughly enjoyed growing up in our community. It's a pleasure to know some of you. For those that I don't know, I look forward to meeting you and getting to know you. I want to reiterate the majority of the comments made tonight. I'll keep it short in terms of support of residential neighborhoods. I personally reside in Salah Creek, which happens to be a non-mandatory HOA. At least three of the homes that I abut to are not members of the HOA. So based on wording, previous wording that I understood, that could have been a potential loophole, understanding that's not the case now. But it was a severe concern and obviously why a lot of people are here today. In combination, I do want to thank the due diligence you all are doing tonight. And obviously the staff recommendations, putting our concerns to rest and obviously look forward to seeing the vote as it's upcoming. I do also want to say reiterating the concerns that you have tonight. One word transparency, right? Um, this wouldn't happen tonight if transparency probably would have occurred. You showed previously you had six, uh, planning meetings, community meetings on this topic. I'm open to any input in terms of if any of those covered the concerns that you're hearing tonight in terms of opening up the concern of residential communities. So again, why we're here tonight. So again, I ditto the multiple comments. And in common, I want to thank two of the city council members that are here, again, I've not had the pleasure of personally meeting you, that actually put on their campaign websites that transparency is important to you. So I thank you for that and obviously look forward to you maintaining that commitment. Thank you for your time.

Next speaker. Roman Persak.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. First of all, Michelle, I want to thank you very much. You work very hard and I know that a lot of snakes have been around you to change and everything because everyone has different ideas. So thank you very much. I came first time to Roswell in 1990. And since then, I saw the development, I moved from the city because due to my work. We are talking about 20 years from now, and we'll have a decision. In 20 years, there will be new mayors, new councils, and sorry, some of us will not be here, so we'll not remember. So I'm not able to remind what it is. Those people, in 20 years, they'll not read even one word for the 200 pages. AI maybe read it. So the comprehensive plan is today what we understand, what we don't know in 20 years. And I remember once I was asked, because the email, how will we see Roswell in 2025? But I don't want to talk. First of all, the population in Roswell is going down. We are shrinking. And according to the previous mayor, he said, in Roswell we'll have 100,000 residents. Today, we have a little bit less than 90,000. Last year, we have 90,800, according to the report of City Hall. And I believe it will go down further. I would like to indicate some factor that can define our city, and by this one, our plans or something can be changed. Our city rely on retail and service job for stability, and higher playing income is coming from nearby cities. We can say Atlanta, Sandy Spring, and now even Alpharetta. We invest in parks, and recreation programs. We're not having major local industries and corporate centers. We are talking about it. I'll make copy and paste. I hear this one for years. We are a commuter town. And I know you all remember you complained Holcomb Bridge Road We cannot drive, it's congested. What you did? Nothing. Can you do something? No. We're going down with shopping center, they disappeared. No financial centers. Big financial centers, they are in Sandy Spring, another threat that missed us, and they were not coming here. When we have Fidelity investment, they left. Number of banks, it's also going out. What I hear today, all the comments I had on the list, but people say. So now you're going to a dictionary or AI or Google All this stuff, it says, those factors define a city as a bedroom city. And this we are. And we need to think what we can do, this plan, with bedroom city. And we are. Everyone want to keep the house. They're living here, quiet. During the weekend, we go to parks, sports. and going to work will get the salary. We want to come to a quiet place, sleep here, and enjoy it. The discussion, if it's 20, 40 texts or 20, 40 pages, is just useless. Because we are going completely different direction. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Next speaker.

Alison Archibald.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Allison Archibald. I've been a Roswell resident since 2002. I've lived in the Roswell Farms neighborhood just off the Coleman Road nearby here. I came tonight to specifically talk about the one property that's at the corner of Coleman Road and Magnolia. I believe that was referred to as the Vaughn property earlier in the slide. and I just wanted to express my concern if that was previously in the 2040 comprehensive plan zoned for neighborhood residential and now it's put in the downtown activity area and potentially able to have much higher, high density residential. I don't believe that that is a good use of that property that fits with any of the surrounding areas, backs up between the Temple Beth Tikvah and the Roswell United Methodist, as well as the Roswell Farms neighborhood and the restaurant that was previously the Roswell Garden. I can't see that a high density property is a match for that area, the character, all the dense trees and environment there would look very different if a high density residential was allowed to be developed in that particular small property there. So I just wanted to have that taken under consideration that that property not be allowed to change from its current status and remain the way it is now.

Next speaker, Gus Haydorn.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. A lot of hard work's gone into this, and I haven't really followed this process closely, but I have followed the changes in Roswell for the past 40 years. And, you know, I have the house I live in because I bought it 40 years ago. My daughters grew up here and they both live in the Gainesville area now because they can't afford to live here. They both are They both have graduate degrees and would be the kind of addition that I think Roswell needs. I do have great concerns about the fact that we are aging and I walked a couple of streets yesterday evening in some of our finer neighborhoods and they were very quiet. They were quite quite silent actually. There were no kids in the streets. So that is a concern of mine. I want to live in a city that's vibrant. I don't want to live in a city that's moving toward a museum stage of where a few people with a lot of money can afford to be. I think we We have to find new ways to make the city affordable. If that means going up, if that saves green space, I'm very much in favor of it. Sometimes I feel that maybe what's missing in government, and I don't mean this as an aspersion against the present council I'm talking, in general is creativity, and I think we have to find ways to do things that perhaps we haven't always considered. One other thing, a lot of talk about the terms, and the one term that I don't hear, which I think is important, and that is sustainability. We're always talking about progress. We're always talking about things related to money, but if we're developing a plan that's taking us into the future, we really need to think about how we're gonna sustain the natural resources that are essential for us to continue to live here. That's it, thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. Steve Walsh.

Good evening, Mayor, Council. Yeah, like I've said before, I want to thank you for all the hard work that's gone into this, as well as the staff. A lot of aspects I like about this plan. And we've heard testimony tonight where this plan does create a vision for Roswell and a strategy. We've heard that language is important. And we've also heard that we want Roswell to be a live, work and play community. So I am here to speak for affordable housing. I went through the plan and the data that is within the plan points that out as a problem. Uh, when you look at, uh, median income against, uh, median, uh, home prices, uh, it is, exceeds the benchmark of what traditional, uh, affordable housing is. And, um, so I applaud, uh, some of the efforts, uh, that perhaps the strategic plan can do for this. You know, I live just a stone throw away from, uh, from Vickery. And, you know, in its history, you know, it was at one time a busy gas station. However, it came under some disrepair and, what, maybe used to repair a car here and there. I remember more recently before it was developed, a food truck would show up on Saturdays to sell tacos. Yes, I had concerns about how that development would look and impact upon my property. I'm happy to say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but doggone, I think they did a pretty good job of preserving character, of updating underutilized property, and hopefully that brought that affordability living here in Roswell in a favorable direction. Yes, I hear the concerns of everybody regarding the impact on their property, but I can also say that we have to move forward. As a doctor, I'm all for public safety and healthcare, and I know that we need affordable housing. to be able to have these people, this infrastructure in our community. And so I think if we work together, we can get the job done. And I would only ask that in the plan, maybe we could have some more specific language to address housing affordability as a goal. So thank you.

next speaker sally mckenzie good evening mayor and council um thank you so much for all of the effort and incredible time that you put into this um into this into the plan. And also, I know it's been said before, but I want to really thank the steering committee. The amount of time that goes into this is significant. So thank you to everyone involved. I've been involved peripherally and paid attention to development projects and issues in this city since about 2013. And two things, I've learned kind of two things. One is that the review and approval process is important. It matters. And the second is that, as has been said tonight, words matter. And to that point, a picture is worth 1,000 words. And I wanted to ask, I had emailed and I haven't received a response. I wanted to understand the map that was that is up for being transmitted, the character area map, were neighborhoods, or I'm sorry, are there any parcels that were neighborhood, in the neighborhood character area, that have been moved into transitional or activity centers that the steering committee was unaware of, that you all were unaware of, and that the public was not aware of as of the final, the previous meetings? Do we have an answer for that? Is the map different? It is not. The map is not different. I cannot get an answer. It is not different. The map is exactly the same. From what I understand from an email that I read from Mr. Leatherman, the map did change. I just want to understand how, if that is indeed the case, I do want clarification. I've seen two emails. I just want to understand how the map changed after final review by everybody. And if so, who did it? and why. The reason I ask is because, as one lady said, I think from the North Farm subdivision, this does impact other people and people with vested interests in their property. I'm living the situation right now myself on Goulding Place. The property in my backyard is redeveloping and because of a few loopholes and changes to the character areas 10 years ago that I was unaware of, they are building five feet from my property, a much higher intensity development with no buffers. Five feet from my property with no buffers, nothing. So this is my concern. The process matters, and I just want to make, I want to understand, was there a slip up here? Because it's happened over and over and over again, and I just don't want it to happen again going forward. I would love clarification on whether the map was, that is going forward, is the map that the steering committee approved. Thank you.

Next speaker. Lindsay Coats.

hello friends um hi i rushed up here so forgive this look um i know most of us many of us parents and people that are getting ready for the school year next week to start and Santos camp started this week. So that's been great. Anyway, I just wanted to say first and foremost a shout out to Doug curling and his family right now He was a speaker previously mentioned that he ran for council and Doug spoke with him not that they aligned on much Doug and I did happen to have a lion on many things and I just and thinking of the Curling family right now and how much of a pillar Dave has been to this community. I have been speaking on housing since 2021, I believe, when prior to Sarah Beeson, Council Member Beeson being on council, came to me and kind of said, hey, you're a community leader. And I was like, what are you talking about? And through conversations realized as my advocacy and housing being a realtor and wanting to protect personal property rights aligned with things that were happening in the city and recognized not only is it important for my job to understand what zoning is, but what's happening in these local municipalities where I work regularly. And that's how I started to become involved in that. I realized moving forward from there that there had been an ongoing decade-plus argument, faction, however you want to put it, that was really against any other form of housing except single-family homes. What I've learned is that those scare tactics and those activities and the misinformation that is spread on the regular by certain officials that are still elected and that I ran against, so it could be seen as I am coming in with, you know, I've got an ax to grind and I don't. I firmly disagree with your stance on this policy and where you want to go with it. And I feel like the city has missed an opportunity to get ahead of this. We have the opportunity in Roswell to be forward thinking. to really get ahead of the curve. And we've had years of prior leadership that has ignored this. And it's sad to me that we have missed this as a huge opportunity. And not only housing, but for economic development, for public health. It is a public health factor. Steve Walsh, I haven't had a chance to talk to him yet. We've only met by email through Nancy Diamond, former council, head of North Fulton, or one of, and North Fulton Improvement Network who is doing amazing work in the housing sector and understands this completely. And I urge everyone, to check out their website, check out their housing solutions because we have some major things that we could do and I believe this comprehensive plan and what y'all have done at the leadership of Council Member Sells and Council Member Hall can achieve. So thank you for putting it together and leading and thank you to all the committee members and thank you for all the consideration into this particular topic and Time you've taken to answer emails, so many emails driven by fear mongering and misinformation. And I hope moving forward that our council members and elected officials not in this room will make sure that they are not a part of that. Thank you.

Next speaker. There are no other speakers.

Does council have any comments or questions regarding this item? Council Member Zack.

Michelle, can I ask you a question? This is very nerdy. We talked a little bit about OP being in the UDC but not in the comp plan for PV. Do you recall?

Right, right.

Is that something that will be fixed with this?

This is a UDC fix, yes. We need to fix that, yes.

Okay, so that's UDC fix, not comp plan.

It will be to, yes, I have to look at both of them. I would bring them, that would come to council as an independent item that we need to correct.

Okay.

Not part of the process so far because it hasn't gone through.

Thank you.

Mr. Lefman, if you wouldn't mind, again, could you address the question in regards to map changes? I'm not sure what the, are we asking were Areas that were included in neighborhoods were moved or were some added, which I think I'm a little ... I'm sorry. Is that what you're asking, Ms. McKenzie? I apologize.

I think I've got a sense of the question since we've been emailing back and forth for the last few days. The question, and then if this doesn't answer the question directly, I'll take direction at that point. This is the map that is currently included in the recommendations for your consideration tonight. And this map was included and was the final version of this map at the final community meeting in April of this year. The steering committee saw this map in March of this year. And to the earlier question, this map has evolved since August of 2025. It's gone through a number of reviews, as we've gone through the process. It was largely consistent with what you see here on the map, but there were a couple of changes. There were a couple of changes to the very north along Woodstock Road where we added a couple of parcels that Ms. Alexander went over in her presentation. In the earlier version of August 2025, the areas around Bullock Hall were not included in the activity area and we realigned those with the 2040 language with this final map. And as you saw in the earlier presentation, this map used to extend all the way down to the river in the 2040 plan and we shored that up and stopped it short where you see it there at the southern end of the marker. So this map was seen by the community and the public in March and April. It has not changed in the current versions of the draft and it has been iterative since August of 2025 but largely intact from when we started about a year ago.

May I ask a separate type of question? I think the concept, areas that are included in this specific downtown activity center, so it's not a neighborhood map, but areas that here would come under approval and or submission also to the Historic Preservation Committee per se for zoning and development, or some do or some don't.

Yeah, the historic district boundaries are close, but not exactly the same as what you see here. And so there are some parcels that may fall outside of the historic district boundaries. Not many, as I'm just kind of looking very quickly at it, but for the most part, it's consistent with the historic district boundaries with maybe a few exceptions on the edges in the north.

Thank you. Any other questions? Council Member Hall. Thank you.

I knew it was going to do that. Thank you, Mayor. Michelle, actually I'd like to go through slides on your presentation as it relates to the map, if we could. And just for the public, when the committee was defining the scope of the work back in August, we were focusing on what we are now calling activity centers. In the 2040 Comp Plan, those were not called activity centers. They were called corridors, basically our commercial corridors. And so when the consultant basically went through and identified the commercial corridors and drew basically a planning level map for us, it did not identify specific parcels. But it was clear in our conversation that the now known activity level maps basically were not to encroach or trickle into the residential areas. And when we discussed the core activity centers and the transitional centers, we basically were very clear that where they come to abut, the residential areas, we'd have the transition areas. So I just wanted to give the public that knowledge. And also, the version, there is another version of the map specific to the Downtown Activity Center that is slightly different. It didn't have that skinny, skinny tail going out. Or if it did, it was not clear. It was more of a dark green color. But beside the point, when we had our meeting and we were discussing about moving the 2040 language along with the 2040 pictures, I had made the request that we also move the 2040 maps just so that we're clear. And the response was, oh gosh, you know, we can't do that because there's some changes. And so the conversation, and this was really about mid-June, So the conversation went on to, well, what are the changes? What changed? Well, there were some things that we and the consultant had to change. So that was new information, and that's where some of this conversation started. Last week, we were in a meeting. Councilmember Beeson was in the meeting. Councilmember Brumley was on an airplane. unable to attend and we had a version of this map I actually have a copy that you had brought to the meeting and the question was again on the did any residential areas or areas that were previously residential did they get included in these activity centers. And you had circled the Woodstock area, north of Woodstock Road, the area that's light pink on the very periphery on the north side of this map and had indicated that's the only parcel. And that was the conversation on Thursday or Wednesday or Thursday. Director Leatherman, I believe, asked that we further go through the map and identify any of the changes. And that's what you sent to us on Friday, to the Mayor and Council on Friday afternoon, about four o'clock. So if we can just go through those pages, it will be very helpful. And I think they start on page 15. so that we know what changes we're talking about to the map, where they were pluses or minuses, what the parcels were, and underlying zonings. Estate residential, there were no boundaries or changes to the activity center. So if we go on to the next two, page 16, there's what I can see, four red triangles, and I believe on page 17 you, identify those. The one in the top left is a red triangle with no coloring inside. So just to be clear, is that something that was in residential and now it's not? Correct. Okay, thank you.

This is the church property that I reviewed which was partially. So it's a civic kind of property. Yes, I have to double check that. I'm assuming it is, but I can't say without looking at the book chapter verse.

And that got moved into the commercial corridor or activity center for what reason?

Because it was one large parcel that was partially, partially in the suburban residential and the rest of it resides in the Parkway Village. So one parcel has a split character area and it's a church.

So it made sense to move it in there for the consultant and staff to go ahead and do that, make that change? Yes. Okay. And then the parcels on the east side, those have blue inside there, so that means that they were originally in the commercial corridor.

Holcomb Bridge Corridor. Right, more commercial, and it was moved into suburban residential character.

And those three parcels, I think one of them is the park, Seven Branches Park, or the furthest west one.

You'll know better than all the parks, yeah.

So they're all three park parcels that were moved into the residential area?

The one that's at the tip, part of it is in the national park. recreation area, and then the rest of it is zoned agriculture.

And so that increases our residential area. That's part of the net increase. We're moving these park properties in there. Yes, ma'am. Okay. If we can go on to the next page, please.

So this is the map, and then I go into the detail.

Neighborhood residential. Could you just please walk through these parcels? I believe the top parcel is the one we discussed, which is the soccer complex and the cemetery zoned NX. And that was in residential. It was in neighborhood residential, yes, ma'am. And now it's in the? Downtown activity center as the transitional area. Thank you. And if we can just walk down to the left, I guess, would be the easiest. What is that next parcel that is a red square with the blue in the middle, just to the left and down a little bit?

And I don't have notes with me to tell you what it was before, what the current zoning is on that parcel. It was because it went into neighborhood residential. I didn't anticipate. So I apologize. I don't, I can't tell you off the cuff what it is, but we can look it up while we speak.

Okay. And then the one below it is also was in the commercial area. Now it's in residential.

Yes, same.

And then the one with the white opening is that the... That's the Vaughn property. That's the Vaughn property. Thank you very much. And I think you discussed that earlier as to why that was moved in because there's part of that properties in... in the district, a majority of the properties are?

Part of it's in DX, part of it's Civic, and part of it is RS-12. Okay, and the largest part is DX? I can't say that. The largest part is RS-12.

So the largest part is RS-12? Yes, ma'am. Okay. And then let's jump across where it says City Hall. And so that was in residential, but those are commercial uses in townhomes, so that's...

These parcels are zoned either NX or Civic, and they have commercial uses. There's the one set of parcels that are the new townhomes on the Myrtle Street and Zion Circle.

And then just to the northeast of that, that one that's now blue used to be, if you just go up to the right, up and to the right, what is that one?

It's an existing neighborhood. I can't tell you which neighborhood.

And it used to be commercial, and now you moved it into residential. Yes. Okay, and then off to the north of Holcomb Bridge Road, there was an area that was added to residential?

Yes, yes, yes, I see.

And what is that, can you, is that the school, Mimosa School, or?

Do we know?

And these were changes recommended by the consultant or?

What is it? I believe those are those townhomes that are on Grimes Bridge Road in that area when you're heading north on Grimes.

Our team has confirmed yes, that's the case. Thank you, Mayor.

So they have commercial zoning. They have commercial zoning. Multifamily. Multifamily zoning. Okay, thank you. And then all the way at the bottom of this page, it's a big area.

The large blue? Mm-hmm.

Combination of apartment and residential. And so that was moved into residential, okay, thank you. And were there any other changes on the next sections, active?

This just was explaining on the rest of the remaining portion.

I think active neighborhood is where we are next, just. And so these were in the commercial areas and they got moved to residential. Correct. And so just can you explain the Liberty Lofts and the townhouse, it's zoned downtown DR. Yes. And that is typical of residential zoning or it, I'm just curious.

So active neighborhood, the definition of active neighborhood talks about existing multifamily and small lot residential. So that was, that was consistent with the definition.

Okay. So that, that just brings me back to the, the, property that we had a lot of discussion about, the Vaughn property that was primarily, that seems to be the outlier of all of these moves. In what way outlier? outlier in the sense that most of that property is the underlying zoning and i realize this is the comp plan but the underlying zoning is our residential rs-12 a very small portion of it is dx which would be in the commercial areas the other the other movements that that we had seemed to They were either churches or parks moving back and forth.

I see where you're going. This one is just the grouping of the existing zoning for the location near residential or adjacent to residential made sense as part of the transitional. The goal is that transitional, like we were mentioning with Councilman Russel, the goal with transitional is that you have within the boundaries similar, within the boundaries of transitioning down from a more intense. So for the active, excuse me, not active, The activity center, this is in the transitional area, the activity center, and it would make sense that it would have a residential, less intense use, but along the, as a way to taper down to adjacent and have compatibility with adjacent properties. So it's meeting that intention. the intent of having transitioned areas within the activity centers. So we wanted to build in confidence that when we looked at it, whether something was in the core or if it was in the transitional, regardless of which activity center, it really is night and day. It's very different what's allowed in the core, which is your most intense, and the transitional is really where your RS6, RS9, you're more transitioning down of uses as intended.

Okay, thank you. I know I took a lot of time. I'll yield to my colleagues and follow back up.

So, and I guess I just, this is the map of the Vaughan property is not this entirety of this.

It's in the purple Right, so if I look at that on the... Oh, no, oh, I see, I'm sorry. Yes, it's a couple of parcels, not just the one owned by the Vaughn family.

But it is also, it's got Civic on one side, it's got some DX on the other. Exactly, correct. Okay, I just want to make sure I'm seeing it. Yep. Councilman Beeson?

To clarify, and this might be a question for Mr. Leatherman, when was the Vaughn property, this parcel, added to the map originally?

The first time that we started to look at this property in particular was in August of 2025 in the first iteration of the activity center. The first blocking of the map included, it did not include the civic parcel that is there shaded in the light gray, nor did it include the long tail that goes down to the corner of Roswell Farms Drive. and Coleman Road. That iteration was later in the fall, I think around October, when we started looking at a parcel by parcel iteration of these maps and picked up the total ownership of all three zonings in that corner.

And when you say we, do you mean the Comp Plan Steering Committee?

It was made by the staff and the consultants and then we interface with the steering committee on the parcel maps through our process. So we laid these maps out and took a look at them and then they were also available to the community during our public meetings.

Understood, thank you. You're done. Just a couple of comments. While I appreciate that stimulating exercise that we just did going through parcel by parcel on the zoning maps, as it was determined, for the most part, nothing, nothing has changed since about a year ago. And then October was this property in particular. And I understand Council Member Hall maybe didn't notice it in August or October when it was previously discussed with the steering committee, or the six meetings that the steering committee had, or the two public meetings that were had in addition to that. but just because it was not noticed by a particular member does not mean that it was not there or included nor was it presented to the public for weigh-in so in terms of making sure that we're being fully transparent within the process itself i understand if folks maybe just became aware of this process or maybe this parcel's involvement in it but awareness is not inclusion this was included in the original maps i hear you in terms of your concerns i'm amenable to us striking, if not part of the property, all of the property, but I want to make sure that it's clear that the steering committee, which included Councilmember Hall, was very well aware of the inclusion of this property as early as August and as late as October of 2025. Not to mention, as Council Member Hall also mentioned, we receive briefings every other week prior to our council meetings as council members. It's just so that we don't get completely caught off guard when we sit in front of a large group of people like yourself and we have to make decisions from the dais. So that gives us every opportunity to ask clarifying questions. As Council Member Hall said, we did discuss this section of the map in our briefing last Wednesday. Wednesday? Thursday. My life's a blur. Last Thursday, the Vaughn property was brought up and discussed. Also, the briefing before that, when we went through line by line by line of every single edit that had been made to the document over time, Council Member Hall asked no questions in that meeting because she said that she had nothing to clarify and she was aware of the changes. However, the following council meeting, she said that she was not aware of any of the changes and we got to do that line by line by line exercise again.

Council Member Beeson. Please don't make it personal.

It's not personal. It's transparency to the process itself. It's extremely frustrating from my position as an elected official to have somebody send mass emails to the public and have a former council member who isn't here tonight, nor has he emailed mayor and council his concerns. to tell people that there's something that they should be worried about or that there was something inherently wrong with the process when they were involved in the process itself. So it's frustrating, and I do feel like I owe the public at least some clarity in terms of the process itself. Beyond that, this person who asked the question earlier, I did want to answer their question. The council member who said something about changing demographics in the community, that was me. I was pointing out the statistics on page... There's a bar graph within the comprehensive plan of how we have increasing percentage of population of those who are senior residents, which is great. My parents are included in that. My parents have lived here since 1998 when I was nine years old. Love it. Love for the fact that my kids live near their grandparents. And I want other kids to be able to live near their grandparents as well. That is a part of our community as a whole. So I never once said any disparaging remarks about the inclusion of our senior residents. However, I did say that I would like to encourage the moving of those who maybe would love to move back home. I was one of the lucky few who in 2017 was able to afford my house. If I purchased my house now, I could not afford it. And I have two master's degrees and a six-figure salary. I could not afford my own house if I bought it today. I want to make sure that those who are working professionals, those who are, say, between the ages of 25 and 45, are able to be included in the Roswell community, especially if we're going to say that the top priority is economic development and alleviating that tax burden from the homeowners on property taxes. Nobody, and I will emphasize this, nobody places their business in a city based off of how few between the ages of 25 and 45 are going to be there, because they cannot live there. For kicks and giggles, I can make a lot of friends in this room right now and just say, show of hands, how many people are under the age of 45 in here? But I probably know the general answer to that.

It illustrates my point, hey-o, I see you, Jennifer.

I see you guys. We have a smattering of folks, and I appreciate your involvement and the community as a whole, but that's really what I'm trying to say. I love the fact that each and every one of you are here right now, and I want you to be able to continue to call Roswell home. But if we are going to continue to grow businesses here, we need to allow people to live here who are entering the workforce, who have five to 10 years of experience in the workforce, people who cannot afford to live here right now. And so with wrapping this up on terms of my feedback on this, oh, the last comment too, there was another gentleman who I believe also left. His concern was that we had a lot of undefined terms. That was because council unanimously agreed to authorize a housing study to define those terms. We didn't want to go into the comprehensive plan defining terms that had previously been discussed. So for example, I think he said, He gave some examples, missing middle, workforce housing. Those are all used in the 2040 comprehensive plan. They're used liberally in the 24 comprehensive plan. They were never defined in the last five years. That's something that I appreciate of this administration, specifically this mayor and councils. We all unanimously agreed that we need to have a housing study to identify not only the needs within our community, but also how we're defining those needs based off of what Roswell needs as a whole. We cannot do that until the study is performed. I realize that that came late, would have loved to include it in the comprehensive plan, but unfortunately housing was deprioritized from the comprehensive plan up until January of this year. I understand the concerns with wanting to bring back in the 2040 language. Originally it was just the request for the residential sections, but then I've also heard requests for bringing back in the pictures and then bringing back in the maps. At this point, you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We had 10 public sessions that allowed people to give feedback, including two surveys that had, I believe, over 1,000 participants within those surveys. Housing was still identified as a need within that. I understand there's some questionable language that people feel is too ugly of a tooth, and I'm good with striking that language. So for example, page 122 in Suburban Residential, there's a line, we could strike, which is alongside smaller pockets of other housing types. that tightens up the language. Page 124, neighborhood residential, strike the word generally, that takes out the wiggle room in it. But to sit there and revert an entire document back to a document that was made five years ago, it's being disingenuous to the process itself because you're just going back on what you did five years ago and trying to not acknowledge that there have been changes in the market over time, and there's changes in different goals over time, and that there are new people in the community, or maybe people who just didn't participate last time, who did participate in this round. And I don't want to discredit their participation either. Thank you.

Council Member Sells.

I'll go back to you, but I just, you know, so as a As part of the steering committee, I just want to focus on a couple of things. One is that the reason that we focused on economic development is because Roswell has some unique challenges. We have a very small portion of our city which is even available for economic development. Most of that is a brownfield already. Everybody in here probably drives past a shopping center that is economically and functionally obsolete. And the average age of our commercial stock is, I believe, Jeff, I'm correct on this, about 45 to 48 years old. So we as a body decided that we were gonna focus on economic development. And we did that because you have to have a strategy that oversees and drives that whole process because not only do we have a very little bit of it, but it also turns over, one parcel at a time, and not very quickly. And so you have to think about these things holistically, and so we focused on these character areas. And so the instructions to us as a steering committee, the instructions that we discussed among the steering committee was we're gonna focus on these activity centers. Every map was focused on those activity centers. What we saw, people put their yellow stickies on what they thought could go there. And of course, in a, For instance, someone mentioned that downtown is not family friendly, downtown Canton Street in particular. You're absolutely right about that. It's also not scalable. because it is what it is. We're not going to build any more 1840 buildings, okay? It is what it is. It's not scalable. And so we looked at and discussed areas where perhaps an entertainment-based mixed-use community or mixed-use development would work. And there are a few parcels that are of a size and of a location that that would work. And of course that would include some apartments, townhomes, transitions as you move closer to existing neighborhoods. And that's what this group talked about in all of those meetings that you saw, including the two extra credit ones that we did. They wanted to go further in that issue and talk more specifically. There was a couple of statistics that we saw in the delivery by the consultants where they told us, basically built the case for what we need and how we match up against other towns. Roswell has the lowest cost housing on average of the North Fulton tier, okay? We are the workforce housing of North Fulton. That's the bottom line. So to give you a perfect example, the Alpharetta, the statistics show that Alpharetta has 3.3 jobs per household. Roswell has 1.2. And I misquoted the analogy I gave last time when I said, you know, once upon a time, people believed that fruit flies came from dust. It's actually house flies. Back in the day, they thought that. And some people think that jobs come from residents. That's not the case. Jobs come from businesses that drive employment. so what is economic development all about we have three chief objectives in my view as a body with regard to economic development the first of course is the quality of life of the roswell residents that's number one we need to be thinking about that where would they where would they like to shop where would they like to work but that leads to the second one the second one is we need to bring employee employers who fit the demographic of Roswell. How do we bring jobs that fit the, you know, you look at the economic status of the Roswell residents, the educational status, the age and stage. The reason we're commuting is because we don't have any high-end jobs. We have lots of low-end jobs. And so the third reason that we should be involved in economic development is to drive our tax base, which is overweighted on residential property taxes. That's what we focused on. That's what we talked about. There was never any conversation about the residential areas because we were focused on that because it's important. And so the reason for going back to the 2040 language with regard to residential, these nine pages that we're talking about, is because nobody asked for input on those. That was not part of the conversation. And as a matter of basic fairness, it seems appropriate because we were focused on economic development in this plan, that we should leave that as it is. That's how that came to be. As far as activism, I'll see you and raise you. I haven't sent out a thousand emails, but I will tell you that some of this is based on words that people said, as you indicate. and they did not land well. And that's what this is called. This is community involvement based on what was said in a meeting. And so that's why people are here. If it is appropriate, I would like to make a motion with regard to the 2040 language as soon as we are ready.

Council Member Hall. Thank you. I just wanted to address a couple of comments that my colleague indicated. The question isn't about the maps being available. And Jeff, can I give you this map to put up there? This is the map from our meeting. It was just one copy brought. So the question isn't about the maps or the version of the maps, whether it was pink or whether it was Google type of map with the boundary. The question is, my question was, were any of these areas previously in a residential area? zoning category that were being incorporated and i i do apologize that's my circle on the left in the black ink when i started going through the parcels after our meeting up at the top was what was indicated that was the only part that was previously in residential so i have to rely on staff It's not that we didn't see the maps. We had maps. We had versions of maps. We had planning maps. This is the issue. We relied on information that that was the only area that was in residential previously. It was corrected or Jeff did ask Michelle to go back and identify the areas and that's why I wanted to go through so painfully all those pages but for the public so that they understood why the consultants and staff made those decisions. It was not, those decisions were not made or pointed out on a parcel level. at the stakeholder level. At the 2040 comp plan, at the end of the comp plan, we went through parcel by parcel and defined the boundaries of the residential areas. We did not have an opportunity to do that here. Councilmember Brumley asked or I mean with support for another survey that pushed us back a little bit and perhaps that's why we got the draft when we did before we had a chance to review the draft for an updated draft. So I just wanted to set the record straight on that so that there was clarity. Thank you.

Councilmember Phillippe.

I just want to start by by thanking staff, in particular Michelle and Jeff. You guys have worked tirelessly on this, answering so many questions, going back and adding details where some various questions came up. I appreciate all of you being here, all the emails that we've received. I really appreciate the public engagement. I do feel, and I really appreciate hearing some of these narratives tonight. My business partner and I, through work with a executive coach, talk a lot about stories and how we develop our own stories in our heads. It becomes our narratives of things that have happened. and so hearing the stories that people have had about your own experiences and the things that you're afraid of happening is is very very helpful i do also really appreciate the speaker who had said that they believe 98 of this was done with good intention and that has been my experience i don't think that there was any intention at least i'm not aware of any intention for any of this language to to invade any neighborhoods. From all the conversations that I have had through campaigning and through my time in office, I have found, like our first two speakers have said, that there is so much common ground amongst us most of us do want to focus on these activity centers we do want to bring commercial more commercial to our city we do want to alleviate our tax base we do want to protect our neighborhoods and i think where the conversation needs to go now is yes okay we're going to put we're going to have this vote to put the 2040 language back in i have seen the few little variances and understand why that would be more comfortable for people i will be supporting that language But what we need to do when we're talking about these maps is we're looking now at transition areas. And the reason why we want to identify these transition areas on our maps is because those are the areas we need to talk about together. These are the ones that are going to raise the most conversation, right? We agree that we want to build our activity centers, build the commercial base there. We agree that we want to protect our neighborhoods. What do we have to work with is these transition areas, and that's what we need to talk about. I don't believe, as much as I believe in the combined genius of this council here, I don't think that we are going to solve the housing issue. We know that housing has been an issue nationwide, And we all care about it. Many of us want to be able to downsize or have our kids live here or whatever. Many of us feel like maybe that's not our responsibility to determine how this type of housing develops. And that's okay. Those transition areas are gonna help us have these conversations and really define what we want. So I just want to say that We are all up here in good faith. We are all up here trying to do the right thing. And we would get to the right answer by working together, and we will do what we promised and protect your neighborhoods.

Council Member Sales.

You know, I was thinking when they were talking about the first two speakers in particular, one of the things that I really enjoyed about running for this, my first elected office since senior class president of 1980, I always like to say, is this was nonpartisan, you know, and I have had some great conversations. All of us have knocked on a lot of doors and met many of you. I think Lance may have, no, there's Lance. He was one of the first people whose door I knocked on. And, you know, I mean, those kinds of relationships have been wonderful. I'm not sure who the 2% is that's acting in bad faith. I think everyone is acting in good faith. We see some problems and we have different approaches to it. So, again, if it is appropriate, I would like to make a motion that we, I think, Joe, what we need to do is two things, right? You want to say something? Okay. You want me to do that first, or do you want to make a motion and then discuss it, or no?

No, I would like Councilmember Brumley, did you want to speak?

Yes, some clarification from the things I heard tonight. That community survey that Ms. Hall was saying that I ordered, that was an initiative of the mayor, so I don't know why I was involved in that comment. So it was not true. I also want to make sure that everybody knows that I don't, I don't, I'm not a builder, I'm not a developer, I don't know any property in Roswell aside from my own home. I don't do rentals, I'm not in real estate, I don't sell. So for those residents who kindly mentioned saying that I was doing backroom deals to change zoning, just wanna make sure to ask the staff, was I doing backroom deals to do zoning changes in the plan? Now, the map that also people were mentioning, asking me why did I change this map, which is in the draft. I saw this map the first time on June 16, where was our committee meeting. It was like this. I didn't change anything. I did not ask for extra density anywhere. The language that is used in the comprehensive map regarding the activity centers and the different zoning areas, as it was mentioned before, it came from the 2040 plan. All the terminology that scare people from me about workforce housing, affordable housing, I did not write any of that. It came from the 2040, I wasn't even elected. This whole plan, everything that was in here was written before I took office. And I was not part of the stakeholder committee, so I also, and they know this, I attended a couple of the meetings, but I did not tell anybody what to write here. So I just want to make sure that people understand that is not the process. And to understand that, yes, we had meetings. Some of them are work sessions in which we bring different ideas to the table. There was a gentleman here that I believe is part of the North Fulton Improvement Network, which is an organization that lives here in Roswell. They had some ideas to bring to the table, and I presented them. They are also residents. Was that something that made everybody that I said, you have to vote on this tonight? No. Could I have changed all that? No. We're all here. This is where we do the votes. So I truly hope that all of you leave this meeting with more of an understanding how the process works and what an individual can or cannot do. And you also make sure that you understand your sources of where your information is coming from. Again, I read every single one of the emails you sent me. I always do. So if you have more to say, please say it to me.

Council Member Zack.

I'll try to be quick and painless. Sorry, one quick thing I want to address, a lot of comments in the room. I do fully agree that I think our timeline of when the draft came out and how much time there was to digest it was too short. Hopefully, obviously going forward, I'm gonna take this conversation offline with staff. I think everyone here on the council will feel the same way to figure out how next time we can make sure that window's extended and try to figure that out in policy that predates us so when the next council comes in, they'll kind of prepare and know that a wider timeline is gonna be needed. So I do wanna comment to that. I'll take whatever accountability and ownership to that.

Council Member Beeson.

To clarify as well, I realize that the two council members that said things that were inflammatory in the committee meeting, that was probably council member Bentley and myself, that was taken out of context. To clarify, I was the council member who had suggested the subdivision of large acreage properties, and it was strictly within the context of a conversation, not a directive on policy, but just within the philosophical conversation of neighborhood character. I'll use, for example, Warsaw Road. The character of that neighborhood has changed immensely or Thompson Place it used to be 1960s ranch houses on about one acre property within the context of that conversation I said those properties should be able to be divided into say half acre or quarter acre so that you can build something about the same size that was previously on that lot within those Lots but right now those Lots are going for about a million dollars there's no way to keep it profitable anymore for a developer without making it a very large house i realize within the context of affordable housing that is not affordable housing but it's more affordable to purchase an 850 000 home on a quarter acre lot as opposed within these old areas that have aging housing stock that are being picked up and convert it into four to $5 million mansions that very few of us can afford. So making sure that when we're thinking about a character area, it also has to do with how the housing looks. So if you drive through those areas and you see ranch house, ranch house, ranch house, very large house, that's not the character of that area. And then lastly, as I know that we're getting ready to motion a vote to incorporate the 2040 language, I believe Council Member Sells is preparing to do that. For the record, I, I want to reiterate that while I support the sentiment of the audience today and sharing their concerns, I also don't want to discredit the process or those who provided their input before. I am all for redlining and striking the language to make it stronger or make it tighter, but to completely undo a process and revert back to a five-year-old plan I think is disingenuous to the process. Do explain my vote, thank you.

Council Member South.

Yeah, I think I've discussed that, and we're going to do it as one motion, the two.

Yeah, yeah, sure.

First of all, I'd like to thank you, Erin. I agree with you. I don't believe anybody is on the take here. I mean, I know people like to say that, and it's easy to do, but there's not any backroom deals. I don't believe any of my council member cohorts are trading on their own book, let's just say. So where did it go? There. There we go. I'm going to make a motion to approve. for the approval of the Transmittal of the Comprehensive Growth Plan for 2045, draft version which has the environmental language proposed by Councilmember Phillippe and the residential character area language and photos from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

Staff would just request these additional four items as well.

Okay, gotcha, gotcha. Further, and furthermore, Staff recommends approval contingent upon correcting the following. Page 151, add RS-12 to Holcomb Bridge Road, Georgia 400 Activity Center. Page 159, bullet 9, correct the text box so words are not cut off the last sentence. Page 159 and page 174 and 175, correct the compatible district's narrative, page 159, and table, page 174, I assume that is, With this edit, Midtown Core remove RS-6 and RS-4, transitional add RS-6 and RS-4, and then page 74, use the words neighborhoods instead of subdivisions. That is my motion.

May I have a second? Council Member Phillippe.

Can I make an amendment on the existing motion? You can try, go ahead. Okay, there's two proposed amendments. The amendment that I would like to make is pulling out the reversion of the language to the 2040 version and letting that be a standalone vote before doing the full approval of the comprehensive plan with the rest of the recommended changes.

I'm fine with that. So we're going to do 20, sorry, let me make sure I understand.

No, legally, no.

So we're unable to, because so far you have six pending changes to the motion.

One motion.

It's one motion according to our attorney.

Yeah, one motion. I've amended motions before and had multiple motions. It's one motion according to our attorney legal advice right now. Understood, okay. Council Member Hall.

I guess we have a motion and a second. I was just going to ask if I could, I guess amend the motion To add administratively correct language, there's one item that was missed on the staff recommendations that are listed one through four. There is a word error. I don't know if I can do that or I can make a separate motion for that.

I'm gonna go with legal advice.

Okay, so there is a motion and a second right now and you're amending the motion to include, what was the language that you used?

I propose to amend the motion to remove the words preferred use that were not included in the 2040 language and that word preferred use on top of the photos was supposed to be eliminated per our conversations and it was not. It's in the draft. So I just was correcting that the 2040 language was not pure.

Which pages are those on? Where would these edits be made?

These edits would be made in each of the residential areas starting with the state above where the photos are shown on the page and there is Do you see it?

Perhaps, Mayor, if I can maybe try to provide some understanding and clarification of what I think the council member is talking about, if you'd just indulge me for a moment. There we go, okay. Here's what I believe to be the description. So what you see here is an example of the 2040, it's not an example, it is the language from the 2040 comprehensive plan that includes both the bullet points in neighborhood residential as well as the photos. The current version, this is the formatted version of the 2045 plan. And throughout the document of the 2045 plan, we have preferred uses and transitional uses. That is language and formatting from the 2045 plan. What I believe Council Member Hall is referring to is that word preferred use does not exist in the 2040 plan and would like it struck from the residential areas so that it is a copy and paste of the 2040 to the 2040 plan. The photos are the same, the bullet points are the same, but that preferred use is not consistent with the 2040 language, and I believe that's what you're referencing.

That is correct. It's four times in there, in each of the four sections.

So the amendment is to strike transitional uses and go back to preferred uses, or it's preferred uses to transitional uses?

It's to strike the word preferred use on four pages where it appears above the presidential pictures.

Okay, so the amendment is to strike preferred use on those four pages.

That's correct. Okay, that is correct.

Councilwoman Basin.

May I ask for a point of clarity from legal why the motion was allowed to be amended on that order, but not my point of order?

Let's take this one up first. We'll come back to that one.

I still need a second on this one.

In regards to Christine Hall's, Councilmember Hall's proposal, can I get the legal perspective on if that would have any ramifications?

I don't believe there would be any.

Thank you.

Mary, shall I amend my, accept the amendment? Is that what you want me to do?

Is there a second to accept this amendment?

Oh, sorry. Then do we take a separate vote? So seconded.

Okay, so let's, is all in favor of accepting this one amendment right now?

To the motion on the table.

I'm sorry?

To the motion on the table. No, but we haven't addressed Councilwoman Beeson yet.

Okay, so we're taking a vote that this amendment from Councilwoman Hall that has been seconded by Councilmember Sells will be added to the motion on the table by Councilmember Sell, seconded by Councilmember Phillippe. All in favor, please raise your hand. That's all we're voting on right now. Five, all opposed? Councilman Beeson. Now, if you would address Councilman Beeson, do we take her? Now is there another amendment?

I don't understand this whole case. This is the time for your amendment. OK.

I would like to make an amendment to the extending motion is that instead of reverting to the 2040 comprehensive plan language as proposed by Council Member Sells in the initial motion, that rather we instead do red line changes to the existing document to reflect that language. all in do i have a second so instead of throwing out all the existing residential sections and just replacing them with the 2040 sections which is the current proposal according to council member cells correct that in lieu of doing that that instead we would redline the document to strike

I have my notes.

To strike on page 120, the state residential, I'm sorry, on page 122, suburban residential strike alongside smaller pockets of other housing types. Page 124, neighborhood residential strike generally. And that should cover, generally speaking, the changes that were providing loose terms.

Do I have a second for this motion? No, we're just gonna, do I have a second? Do you need clarification of what she's asking?

No.

Okay, do I have a second? I do not see a second, sorry, so. Motion dies. Motion dies. So we have a motion with an amendment that has been, the amendment has been approved. Now we are to take a vote on the motion, which would be, I'm not gonna read it again. God help us. All in favor say, please raise your hand. Five, all opposed, one. Motion passes. We're gonna take a 10 minute break right now because we have seven more items to go through, sorry.

They did not change it either.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. I do need to note that Council Member Sells had to leave. So he, I guess, do we mark him as, he's not present for the rest of the evening. So City Clerk Long, please read the third item on the regular agenda.

This is item number 10543, ZMCC 122500006, 320 Hearts Gravel Road Modifications of Zoning Conditions for World Harvest Church, presented by Kristen Thomas-Berger.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. As Nancy said, I am Kristen Thomasberger. I'm a Planner 2 with Community Development. Tonight, I will be presenting ZMCC 1225-0000006, which is a modification to zoning conditions for 320 Hartscrapple Road, World Harvest Church. This is the location of the property outlined in red. You can see that there are two parcels involved in this project, which is for a regional stormwater detention pond. It will span both World Harvest Church and Gethsemane Garden Missionary Baptist Church. World Harvest is the parcel that's on the right, and Gethsemane Church is the parcel on the left. The request for the modification of zoning conditions is because World Harvest Church received a conditional use in 2006 with eight conditions of approval. Because the detention pond crosses the property line to World Harvest Church, it is required that they have to go to council for approval to change these conditions. They are also asking for two new concurrent variances. This is the site plan. If you look at the peak of that triangle, you can see where the detention pond is going to be located. And through the middle of that detention pond, you can see the property line delineating between the two parcels. The zonings of the property for Gethsemane and for World Harvest is civic. Surrounding that is all residential. We have the Wexford subdivision to the rear, and then across the street there is more residential. The variances that are requested are, the first one is for the platted side yard building setback. The applicant is requesting to reduce the platted side yard building setback on the World Harvest Church property at 320 Hartscrabble from the required 50 feet to zero feet to develop a stormwater structure across the property lines. The second variance is to unify development code 7.2.1 letter F side yard building setback. The applicant is requesting to reduce the regulated side yard building setback on the Gethsemane Garden Missionary Baptist Church property located at 398 Hartscrabble Road from the required 10 feet to zero feet to develop a stormwater structure across property lines. The following are the previously approved conditions of approval and the ones that are being requested to be either be removed or modified. Condition number one, the owner developer shall develop and maintain the property in substantial accordance with the site plan received in the community development department on December 22nd, 2005, or as approved by the design review board and consistent with these recommended conditions. The applicant is proposing the development of a regional stormwater detention pond. The site plan packet dated March 25th, 2026 will replace the previously approved site plan. There are no other changes to the site plan proposed. Condition number two, the owner developer shall relocate the cherry trees on the site as approved by the City of Roswell Landscape Architect and Roswell Design Review Board. The applicant is proposing the removal of this condition. World Harvest Church was unable to relocate the existing cherry trees due to their size. They have subsequently planted additional hardwood and evergreen trees in place of the relocation of the existing cherry trees. Condition number three, the owner developer shall install 30 inch curb and gutter and five foot sidewalk with a five foot grass strip along the total property frontage along hardscrabble road during phase two expansion as required by RDOT. The applicant is proposing the removal of this condition. World Harvest Church expansion related to phase two has not been constructed. The city of Roswell Transportation Department completed the hardscrabble road widening project in 2018 that included World Harvest Church frontage. The city improvements included 24 inch curb and gutter and five foot sidewalk with a five foot grass strip. Condition number four, the owner developer shall install a 12 foot wide, 210 foot left turn lane with a 50 foot taper at the existing main entrance to the World Harvest Church during the phase two expansion as required by our dot. The applicant is proposing the removal of this condition. World Harvest Church expansion related to phase two has not been constructed. The city of Roswell Transportation Department completed the hard scrabble road widening project back in 2018 that included World Harvest Church frontage. The city improvements included 175 foot left turn lane with a 50 foot taper at the existing main entrance for the World Harvest Church property. Condition number five, the owner developer shall submit a combination plot to the community development department and it shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a land development permit. The applicant is not proposing any changes to this condition. Condition number six, the owner-developer shall install a four-foot berm with a combination of fencing and landscaping along the northern property line. The improvements shall run from the northwest corner of the property to the western line of 595 Valley Claire Lane. The applicant is proposing the removal of this condition. World Harvest Church has met the condition as possible. They've installed a four foot high berm and planted evergreen trees along their northern property line from 595 Valley Claire Lane to 565 Valley Claire Lane, approximately 525 feet. To continue with additional berm grading, fence installation and tree installation would have negatively impacted the existing 68 red oak tree and 56 inch poplar tree, both specimen trees located along the Northern World Harvest Church property line. Additionally, existing 20-foot wide Fulton County sanitary sewer easement and current drainage flow patterns from residential properties on the north side of World Harvest Church property negatively impact the completion of the required fence, berm, and landscape installation. Condition number seven, the owner developer shall note on the site plan that the critical root zone of the existing oak tree behind the home at 545 Valley Claire Lane shall be protected. The applicant is proposing the removal of this condition. The condition of the subject tree has declined since 2006. The recent arborist report and supplemental letter from Caldwell Tree Care indicates the existing 64-inch red oak tree shows signs of decline in condition and shows several positive indicators of pressure from disease. and this tree has been rated as poor condition. However, World Harvest Church will implement a care plan within their property to mitigate potential impact to the oak tree from the proposed development within the critical root zone. Condition number eight, there shall be no parking on the grass area of phase one. The applicant is not proposing any changes to this condition. Those are all the conditions from the 2006 conditional use. Based on the analysis of this case, the Community Development Department recommends approval of case ZMCC-1225-00006 with concurrent variances to the modification of zoning conditions related to the 2006 conditional use case CU-0504 and CV-0509 with the following conditions of approval. Number one, the owner developer shall develop the property in substantial accordance with the site plan dated March 25th, 2026. Number two, approval of concurrent variances to reduce the side yard setbacks to zero feet for the development of the regional stormwater pond. Number three, deletion of conditions of approval from the 2006 case CU040504 as follows. Delete conditions number two, three, four, six, and seven of the eight original conditions of approval as approved on January 9th, 2006. And number four, the owner developer shall submit to the City of Roswell a plot for the review showing stormwater structure and easements for approval and for it to be recorded with Fulton County. On this site plan you can see the neighboring properties and you're going to be seeing the renderings of what they will be seeing from their backyards. And this is the Wexford subdivision that abuts World Harvest Church. This is the rendering from the Gethsemane Church. This is 350 Wexford Overlook Drive. 340 Wexford Overlook Drive. 330 Wexford Overlook Drive, 380 Colerain Place, 370 Colerain Place, 545 Valley Claire Lane, and that's it. Do you have any questions?

City Clerk Long, do we have any one from the public that would like to speak?

There are no public speakers for this item.

Is there anyone here on behalf of the applicant who would like to speak?

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Michael Lynch. I'm with Foresight Group. We are assisting World Harvest Church as their civil engineer on the proposed redevelopment project that impacts 320 and 398 Horse Gravel Road. World Harvest Church is here tonight to present their proposed regional detention pond project to you and answer the questions you may have concerning that project as well as the requested zoning variances and zoning condition revisions. I'm joined here tonight by the project team. Senior Pastor Merrick Huffton, Executive Pastor Chris Huffton, Assistant Pastor and Project Manager Willie Russell, Landscape Architect Peter Frowley, and Caldwell Tree Care Arborist Brandon Wright. World Harvest Church has been a growing part of the Roswell community for many years, and during this time they have continued to improve their community outreach and the facilities used to support that ministry. With an eye on the future, World Harvest Church realizes that the stormwater management is a key component for facility redevelopment. So in 2023, they brought Foresight Group on board to review current stormwater management conditions within both their properties on Hartscrabble Road and the adjacent Gethsemane Garden Missionary Baptist Church property. Initial discussions with city staff and adjacent neighbors were also started at that time to understand the stormwater management conditions within the affected drainage basin and the existing drainage patterns around the properties. Over the last three years, the project team has worked toward original detention pond design that provides stormwater management for the three properties that primarily make up the drainage basin. Due to existing topography features, the natural location for the proposed regional detention pond falls within the northern section of the Gethsemane Garden Missionary Baptist Church in the northwest corner of the World Harvest Church property. It's important to, again, note that the three properties that will drain into this regional detention pond are two properties that belong to World Harvest Church, one on the north and south side of Hartscrabble Road, and then Gethsemane Garden. Over the past three years, World Harvest Church has completed multiple pre-application meetings with city staff, met with individual property owners within Wexford subdivision, as well as discussions with their HLA. They've reviewed project impacts with Fulton County staff and completed state water determinations. Our submittal package includes recorded easements between Gethsemane Garden and World Harvest Church for construction and long-term maintenance. of the proposed regional detention pond and also include a recorded easement for the connection of the discharge from that detention pond with property owners James and Jenna Pace. These easements identify World Harvest Church as the sole leader for construction planning and permit costs and the sole leader for future maintenance and maintenance costs for the proposed regional detention pond. The recorded easements grant access through perpetuity and are binding to respective heirs and successors. The proposed regional detention pond impacts the current zoning site plan and we are here tonight seeking your approval for the proposed project, approval of the required zoning variances and the building setbacks for each property and the removal of some of the current zoning conditions. We stand ready to answer any of your questions.

Thank you. Does council have any questions? Council Member Phillippe.

As the Environmental Public Works liaison, I could not let this opportunity go by without thanking you for your work here and the entities that are coming together to make this project possible. in increasing stormwater capacity, not only for yourselves and the surrounding neighborhoods, but for some handling some upstream impacts as well. So I have been, I had the pleasure of speaking at length with some of our EPW staff and so we just thank you for this. Thank you.

Council Member Hall.

Thank you, and I echo Council Member Phillippe's comments. Our city is very proactive when it comes to stormwater and for an applicant to be as proactive as you all have been and working with your neighbor and coming up with this very unique, working with staff and with Council Member Phillippe and coming up with this on how to make it happen and figuring it out, it's really, it's kudos to you and thank you very, very much for doing that for the community.

Do I have a motion? Council Member Phillippe, do I have a second? Council Member Hall, all in favor of approval? Vote is unanimous. Thank you. Thank you.

city clerk long please read the fourth item on the regular agenda this is item number 10545 rezoning request to or office residential for zero old roswell road pope and land pl20252326 presented by michelle alexander

Hello, Mayor and Council. This is addressing Shelby Park's little ad for the account number PL20252326. It's a rezoning where the applicant is requesting a CX commercial mixed use zoning to rezone to the OR office residential. The process has followed accordingly through the neighborhood meeting, DRB, a planning commission deferral, and then planning commission public hearing on July 21st as well then tonight we are on the public hearing. The parcel is situated surrounded by as the aerial shows on to the north of it there's existing townhomes but the surrounding area is predominantly industrial and office or light industrial uses. The owner is Pope and Land. The location is 0 Old Roswell Road. The property is around 10 acres, and it is zoned entitled to an eight story CX8 zoning designation. The surrounding uses are townhomes, light industrial, and office development. This is just a locator map for people to locate where they are in the city and where the subject site is. adjacent to Alpharetta, city boundary lines. The parcel is surrounded with CX zoning and it's also surrounded by light industrial zoning in the city of Alpharetta. We're also showing you the city of Alpharetta's zoning map just to point out the surrounding area is not only, it's already built out as office and light industrial, it's zoned light industrial or conditional use, excuse me, not conditional use, it's there. their community unit plan. So the background on this case is that in 2014 there was a project that Pope and Land proposed for 72 acres to pursue a mixed use development. The decision of council was to not allow, to limit and cap the amount of stories to three stories, so the applicant felt it wasn't possible or feasible to pursue at three stories, and instead at the time was able to sell to EH Homes when the Harlow was able to build on the property with townhomes. The remaining 10 acres or so is approved for 8-story height because after the redevelopment and the sale to EAH Homes, the council determined to grant an entitlement onto the property to encourage the applicant to come back and do mixed use with this higher intensity of the height. So the zoning request is that is for CX is moving from CX and it currently CX allows residential only as a mixed use and it requires 51% of the development to be commercial or retail. The height is up to eight stories is currently permitted the proposed development, instead of any office or mixed uses. proposed to be exclusively townhomes they're seeking 62 townhomes and their proposed rezoning zoning district is the or office residential. This is the site plan. What you see is sort of like the shape of a boot is the area where there's some environmental sensitivities. The applicant would need, if mayor and council approved this, they would need to still seek variances from the zoning board of appeals because of encroachments into stream buffers. The applicant is asking to rezone to OR, and I just want to read what's OR in the Unified Development Code. It's really clear in the Unified Development Code where it's located is as an employment district. So the UDC organizes all the districts based on residential or their overall arching use and type, and this one is located within the employment district in the UDC. And it's clear that the OR is intended to provide for a variety of office and employment uses while allowing for housing and limited retail and service. So it's really still looking to have employment and housing mixed, but have it not exclusively housing. It does not say that it's allowed to have a standalone residential. It has a variety of uses that is required by the zoning district. This is a map requested to show the OR zoning locations in the city. One of the criteria for rezoning is does it conform to the comprehensive plan and the intent? And the statement, I'll just read the last sentence of the statement, and this is in the industrial flex character area. And the industrial flex character area says that it is ideally situated to continue functioning as an employment center within the city limits with an additional mix of uses. So it's a very strong statement that this is our employment hub and it's important to think through what we just went as a discussion in the comprehensive plan. We have such a limited amount of area that is allowed, that is even feasible for us to pursue or that you're committed to as a policy to redevelop and allow for commercial employment based economic development driven activity And the one of the areas is this area that is designated as being your premier hub of employment. So this is the current policy that's on the, This is the current policy from your comprehensive plan, the 2040 plan. And it's just identifying that the location I wanted you to also see where it was in relation to Mansell overlook and this overall area that we've been discussing as part of the economic development plan in your 2024 economic development strategy that this area is intended to really serve as the employment hub of the whole entire city. It's really focused for your economic and technology-driven jobs. Employment center is the way it's talked about in the plan that you all approved for Transmittal. Now, it's only been approved for Transmittal. I'm only bringing this to your reference to show not only does your 2040 plan make it really clear that this property is intended for employment and for economic activity, Nothing is changing. You have been having a year of discussion where this is being pursued and continued so that this part of town, part of the city, is really where you want to protect and take care of your precious few parcels remaining that can be converted into employment opportunities. You have 10 total criteria for considering a rezoning in the UDC. They include changing trends, but one of the big ones is, of course, whether or not it conforms with the comprehensive plan. We read to you, the UDC, what the language is of OR and the intent and what the UDC intends for that area. And then there's another criteria having to do with reinforcing existing or planned character area. And you've already planned for this area very explicitly, both since 2040, also in the economic development strategy of 2024, and in the draft that you considered this evening. Planning Commission heard the applicant and the case and recommended denial of the request. And staff, based on our analysis and our report, we also recommend denial of the request to rezone the subject property.

Is the applicant present and would like to speak? Our representative?

There's some folks here who've been waiting all night to speak. I know in other applications, you've allowed them to come up and speak before the applicant. Do you want to do that now, or should I go? All right. My name's Den Webb. My address is 1105 West Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Georgia, 30309, here on behalf of Pope and Land. Before I begin, let me introduce some folks who've been waiting patiently with me tonight. First is Tom Barranco, who's the managing senior director with Pope and Land. And to Tom's right is a fellow who probably needs no introduction in this room, Steve Rowe, who's the project engineer. Let me just touch on a couple things that were just mentioned. Number one, we did file for stream buffer variance with this application. It's been pending since the day we submitted this request, so it exists. Number two, we've talked about this OR language back and forth, but there is nothing expressly in the code that prohibits standalone residential in the OR district, and that's also how it's been applied. Just to our south, is a standalone residential development. It's literally almost next door to where we are. In terms of the comp plan, the staff report's very confusing. It goes back and forth between the draft you talked about tonight and the existing comp plan. But as you know, and I think it's sort of been applied, the only comp plan that matters is the one that's the law or certainly the guiding adopted principle in the city right now. And it absolutely has language that supports this request. This area has been industrial flex for at least 15 years, a long time. And the one thing that the comp plan says under the industrial flex category is that there must be flexibility to meet changing economic demands, which again has occurred in the last 15 years. That same comp plan also advocates for new housing for young professionals and empty nesters. And it expressly supports residential uses. I think there's this idea that in the industrial flex character area, which is probably 150 acres, Everything has to be a mix of uses and that's not exactly the idea You can have a mix of uses within that entire hundred acres and that is essentially what we are proposing So let me touch briefly on Pope and Land. I suspect that's a name you know, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time on it, but they're a premier developer in the Southeast. They've been in business for 45 years. They are mixed-use and office developers. That's what they do. I could list innumerable projects in front of you tonight. I'm not going to do that, but I'll mention my favorite one, the battery, because that's one everybody knows. And I'm also going to mention Milton Park because it's relevant tonight. That project is in Alpharetta. So briefly ripping through these slides, this is an aerial of the property. We are essentially the blue area. What is around us on all three sides is the Harlow townhome community. Uh, and I'll talk a little bit about the history there, but as you heard, uh, we are zone CX eight, which allows resident, uh, allows eight stories, but requires 51% of the development to be non-residential. And we're also in the industrial flex character area. The point I want to mention is you'll notice Lakewood Parkway down to our south, we have no access to that roadway. There is a strip of land between the southern boundary of our property and Lakewood Parkway. They call that a spite strip in the business. The owners of Sanctuary Park have that, and they put it there to prevent our property from ever having direct access to Lakewood Parkway, which, of course, limits our uses immensely. Pope and Land has owned this property since 2014. This is a survey, and I think this is something that staff talked a little bit about, but I want to fill in a little bit more detail. The property we're here to talk about tonight, the boot that Ms. Alexander referenced is in the bottom right-hand corner, was actually part of a larger 73-acre tract development, as you heard. But you've got to understand the history here. So back in 2008, Pope and Land approached the city of Roswell and said, hey, we want to build a mixed-use development just like Milton Park here. It would have 500,000 square feet of office, 400,000 square feet of multifamily, 50,000 square feet of retail, and eight stories. The city said, fantastic. But you know what? We don't have a zoning ordinance that would allow that. So we need to work on that. And they spent six years going back and forth with ARC and Pope and Land to create an ordinance that would allow that particular mixed-use development again modeled on Milton Park. And in 2014, the city initiated the rezoning of our property. And the city initiated the comp plan amendment to this property as well. And as you heard part of the story earlier, After the public hearing and prior to the vote, one of the people on the council said, hey, I'm going to add a condition limiting the height to three stories. Again, that killed our eight-story mixed-use development. There was simply no way to develop it. As proposed, there is no such thing as a three-story Class A office building. But again, we've been at this for six years at this point. And the sellers forced, as they could under the contract, a closing of this property. So Edward Andrews Homes ultimately picked up about 63 acres and they left this 10 acres behind that Pope and Lynn owned then and continues to own today. So as you can see, the property we're here to talk about today is irregular in shape. It was described as a boot earlier. I think the most important part of this property is that 53% of this property is encumbered by stream buffers. The streams that are hard to see on that survey but would have been more legible in your packet actually run both north-south and east-west, and they eat up more than half of the property and make more than half of the property undevelopable. Pope and Land has spent 10 years trying to work with the existing zoning on this property. And again, it requires mixed use. Hope and land is a mixed use developer. It's what they do. It's what they like to do. It's what they've chosen to do, but it simply does not work here. Um, and it's really because of that 51% requirement. It's interesting. My research indicates that that was added in July of 2026 years ago. And I asked at one point early on in the process, has anyone ever applied to rezone and develop property under that CX district and the answer was no. So the reason that Pope and Land really has not been able to make this work is because of the existing office stock in the area. Within a five mile radius of this property, and again we looked at this at one mile, three mile, and five mile, I'm just gonna use five mile, the numbers are pretty similar. The commercial vacancy rate is 21%. You've got 6.1 million square feet of empty space tonight. And that is a structural problem, not a cyclical problem. And you can tell that because the number grows every year. In the last five years, on average, the commercial vacancy within this five-mile radius has increased 210,000 square feet every year. In addition to the 6.1 million square feet of empty space you have on the ground today, there's also 2.6 million square feet of commercial that's been approved for development within the same five-mile radius. and only 90,000 square feet is being developed because the owners of that property know and the market knows there is simply nowhere to go with that additional 2.5 million square feet. You know, it was interesting hearing the discussion tonight, and I'm in these meetings all the time and hear these meetings, hear these kind of comments all the time, but someone in the video said, talked about the industrial flex area in the city of Roswell and said it's in high demand. I've given you some numbers here, but let me sort of distill it down. At the existing absorption rate and without adding one single square foot of additional commercial space, it will take 42 years to absorb what's on the ground now and what's in the pipeline. So our position is any requirement that we add even a foot of additional square footage of commercial space is unreasonable. And I think going back to our location and literally being essentially part of the Harlow development, eight story commercial buildings just make no sense. We're surrounded by three and four story buildings. We're surrounded by an existing stable single family neighborhood. Uh, this is a development that certainly wants to be protected. I think most of the people here are with Harlow. We've met with them a number of times and they've supported us from the very beginning because this will protect what they have and it will serve as a transition for what they have from what is around it and what will come in the future. So how did we get here? We started this conversation, well, I think Tom Barranco would say he started this conversation in 2006. It certainly continued through 2014. But since my involvement, we started a little bit more than two years ago. We came and met with a group from the city around May of 2024 and explained our situation, right? We think the only, we are mixed-use developers, we're office developers. We think the only thing that's gonna work here are town homes, given what is around us. And the message we got back was, look, that's great. That makes all the sense in the world, but there's this secret economic development project out there. Would you guys mind waiting? They actually asked us to wait till the end of the year, which is about six months. We waited a whole year. We kept asking, what's going on? Has there been any news? And didn't get anything. So ultimately, we did submit this application for the OR district at the city's suggestion. That OR district was proposed to us by the staff. I'll talk a little bit about development itself and again I've included some slides that I'm not going to cover tonight that talked about some of the iterations that Pope and Land looked at as it was spent 10 years trying to figure out some way to develop this site those are examples but this is the site plan which as you heard is requesting 62 townhome units that's a density of 6.2 units per acre these are three-story units with two car garages all are rear load There are two access points, as you can see from the site plan. If you look on the north side, there's one that feeds into that roundabout. That's actually been part of the plan since that roundabout was built. My understanding is that it was Roswell Transportation that actually designed that configuration. So there are easements, and that particular configuration is sort of written in stone, at least legally speaking. Again, there are internal sidewalks here, significant landscaping. We're adding streetscape on Old Roswell Road. And one thing the staff didn't mention is we've also asked for a variance for a 13-foot retaining wall height on the backside of that development. As I mentioned, 53% of the site, all of which is on the east side of this property, is a stream buffer. We don't want to get into that any more than we have to, so we've essentially put a retaining wall on the backside of that development to limit the disturbance. That's the landscape plan. Here are some representative images for what Pope and Land is considering. They are considering their JV partner now. They have not selected that partner yet. We're waiting to see how this process plays out. But as you can imagine, the group that they choose will be a name that you know. These are just examples of what Pope and Land has in mind for this property. We've had a variety of neighborhood meetings and things. We actually went to the design review board. I'd call that as a positive meeting. We had no opposition at that time. We went to the CZIM and nobody showed up except for one. The mayor, I think, happened to be in the area and stopped by. But we had no opposition there. No one really seemed interested in what we were trying to do. But I think importantly, we've been meeting with Harlow really from the beginning. Gary is the president of the HOA there. Harlow is essentially three different phases, east, west, and north. Gary is the president. We reached out to him very early on to talk about things. We actually had a meeting in the clubhouse at Harlow, which is fantastic, by the way. That's a beautiful piece of property. I don't know that we took roll, but I would guess there were 50 to 60 people at that meeting. And we were informed that the board supports this request. I'll let Gary talk for himself on that. I think I'm going to stop there. I'd like to get to your questions. And I'd certainly like to give the folks from Harlow who've been waiting for a very long time to speak their minds. But I'll reserve whatever time I have left. Again, from our perspective, this property is currently zoned, has no reasonable economic use. We've got 10 years of hard work to demonstrate that. I think the fact that no one has ever been able to apply for or develop under the CX district with a 51% requirement is also pretty good proof of that. You know, again, all things considered, we think this is the best option. We're not trying to set precedent here. You know, we're looking at the individual facts of this case, and we think in this individual case, townhomes are the only thing that makes sense. So we ask for your recommendation of approval. Thank you.

Thank you. City Clerk Long, is there comments from the public?

Yes, we have seven speakers. The first is Gary Gilsdorf.

Good evening Madam Mayor, Council, appreciate the time tonight. I did not anticipate three and a half hours of hotly contested debate before we got a chance to speak. But I appreciate the time. It is late. But from our perspective, I heard a lot of things tonight. I had a very well thought out speech that I probably rewrote four times while I was waiting for this to start because it didn't make sense based on everything I heard tonight. But from our perspective, what I did hear through the entire speech on the comprehensive plan was protecting our neighborhoods. And you couldn't do us more of a favor than to protect our neighborhood than allow for a residential development to go in there. If you're not familiar with that property, and me, I'm not a huge fan of development to begin with, but it doesn't make sense for anything other than a residential development to go into that plot. The plan that Pope and Land has brought to us makes sense. It enhances the character of our neighborhood because it gives a more residential feel as you drive into our roundabout and our east and west split. And it does provide for some entry-level price points in the Roswell area. Now, yeah, they can start with a sixes and a seven, but that's still a good price point in North Fulton, as pointed out earlier. I do speak on behalf of the HOA. Large majority of our neighborhood is in favor of it. We didn't take a formal poll, but we would probably venture to say about 75% of our neighborhood is firmly behind the development of this proposal and pushing forward with this proposal. I also speak to you as a 20-year Roswell resident. I moved here in 2006-ish into the Eden Wild neighborhood, raised our family, sold that so we could downsize into a townhome community as the kids left. The kids now want to live closer to us, and it's very, very discouraging. You cannot live in this area. But in a neighborhood that would start in the mid-sevens, like the Fireflyer on the corner from us, does give those young professionals a fighting chance to own something in this area. Those who don't have the background in industry, I don't know anybody's particular background, But to look at that property and think you're going to get a gas station, get any economic development out of that particular plot, that little section, you're only fooling yourself. But I'll leave that to the planning people and everybody behind the scenes. Personally, I was very shocked that the proposal wasn't pushed forward for approval from staff. But I understand now, after listening tonight, the overall economic plan for the entire city is in stake. However, some common sense must be applied to this particular track that does not make sense with the overlay of anything else other than pushing forward with townhomes. With that, I appreciate your time and thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. Michael Fishler.

Madam Mayor, City Council, again, I really appreciate us spending a lot of time here tonight and helping to discuss some of the biggest important topics. This, to me, is one of my more important. For a couple years, I did serve as the vice president for the HOA for the Harlow homeowners, or Harlow. But my wife and I were gratefully blessed with the birth of our daughter late last year. She's the bundle of joy that we always want. And looking at the clock, I remind myself I'll probably need to wake up in about two hours to help feed her in the middle of the night. But these are the best moments of our life, to be honest. But I also learned tonight that I apparently share, I think, the same age as another council member. Same, almost identical story. I felt to be very fortunate. I was born just right on the other side of the river. I lived here. I was here when the Olympics. I remember the torch being carried down Roswell Square back in 1996. A incredible sight when I was just a little kid and then got to even experience this with my daughter and my family with the World Cup this summer. These are memories that you only get when you have great family communities to build upon. One of the biggest things I looked at is, and tonight we discuss the 2045 Comprehensive Plan in the one statement, the vision. to be the number one family community in america that statement is family is the key of that statement the vision for roswell is family our community can be supported by businesses it can be supported with economic drives but it's mostly supported by family a lot of us traveled around the world have gone many places but a lot of us are fortunate to try to come back home many of us can't come back home because we can't afford the homes here If we wanted a single family home, the median price average for just in general is about 800,000 here in Roswell last year. But if that's for any home, maybe high density or something, but on average for a home that I have maybe a 10-foot buffer between homes is more like 1.3 to 1.5 million. That's something that I can't easily afford. No person my age can afford that. People my age have to leave. They have to go to Cumming. They have to go far north just to find homes that they can afford. High density homes is a home. It's not a second class home. It's not something that should be a part of a negativity. It should be something where you do see families growing. You see families building a community. I do invite you guys to the Harlow community. We have large green spaces. We have events. We have community drives. We host annual events, music on the green. There's 385 town homes, all filled with families. Most of us are homeowners. something that we don't see often nowadays. Our real goal is we want to drive people from renting to home ownership. Our city is 172 years of homeowners, not 172 years of renters, apartment dwellers and that stuff. We need to make sure we unlock the door to affordability. High density homes, even though they're more packed and tight, is an entry point. We have a lot of people who can come into the neighborhood, can live in Roswell and help grow that they build into those. My goal, I would like to make sure I can raise my family. I would like to have, of course, more kids. My wife loves the idea. I keep presenting this over and over again. But I would like to make sure my home is not living in the shadows of an office building. I want it to be as part of a community where we have trees to explore, park trails to go to, not having to watch buildings be built and unfortunately sit unoccupied. Around Harlow, we've mentioned that there's more than 27% of vacancy from a lot of the manufacturing industrial flex that was previously built. Our 2045 vision hopes to see a difference, but in 2026, we're not ready for that. It's gonna take a while, but we can unlock the door by pushing economic growth, by inviting families, those with skills and labors who can build new businesses. If we start there, I think we can achieve greatness. So with that, I'd like to yield my time. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Craig Hardison.

Good evening, council members. Appreciate your time again. My time is something like bedtime, actually, at my age. But I just wanted to make a few comments. I moved to the area four years ago from Philadelphia with a relocation of work. I've lived in the US for 25, almost 26 years. And the area came to be a good spot simply just because, you know, I actually worked down in Paces Ferry area, but wanted to be a little bit more in this region. And having a new space that didn't need renovations and maintenance and so on and upkeep actually was very appealing to myself and my wife as empty nesters. I guess, you know, when I'm walking and running around the neighborhood, it doesn't take a kind of rocket scientist to work out that when I look at what's already available when it comes to office space. So, you know, I'm not the expert that these gentlemen are, but I did a little quick look on Sunday myself on Coastal and LoopNet data, and the kind of numbers are fairly compelling. The subject market I took was just around the neighborhood. And the subject market contains currently another two mile radius. This is a 5.8 million square feet of inventory across 66 existing buildings, which is currently available and has remained unchanged for the last 12 months. The development activity continues to be limited, and there's only 9000 square foot currently under construction. The mark-on conditions are soft to weak, and obviously decidedly tenant favorable, as evidenced by the vacancy rate, which in my stats was almost 34%. So approximately 1.9 million square feet of space is currently available for lease. And when we looked at also kind of overall occupancy, a standard almost 71% of the market that is leased, the vacancy has improved slightly, but still is a very, very soft market here. Leasing demand has slowed significantly. During the past year, net absorption totaled 18,000 square feet, which is basically an 83.3% decline. And most of the locations that we're looking at are basically over two years still on the market. So just with that, that's currently the office space within that radius. I really think that the figures kind of speak for themselves, meaning that I don't think we need any more of that in the neighborhood. So with that, I'll give my time back to somebody else. I appreciate your time. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. Weinbach.

Madam Mayor, Council Members, thank you for the opportunity. I know it's late. I'm going to be quick, especially since Mr. Webb did a great job really laying out a lot of the statistics. Alternatively, with all due respect to Ms. Alexander, I'm going to use your criteria for zoning. Changing conditions, trend or fact. I'm not aware, I'm sure, I don't know how many of you work from home. Office space, just to reinforce Mr. Webb and some of the other speakers, office space isn't in quite at the demand it was before. Neither is retail because of this little thing called Amazon and Walmart and all these things that deliver to your homes. That is a changing trend that is also a fact. conforms with the comprehensive plan. After sitting here for two hours, I need to look at the comprehensive plan. I'm not quite sure I know what it is, but I do think this in some way, shape, or form does conform with that in allowing for the flex of an area to change its character and grow as it has been since Harlow was installed. conforms with UDC at 10. Again, I'm not going to go there, too technical for me. Reinforces existing or planned character. I invite you, as my friend Gary Gilsdorf did, I invite you to see our neighborhood. I invite you to see the changing character of the area that was dominated by the UPS facility for many years and some of those industrial complexes that now lay vacant and barren. The character is highly residential. You'll see people walking the streets, walking both to downtown Alpharetta where there is a great mix of retail and residential. You'll also see us walking. We actually can walk to downtown Roswell. It's a longer walk, about 45 minutes, but it's a nice walk. It's about a five minute Uber. The property is appropriate for the proposed development. As Mr. Webb stated, It really is only useful for that. I live backing the property. When I moved in in 2019, one of the first fun Sundays I spent was in a big old pair of L.L. Bean boots walking the property. December of 19, what I found was a lot of coyotes, some deer, and when I got back, my L.L. Bean boots were filled up to right below my knee with mud because about half the space is unbuildable. So townhouses are about the only thing that can go there. Substantial reasons why it cannot be currently used as zone. Well, I think I just said a lot of those. I don't see anybody building an eight-story office there. I don't see anybody building a storefront of retail there. So with all due respect to the owners of the property, good luck if it doesn't come through. because I don't think there's going to be a buyer and any increase in the tax base on that property. Seven, a need exists for the proposed use. Mr. Fischler just spoke about it. We need more housing. I heard an immense amount of people get up here and say they don't want their neighborhoods disturbed with more building. Bring it on. 62 units, we're ready for them. uh sufficient city services facilities there's schools right near there there's a fire station right up the street we're good to go there it will not significantly impact the environment again mr webb was very uh pointed about that it is a watershed there are streams i would venture to say that the impact of an eight-story office building and adjacent parking will be far significant than the well thought out and planned environmental impact of landscaping for residential. And finally, will not have an adverse impact on property in the vicinity. Quite the contrary. I think it might actually push some of those vacant light industrials into being more attractive for tech companies. Rivian, by the way, just built their service facility for the southeast up the street, and I think that's the kind of employer you're looking for here. So thank you, Ms. Mayor, thank you, Council. I hope you vote accordingly.

Thank you. Next speaker. Ms. Isinger.

Thank you very, very much.

Just a quickie, I love the dynamics of your commission. You guys listen, you debate, you seem to be trying to be very, very fair, and you're relatively polite to each other. My name is Dennis Isinger, and my wife and I, Debbie, are new to Roswell and Georgia, and we are just thrilled to be here. We've been living here, we're partially in Florida, and here for the last several months. I'm certified by the Florida Bar as a specialist in community association law as well as community development law. And my wife, Debbie, has vast government experience in community developments through the cities that we've lived in Florida. She could not be here to speak because of the medical emergency, but she asked that I present for her. She is a former mayor and in politics in South Florida for several years. So she asked me though to read what she had written, which I'm gonna do now. After living full time in South Florida for more than 50 years, my husband and I recently purchased a second home here in Roswell in the Harlow community to enjoy more quality time with our children and our grandchildren. While life in Georgia is new to us, I am very familiar with municipal government and the vital role elected officials play in protecting and preserving the quality of life for residents, businesses, and visitors. I had the privilege of serving as mayor of Cooper City, Florida, where our children were raised. Although I left office due to term limits, I've remained a strong advocate for good government and civic engagement. Having served in public office, I have the greatest respect for municipal leaders, because I know firsthand that the decisions made at the local level have the most direct and lasting impact on people's lives. One lesson that I've learned during my years in public service is that government closest to the people is local government, as it has the greatest impact on the daily lives. Local government makes decisions that directly affect our neighborhoods, schools, public safety, infrastructure, parks, recreation, water quality, and of course, development. Those decisions shape not only the physical character of our community, but also its life. I'm here tonight to support my fellow neighbors and ask that you approve the rezoning of the property in question from commercial use to residential townhouse development. I believe this represents smart thoughtful growth. A townhouse community is clearly compatible with surrounding neighborhood and would compliment the existing character of the area, help protect and enhance property values and improve the quality of life for future residents. I recognize there is a significant amount of commercial development nearby. As we've driven around the neighborhood, we've noticed a considerable amount of vacant office and commercial space has already been presented to you. That reality suggests there may be greater need for well-planned residential development in the area. Potential issues of concern to the Harlow community are if there's gonna be industrial or commercial use further there. More environmental pollution, noise, possible traffic congestion. Communities association projects are generally much safer than commercial industrial projects. Also, I think it's pretty well documented that values of residential property that abut commercial or industrial properties that are built devalues the residential property. Since moving to Harlow, we've enjoyed walking, biking through the neighborhood and meeting many of the neighbors. Without exception, they've been spoken very proudly about their community. We do have about, I believe it's 344 townhomes in the existing community. We're fortunate to have an active board of directors and dedicated volunteers who organize activities for us. Wouldn't it be wonderful to build upon the success by expanding this vibrant neighborhood with another thoughtful design townhouse community? We thank you for your service. I do have a couple of more thoughts I just wanted to mention in my 47 seconds I have left over, which is, having looked at some documentation, I also, as was stated by Mr. Webb, see nothing that prohibits standing residential project alone in this particular zoning category. My wife and I would not have purchased a townhouse in Harlow if we thought that commercial or industrial use would abut our property. Low density, 62 townhomes is low density, three stories and less. We ask that you protect our property. And finally, I've been around the block in this area of the law for many years and I'm no threats or anything, but if judicially contested, I really highly doubt that a court would deem a denial of the zoning for this type of change to be fair or reasonable.

Thank you, sir. Next speaker.

Sandra Thone.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and council members. Thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate all your efforts to make Roswell a great place to live. And I really appreciate the vision that you guys are proposing, which is to make it the number one family community in America. And with that vision, so many people were also speaking tonight about protecting neighborhoods, protecting families. And along with that, I would ask for you to approve this to protect the Harlow neighborhood. We're a vibrant community that has been around, I guess now eight years as my colleagues and, oh, sorry, my neighbors, my neighbors and the board have mentioned that in terms of safety, there is already so much empty office space. There is, You know a vibrancy in that community. There is also a couple of other neighborhoods down the street And so it is already in effect mixed use having commercial and residential in that area also It's late hold on what other points that I have Yeah, it's not the typical townhouse community. It has a lot more walking spaces lakes, etc and And the community is really behind Pope and Land building the townhouses. It'll be very consistent with our neighborhood. It'll be safer, sustainable, and really will be great for the future development of Roswell. Thank you so much. Please approve.

Thank you. Next speaker. Langer.

So hopefully that's who you meant. I've never spoken before the council before so I'm really excited to have been here and listened to you all and thank you for having us speak. I knew my neighbors are kind and supportive and super active in our community. I had no idea they were so knowledgeable and so smart and intelligent and active in wanting to maintain our neighborhood and the community feel. I lived in, Dunwoody raised my son there since, and I lived in Virginia Highlands since 1987. I've been here in Atlanta. I moved up to Alpharetta Roswell area and all those neighbors that I used to have are very jealous. This is such a beautiful community and neighborhood. So I tell them to come on up. And so I don't want to repeat everything. My little list was everything everybody has said. They talked about the space. I actually back up to an office space, Sanctuary Park. It is 29% vacant right now. It's a five to eight story building complex. It's beautiful. but they've talked about the vacancies of that kind of corporate and the trends that are going on now. They've talked about home ownership and the desire for young people and people old like me who want to move up here and have affordable housing. They've talked about community and they've talked about the traffic implications. And also there's tax implications. We pay Roswell and Alpharetta taxes on my side and on the other side it's Roswell City taxes. So I think all of that as our as we are your constituents, I would love to see you vote to approve this rezoning. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker. Who'd depart?

I watched the Planning Commission presentation and I agree that we really don't have the industrial demand for services in our community. We've had charter schools in this area where Fulton Science Academy began. I believe that was Roswell Industrial zoned. Their community wasn't broad enough, growing fast enough, and so they decided to break off and go on their own. And I believe that the charter school was in North Meadow next. And I know Holcomb Bridge has vacant across from CVS when you cross Warsaw. Going north, you see a brand new building that's never been occupied. Colonial Park has a building that's not even occupied. So when you look at the number of schools we know on Hembury Road, we've got Elkins, we've got Hembury Elementary, and we've got the Charter School. All they need is a grocery store a little closer to the car district of Alpharetta Highway. They have lots of assortment nearby, closer to Mansell. These are reliable people. Also, with affordable housing, I live in the 60s development when more people had one car per household. and you see a brand new house selling for $800,000 on Maxwell Road, well probably an originally 3-2 or 2-2 house next door sells as a rental investment for the same price. So you're missing the picture. We have overused residential development from the 60s when it was a one-car family that are multi-family living there. I watched the house behind me that was Middle Easterners that got taken away that were illegal. Then Hispanic painters come in. Now they have more vans. You see how they work as a community. They put their money together. They buy a house. They could teach these young adults how to do instead of the designer handbag and the expensive car or leasing a car. There's ways to get around it. And so we're missing a lot of things about affordable housing. There's more people that are bringing in the parent to live with them, or the adult grown educated child is living in the basement apartment. There's people on next door advertising a room for rent. There's a lot going on, but we definitely have security with well-built townhomes, professional people that can drive short distance to teach at a school, be a principal, be someone with the government off Wills Road or off Maxwell in the new development there. So there's a lot of job opportunities for professionals in this industrial area. I had a grandmother grow up down the street from the railroad and the shoe factory. Industrial is not what it used to be. To go to Bread Becker's in Cherokee County, that's where more industrial is occupied. If you've ever gone there for bread, It reminds me what industrial was thought of years ago when Roswell had Pug Mabry. Thank you.

Next speaker. There are no other speakers.

Does council have any comments or questions regarding this item? Councilwoman Beeson.

I just wanted to say thank you for sticking around. I know it has been a very long meeting and I know that those pews from personal experience are not very comfortable. So thank you for sticking around and sharing your thoughts because it does directly impact you. It's the abutting area to your neighborhood. And that provides us the elected body with a lot more clarity for those who would be directly impacted by potential development. So thank you.

Council member Zach.

I would like to ask for more time on this item, so I'm probably gonna motion to defer, but I would want to give anyone else a chance to give comment.

Council Member Phillippe.

Yeah, I agree with Council Member Zak. I think staff did a really great job presenting this item to us when we were in our other meetings together, but you guys all here tonight have also presented some very compelling information, and I'd like to have some more opportunity to review both sides together.

Council Member Bromley.

I have a question to Mr. Cusack. Is there any additional legal liability that we would take if we deny this?

If you deny or defer?

Both.

Well, denial always leaves the chance for a lawsuit, I would say, and I think in no uncertain terms that has been intimated here. Deferral, I would ask Mr. Webb, are you amenable to a deferral for staff to further look at this rezoning?

Tom just gave me the nod, so yes.

And again, as mayor and many of us up here newly elected in the last six months, we would, if that's their vote, I don't take a vote on this one, but I appreciate your at least willingness to let us learn more. So any other questions from council? Do I have a motion? No. Councilman Brumley?

No.

Okay. Council Member Zack.

I'd like to motion to defer this item two weeks to give me.

It would be three.

Three weeks.

Three weeks would be our next council meeting. We just want to make sure we clarify that. I think it's three weeks.

I don't know. I would like to motion to move this to the next council meeting in three weeks.

I'm sorry. It would be two weeks. My bad. It's late. Councilman Beeson.

I would just like to ask for council members Zach and Phillippe, is there any specific information that y'all are needing to vote and why deferral is needed tonight?

Yeah, I'll speak for myself. There are some specific questions I'd like to talk through and also given some of the residents feedback, there are some decisions I have in kind of how, sorry, process and how I make decisions. And there is something that I kind of need to quantify versus what we talked about in the comp plan into this. So I'd like to take that time to talk to legal, some of the residents, and CommDev a little bit to get a little bit more information to help with the decision. Attempt to motion again. So let me get the date. I would like to motion to defer this item to August 10th to give me some additional time to review some of the things brought up today and some other material that I'd like to ask staff for.

Do I have a second for the deferral? Councilwoman Phillippe? All in favor, please raise your hand. Three. Those opposed? Two. Motion passes for deferral. City Clerk Long, please read the fifth item on the regular agenda.

This is item number 10532, approval for the mayor or city administrator to award a contract with the Cool Roofing Company for the City Hall Roof Replacement Project in an amount not to exceed $2,267,075 and a total budget authorization of 7,000, presented by Brian Watson, Director of Environmental Public Works.

I believe it was for 7 million, not 7,000.

Do you want me to get started or do we need to say it again? Fantastic. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I know it's been a long night. I know we've got a couple items ahead of us, but I do feel that this is a pretty important one that we need to discuss. As City Clerk Nancy Long brought up that we're bringing forward tonight an award of a contract for the City Hall roof replacement. Just as a point of note, this item did not go to committee due to the urgency that we've experienced over the last several weeks where we've had water intrusion within City Hall. on three separate events, and I'll go into that in a little bit. We had actually been in the process of procurement for finding a roofing company that could actually take on this job, and with that water intrusion and consultation with Randy Knight and as well as legal, we decided to come straight to mayor and council. So just apologize that this did not go to committee beforehand. So I'd like to give the council a little bit of a history on the city hall roof. City Hall itself was actually constructed in 1989. That's when the roof was installed and it opened in 1990. The roof is original. We have found out through quite a bit of research that it is actually only a 20 year life expectancy of the roof that was put on on this building. approximately 55,000 square feet. What we could find in the latest 10 years is there was three roof assessments that the city has conducted. In 2017, a roof assessment was done and the assessment came back that there was a recommendation for a replacement of the roof by 2025. At that time, there was an estimate of 1.3 million to do the roof replacement. In 2021, a second assessment was done. It was also recommended for replacement. Don't have a year, just said recommended for replacement. And the cost assessment there went up to $3.2 to $4 million. In 2025, which was the last roof assessment that we had done, again, it was recommended for replacement, and the cost went up to $6 to $8 million. Also in that 2025 roof assessment, there were some areas within the roof that were actually identified as being installed incorrectly. Not to get into all the fun technical stuff, but the gutters that surround the building, There's also flashing that is missing, and there's areas of the roof that were not properly attached. And so over the years, basically the roof not being installed correctly has caused some of the water intrusion that we have experienced. From 2016 to present, roughly we have spent over $800,000 in various roof repairs. That does not include what we are currently spending on the water intrusion that we've experienced over the last few weeks. Not that, sorry, not that pictures necessarily need to be shown, but I think it's kind of important to kind of look at the extent of what we're looking at. All of these pictures were taken last year. They were not taken, in the last few weeks, so just as a point of note. What you will see is a lot of the joints, you will see a lot of extensive rusting. The picture on the right for you is actually looking at one of the flat areas, the picture on the left, this is actually inside City Hall looking up at the roof and what you can see is quite a bit of water staining that is indicating water intrusion. The picture on the left also shows that at another place within City Hall. Picture on the right, there are actually pieces of metal on top of the roof that are literally coming off. This is somebody holding up just to take a picture. Also, it's important to note that these areas are not isolated to any one part of the roof. Basically, areas all around the roof are experiencing heavy degradation and definitely show signs of needing replacement. I mentioned several weather events that we've had in the past few weeks, July 4th and 5th, July 12th and July 17th. Most notably, there's also a couple other weather events, but these were significant enough that we actually experienced quite a bit of water intrusion. I've listed a few places here. Right now we have 32 areas within City Hall that have been affected. 22 people have been relocated to other offices while we go through the process of actually fixing all of the issues on the inside of the building, let alone on the outside of the building. So I'd just like to show some of those pictures just to kind of give counsel and the public an idea of what we're dealing with. I only picked one person, Jackie, because she is probably the most beloved CommDev person and spent quite a bit of time going through all this. And yes, that is her office on the left. Thank you, Jackie, for letting us take the picture. Our server room is on the right, which is a pretty important office space, if you will, or space within the building. Our server room is important to note, not only serves City Hall, but also services 911, police, fire, and other buildings that are not located here at City Hall. The first floor, damage on sides of walls, On the right-hand side, it's kind of hard to see the extensive water damage, but this is quartz on the second floor. You also have molding that is coming apart from the wall. Several ceiling tiles throughout the building are coming down or are down. And then this is the basement floor. I show this picture because what we're looking at is actually looking south within the building. The windows there on your left hand side, those double windows are actually resident and business services. That was a recent project that the city completed last year. And so although we did not get any significant water intrusion into that new area, we are experiencing water intrusion surrounding those areas. I won't go into all of the specifics, but this is the most wordy slide. But basically an overview of the project is we are recommending a full replacement of the roof, not just patchwork. We'll be installing new insulation with definitely improved energy efficiency over the last almost 40 years. It can definitely use some new insulation. There will be a significant amount of work done on the gutter system. We do identify that as probably the primary source of water intrusion into the building. The removal includes all the required flashing and transitions. Another thing that was missing with the, We could not find it. If some of the flashing was there, we could not find it. And then you will note that we've got a contract, and I'll get into this, that the contract is just over 2.2 million. We are recommending that the remaining portion of the funds that have been allocated from the PFA go towards this. What we don't know is once we take off that metal from the roof, what does the decking look like? We have suspicions that there could be extensive water damage. but we may be lucky and it may not be too extensive. So at this point, without taking a guess on if it's 10 or 20% of contingency, because this funding can only go towards the roof replacement, we're just saying all of the money that is in the PFA for this project be allocated to the project. The contractor is fully aware that this is an eight to 10 month project. And they know that this is an active workplace, obviously lots of meetings. So they are very well aware that during this construction that they're gonna have to contend with how to basically that we can still work in a construction area. Project timeline bringing to you tonight, hopefully for approval, Estimated contract sign would be September 1st. That would be great. Construction to begin closer to the end of the year, and then the project completion, like I said, an eight to 10 month timeframe. From the procurement side of things, the total budget allocation is seven million. That is what was approved by Mayor and Council in the PFA. We did use the Omnia Partners Cooperative. Under Omnia Partners, there are actually four contractors that could actually do the work. One of them we could not get a hold of, but we did send the submitted scope of work to three of those contractors, and we received bids from two of them. Those bids range from 2.2 million to 4.9 million. Both of those bids did not include the unforeseens, and we could get rough cost estimates for square footage, but neither one of them were gonna give us a, we just can't tell. And so again, that is why we're recommending the full allocation of the PFA funding. So the recommendation is to award the contract to the Cool Roofing Company, not just because of their name. They are a local partner of National Roofing Partners, in an amount of 2.2677530. And like I mentioned, all the funds from the PFA to be allocated to the project. Are there any questions from council?

Thank you. City Clerk Long, is there anyone to speak on this topic? There are no speakers for this item. Does anyone on council have any questions? Council Member Phillippe.

Thank you so much for the presentation. Early on when I first started my term here, we started talking about the potential of solar on some of the buildings. Were you given the opportunity to look at solar in redoing this roof?

So it's a good question. I do remember you were adamant to definitely look into solar. For this roof, we started the process of looking into it, and then when we actually started seeing issues, we did not go any further with this building. What we have started to look at is are there some other buildings within the city, in particular, from my experience, if we can find some flat roofs, and we actually have a lot of flat roofs within the city that we could look at, probably be better situated and probably actually already structurally ready to take solar. If we put solar on this roof, we could do it, but it's gonna be, it'll be quite a bit more. And I just, at this time, we did not explore it, especially once we started getting the water intrusion.

Yeah, I appreciate the urgency of what's going on now and the timeline and the fact that you're still looking at other possibilities throughout the city. And if I could just have you go back to your first slide real quick.

Oops, sorry.

Yeah, not the coverage, yeah. So here, since we're going into budget season, I just wanted to point out to the public how much costs have increased and how long of this type has been deferred because it is very much on our radar that there are going to be a number of items like this that have been deferred from administration to administration because the maintenance costs are real and budgets are tight and we're getting to the point much like this roof that we're not going to be able to defer some of these costs any longer. So just wanted to point that out. That's it.

Council Member Brumley.

Yeah, I also wanted to bring that up, you know, the deferring. I know it's a lot of money, but we've been deferred, and there's only so much that you can wait to have something, you know, done. One interesting point that I just want to share with the public, which I didn't know about this, is the part where you say design of the gutter internal drains. And for, if you guys didn't know, and I really didn't notice until today, there's no gutters outside of this building. You know, I have gutters in my home in every corner, and here there's nothing there because the design has the gutters inside here. So what's happening is that all the water is going there, and that's why it's in between all of our offices, because the gutters are inside our offices, not outside the building. And so, I mean, I understand the design by aesthetic reasons, but that is why it's so expensive and it's so hard to manage. I'm next to one of the offices affected. I mean, the carpet is just musty over there, and now I'm concerned about, I'm not here all the time in hours a day, but there's a lot of employees who are, and I'm just concerned about mold issues maybe. I know we were trying to, or allergies, so that's one other reason why I do agree that this needs to be, you know, brought forward, because we can't wait anymore. I mean, thank goodness nobody has been hit by something that falls, and we haven't lost any equipment, especially like in the server room, which is like so important with all the electronics. You know, it's just deferring, deferring, deferring until, you know something really big is going to happen or something that is not going to be as easy fixable so thank you for this i really looking forward to um to having the fix the fixed roof oh my and people back in their offices instead of like huddling with each other it's just not going to work really can i have a motion council member philippi do i have a second council member beason all in favor

Passes unanimously, thank you.

Thank you very much.

City Clerk Long, please read the sixth item on the regular agenda.

Yes, this is item number 10544, approval of an ordinance to amend the Unified Development Code of the City of Roswell by amending Article 12, Environmental Protection, Section 12.5, Stormwater Management. This will be the first reading, also presented by Brian Watson.

That's okay. This is an ordinance to amend Article 12, Environmental Protection, Section 12.5 of Stormwater Management of the Unified Development Code of the City of Roswell. Now, therefore, the mayor and the council of the City of Roswell, pursuant to their authority, do hereby adopt the following amendment. Article 12, Environmental Protection, Section 12.5, Stormwater Management of the Unified Development Code of the City of Roswell, Georgia, is hereby amended by deleting said article and replacing it in its entirety by adding a new Article 12.5 entitled Stormwater Management, which shall read as shown as exhibit A attached here to and incorporated herein.

Okay, just making sure I didn't, I don't want to speak over you, Ms. Mayor.

It's late.

It is late. I think we can get it done today. All right. So to get prefaced for this item, we went over this in committee and I did go into great depth on the history. I won't go into the great depth, but I do want to highlight a couple of things because it was about three, four weeks ago that we last mentioned this. So a bit of a timeline for the stormwater ordinance within the city. It was first brought into the city's ordinances in December of 2002. In 2012, we revised the ordinance really to be in concert with the stormwater utility that had started two years earlier. At that time, stormwater was really looked at as just looking at stormwater ponds. In June of 2020 was probably really the major update that we had to the stormwater ordinance and just in 2016 is when the Georgia stormwater management manual was created and in 2020 is when the city adopted it and they put a lot of that language into the stormwater ordinance and It drastically increased the amount of stormwater measures that designers and applicants can take. And so it also provided a lot of additional design guidance. And then the last major update was in 2024 when mayor and council at that time made a decision to move all stormwater resources within environmental public works. And at that time we changed the language within the text to make sure that it fell with under environmental public works. Some of those challenges that we've had within stormwater again situations that have occurred within the city that are not actually specifically identified within the blue book and what this does is it leaves a lot of discretion to the plan reviewer and if we're not able to give a coherent response to the applicant oftentimes it'll actually fall within your email or on your desk to hear about these complaints and There's a lot of design criteria in the Blue Book that are recommendations and not requirements. As an applicant, that causes confusion, doesn't have clarity, and this also allows for discrepancies, not only within the city, but if you've got a developer who's doing work within the North Fulton cities, there could be some discrepancies of the developer working in the multiple municipalities, which then leads into the next bullet, the consistency that we would like to have amongst North Fulton cities. There's a lot of non-documented decisions that were made by previous staff. Doesn't mean those decisions were bad, it just means that those decisions were not documented and they're not within our ordinance. And so when we have those things, it does become inconsistent and when we have that last bullet where we have inconsistent staffing, it's hard to make sure that we, I apologize,

That's due to the gnats we've been infested with.

Yeah, it's probably because of the roof, which you just approved, so I appreciate that. So when we have inconsistent staffing, then it makes it very difficult to have consistent messaging to applicants. So the recommendation that we have is to this development of the stormwater handbook that we have mentioned. The goals are to provide transparency to residents as well as applicants on stormwater design requirements. It's important to note, and this came up in the committee item, that the ordinance that is on the books will still guide. The blue book will still be the initial source of information, but that the handbook is going to clarify anything where there's a discrepancy amongst the two, and there are a few. So we'll be periodically updating this. Right now we're thinking maybe annually, but if we don't have updates, then we wouldn't need to do that. Big thing is it does provide consistency amongst plan reviewers. And the last thing is this would be the document where we've got all of the stormwater tools that we have, checklists, maintenance agreements, information about our shared stormwater facilities would be in one document. So if you came to the city of Roswell and you were going to actually develop or had questions about stormwater, you'd be able to go to a single source. We mentioned this again at committee that we started with the city of Alpharetta's handbook, very good starting place. Also it provides continuity between the two largest cities in North Fulton. This process started many, many months ago. We're finally able to bring it to you all. But to make the changes, we actually need to make the changes to both the UDC as well as the code of ordinances. So 12.5 in the UDC and 7.2 in the code of ordinances. The recommendations which are in the agenda are to revise the text to include reference to the City of Roswell Stormwater Handbook. There's some text that needs to be revised in this section to be consistent with the Code of Ordinances. And then there's minor revisions to clarify some of the requirements. It's important to note that because this is a UDC change, we did go to the Planning Commission July 21st, and they approved of this with no conditions, or no changes to the recommendations, sorry. So the steps moving forward is, you know, we brought this originally on June 9th, went to Planning Commission the 21st. Tonight would be the first reading, and if you approve it, it would come as the second reading August 10th. We are still hoping to do some sort of a workshop, either later this fall, early next spring, to basically put this information out to developers and to the community. We don't have any dates on that, but that's what we're working towards. That's our goal. And with that, I will answer any questions.

City Clerk Long, is there anyone who would like to speak on this topic? Speakers for this item. Does anyone on council have comments or questions? Council Member Hall.

And I know Council Member Phillippe will have some as well, but just thank you. Thank you for your work on this. It just backs up our commitment to stormwater and that infrastructure. But I also wanted to point out that this went to Planning Commission and there were no suggestions or comments. And that's the most technical, astute group of people to have to look at something. So kudos to you on that. Thank you. Thank you.

Any other questions or comment? Do I have a motion? Council Member Zack, do I have a second? Council Member Beeson? All in favor, please raise your hand. Motion passes unanimously. City Clerk Long, please read the seventh item on the regular agenda.

This is item number 104.77 approval of an ordinance to amend the Code of Ordinances of the City of Roswell by amending Chapter 7 land development and environmental protection. Article 7.2 post development stormwater management. This will be the first reading also presented by Brian Watson. Assistant City Attorney Cusack, please read the ordinance.

This is an ordinance to amend Chapter 7, Land Development and Environmental Protection, Article 7.2, Post-Development Stormwater Management of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Roswell. Now, therefore, the Mayor and Council of the City of Roswell, pursuant to their authority, do hereby adopt the following amendment Chapter 7, Land Development and Environmental Protection, Article 7.2, Post-Development Stormwater Management of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Roswell, Georgia, is hereby amended by deleting said article and replacing it in its entirety by adding a new article, 7.2, entitled Post-Development Stormwater Management, which shall read as shown as an Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, and if adopted, this is the first reading. Thank you.

As my gift to you all tonight, I will not do another presentation because it is basically the same language. As I mentioned, the only difference here is that there's some things in Section 7.2 that would make sure that they match 12.5 in the UDC. And with that, I'll take any questions.

City Clerk Long, is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? There are no speakers for this item. Does Council have any comments or questions? May I have a motion? Council Member Phillip, you may have a second. Council Member Zach, all in favor? Passes unanimously. City Clerk Long, please read the last item on the regular agenda.

This is item number 104.88, approval of an ordinance to amend the unified development code related to data centers by modifying article six, employment districts, and article nine, use provisions. This will be the first reading presented by Michelle Alexander.

Assistant City Attorney Cusack, please read the ordinance.

This is approval of an ordinance to amend the Unified Development Code related to data centers by modifying Article 6 employment districts and Article 9 use provisions. Now, therefore, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Roswell hereby amend I'm lost at this point. Article 6, Employment Districts, and Article 9, Use Provisions of the Unified Development Code of the City of Roswell, and if approved, this is the first reading.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Just to back up and put it to context where we've been in January, a moratorium was placed on data centers and you instructed staff to research and to consider drafting ordinance language to regulate the operations within the city. We've had several meetings and several public hearings already. We've done quite a bit of research and have heard, we've had quite an interesting turnout also at the public hearings and it's been a helpful process to go through all of the information that's available. We brought this to you at committee and we had another planning commission meeting on July 21st and now we're here to have a public hearing. When we met with you at committee, you did instruct that you were favorable for the direction that staff was going, so we made some final tweaks to the ordinance and we're bringing it to you for consideration. I think we're pretty confident now on what we understand a data center to be. It's just that it does have several different types of names. Sometimes it's some digital infrastructure or hyperscalers. So what's often in the imaginary or the vision is the hyperscalers, which are the super large, mega-sized data centers. And we are looking to cap the size. have accommodation for the hyperscalers or those massive sized problematic data centers. We recognize that data centers create negative externalities. They do not generate employment is one of the concerns. We just went through, we talked earlier, the comprehensive plan and the reminder of how precious every parcel is and can we really afford to allow any of the land to be chewed up if it's not going to be generating employment, if it's in your economic development strategic areas. There are some considerations as fiscal impacts that can actually be quite substantial. depending on the project value. But we do look at the strategic side of it as both what is the impact on the quality of life, what is the impact for employment, and what is the fiscal impact. And we're gonna refer to that sort of three-legged stool as we go through the presentation. We have done quite a bit of interviews and research. We did work to get through our Georgia Power partners to get in contact with those who are in the industry. We didn't want to have just one-sided. We saw everything from advocates, advocacy side of those concerns, environmental concerns, as well as those that are in the industry and work to bring to you the findings of our work. The issue is such of an importance that 11 different states have passed moratoriums or have legislation. In fact, Georgia spent a little bit of time looking at legislation. We didn't quite pass anything through the governor's office, so it just reinforces that as a city we need to protect ourselves and make sure that we have in place what we need since the state and federal guidelines are still forthcoming the department of community affairs is one of the agencies that is working to put some protections in place however what they put in place is just a process where anything that's one of those larger hyperscales those 300 000 square feet or greater If they were coming in, they would be required to have a review, and they would be required to submit all kinds of documentation, and we took from that for the drawing of the draft that's before you, some of those requirements, because we don't anticipate the large kind, but we do need to have the information so that anything can come before you while you ask all of the right components to evaluate the appropriateness of the use. The Public Service Commission, they've also gone through, they've had looking at, their interest has been on the price impact on consumers for the cost of the extension of all of the infrastructure and outlays to support the massive increase in data centers. And so there's at least, that's one gap that was tried to be closed when the legislature didn't fail to take any action. We did want to let you know that there are both economic and fiscal considerations. We looked at the employment comparison to see how much employment would a data center generate versus a warehouse or versus an office. And you can see the numbers, 20 employees for an 80,000 square foot building versus a warehouse would have 53 employees, but an office would have 320 for that same amount of space. So we're looking at forfeiting quite a bit of employment. This is just another example of that for 134,000 square foot size, the number of employees. that would generate employment generation for that size building versus if it were an office versus a data center. And the numbers are quite extreme, 35 for a data center versus around 500 for office employment. On the flip side, on another side, the other dimension is looking at the tax tax implications. Because it is personal property, underneath that roof is quite an expensive amount of equipment, and that is really highly, highly valuable. And so, unlike something like a warehouse, you've got neither real estate property, but for a data center, you're actually, a local jurisdiction can get quite a bit of personal property tax, and you can see the difference there. between 2.4 million, 2.5 million versus several hundred thousand, 224,000 in the personal property tax, excuse me. One other impact that is a concern of the literature was that there may be an overextension and overbuilding of these buildings. So that means that if there's not the demand and if technology changes so that you don't need such large centralized locations, then you would have vacant buildings potentially and so this Our findings recommend for the ordinance that you include language about decommissioning and requiring that they're repurposed. We presented in the past the amount of energy. The white paper that we prepared has a lot of the details and we just wanted to put before you the sort of validation of the fact that There's this increased estimate of use for specifically for data centers, and it really takes its toll on the system. The other, excuse me. The other area is water and we documented that indeed there and just validated the concerns that folks had about water and how much is being used. Some of the other impacts concern noise and vibration. We looked at jurisdictions around the country to see how they handled attenuation and by using buffers and distances from residential. There was quite a variety and quite a variance of approaches. We went from, we pursued the furthest away that we thought made sense. Most were requiring a distance of between two to 500 feet away from the nearest residential property and we are proposing 1,000. So the recommendations included a definition, a new definition, and I wanted to emphasize that we are recommending you categorize the types of data centers by the megawatts of power that they use because it's the megawatts of power that they use that's going to determine how big of a nuisance are they but also it may be something you care about in terms of wanting to know what is the use of their energy what is the impact for our community and same with water you want to know how much they're being used so we're recommending organizing by megawatts and we're recommending that we don't discriminate and accidentally bring in an average business or maybe our own city government might have one megawatt over at Summit. We want to be reasonable. These data closets that the companies have can get really quite large, but they are always using the same HVAC equipment of the host building. So they're not generating the noises or the problems of the systems that require industrialized cooling systems or redundant backup generators. So those are the big noisemakers, and those are really not likely, those are not associated at all with the smaller megawatts of use. So we wanted to, the last sentence there is explicitly exempt them from the definition, so we're not trying to over-regulate what doesn't need, what isn't causing a problem. And so this is basically a chart that describes how that would look for exempting one megawatt, and we also recommend exempting hospitals. an average hospital might have a four megawatt data center, but they have specialized equipment for the acoustical engineering that stops the sound at the location, which most data centers aren't going to be doing, but hospitals and other specialized locations are required to, and it makes it functional for those who are getting services and work there. So we are recommending to have distance regulation from residential use or zoning from either 200 feet if you're a small data center versus if it's a larger one between 5 and 20 megawatts to have a thousand feet distance and a planted buffer of 100 feet and for the 5 to 20 megawatts which is the level that triggers around 15 megawatts is the triggering point the threshold where it really starts to make noise and become an irritant and a problem for a community so we are looking at a 200 foot buffer we recommend that this is conditional use only that if you allow it you allow it only as conditional use we allowed only the small tier one we're recommending only in the small only the small size megawatts, five and under, be allowed in OP, but still would need a conditional use permit to determine if it's appropriate, and if so, under what conditions. And the rest we're recommending is to allow under tier two as the industrial light zoning district. I'm saying the words tier one, tier two. I'm gonna go ahead and anticipate that planning commission had some recommendations that i'd like to review um with you this map we had just generated a map so that you could see where the locations of the green which is the light industrial is located in the city and where the op is located but again the op is um is the one to five megawatts. It's not going to have, likely to have industrial size coolants or it won't have, won't need generator backups, backup generators. This was a diagram we made to help visualize the size of something. So like one building might be 100,000 square feet. And just think of like a Walmart just under the size of a Walmart for 100,000 square foot. If it were next to an Aldi or a Lidl, that's the next image there, that's around 20,000 square feet. So it's just a way to put into perspective the distance until you get over that 1,000 feet away is where residential would be. would be at first even be allowed that they could be considered to be located. The data center could be located. We're prohibiting adjacent to residentially zoned or used property. At the moment, all major utilities located in the rear yard and we already discussed the planters. We would get information about water consumption, energy consumption, and we would prohibit the worst of the water users by requiring closed loop or something that's comparable and prohibiting the water, I'm gonna call them water hogs, that cause so much extreme over usage. We'd require noise study mitigation standards with planning commissions recommending that we do that once a year so that we continue to check and that's one way we can augment and make sure that they don't expand their footprint. We recommend, keeping the diesel backup generators that they aren't allowed to be tested during the evening hours. And we require additional information to talk about so that, talk about the impact on the community and give us information about their economic and fiscal impacts. Fire Chief wrote a good section quite a bit for us to look at fire suppression and life safety. again the abandonment and decommissioning plan so going through with Planning Commission Planning Commission recommended approval they had some edits that they were recommending and they all make sense the first one was if they didn't using the word tear when you refer to Data centers actually in the data center industry tiers actually has a specific reference and existing industrial scheme of types of data centers, different and separate. So they wanted to change the word from tier to class. They wanted to get rid of the word diesel because there's other kinds of generators. Instead of what you remember seeing, we had conditional use permit for OP for the smaller tiered size. Well, they're recommending that it's accessory use only so that you don't have a standalone system somewhere and that made sense to us that you could have that since typically it's accessory to an existing structure and that was the intent for the smaller size. They asked for some language specifically regarding the facility they wanted it to be of the to be constructed facility their language they were worried that a facility would be built and then residential would come in later, and then you'd hold the facility accountable and say you're too close to residential. So they were worried about that and they felt like this language helped address that. They wanted us to consult a sound expert to get guidance on DBA and DBC limits, and I'll talk about that in just a minute. And they wanted us to have examples for the different sound levels, and I'm prepared to talk about different sound levels. cheat sheet that is helpful in talking that through the same language about the of the to be constructed facility they we are they're recommending that we define better where we're measuring the distance, when we said the distance from the data center to residential, we didn't specify in the ordinance draft that we're measuring property line to property line. And they wanted to make sure that that's what we meant when we said that. So we would add that definition. And this is where I mentioned already, they were recommending an annual compliance mechanism to monitor the level of power usage just in order to avoid, once a conditional use has been granted, then to have a yearly mechanism where they have to submit what is their electrical use so that they're staying in compliance and not creeping out beyond the scope of what they were allowed. They would like to add language to be clear that when we talk about what is allowed, so if you're allowed up to five megawatts of energy use of a data center, they want it to be clear that it's the aggregate amount on a site. So if one site had two 15 megawatts on their site, they wouldn't be allowed because that would be 30 megawatts and we're capping everything at 20 megawatts. And then they wanted stronger language for buffers. Staff recommends you supporting the recommendations of Planning Commission, although I did excerpt out the one that was a recommendation about how to do the investigation for those decibels. We added, based on the language from Planning Commission, we recommend establishing a decibel level for DBA sound monitoring at 55 during the day and 45 during the evening. And then DBC, DBC is just another way to measure frequency of noise sound vibrations, but it's the low frequency that you can't capture or hear necessarily, but you still experience And it can be problematic and the literature shows that communities are suffering from that So and we use that actually our existing nuisance and noise language already also uses both DBA and DBC now if you're having a party and and the police come and the DVA is measured at 65, you're gonna be allowed. They allow it to 65 at the property line, but it's down, we're looking at where we are for the types of, machinery and everything that's going to be used to have it lower based on what other ordinances around the country have been doing. And then regarding, so Planning Commission asked us to do an added detail, item number 10, detail for buffers. And they wanted us to follow the example of a specific ordinance. We're recommending absolutely let's establish tree planting standards for that 100 and 200 foot on buffer. It does have a distinct buffer than what we have now. What we have is a visual buffer in our code. And we would need one to address attenuation of sound, would need different plantings. And so speaking with the city arborist, we recommend if you approve the or draft and the recommendations from Planning Commission that we modify those two so that they read as you see as far above or above in front on the screen, excuse me. So there's any questions?

City Clerk Long, is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? Yes, there are two speakers. The first is Lynn McIntyre. Derek Wood.

I'm not a Lynn, but I might be a pumpkin in five minutes. So this is great. We're super close on what feels like a comfortable, responsible relationship between growing technology and then the policy that is going to both protect people of Roswell as well as enable the business development growth that we want to see and promote with the comprehensive plan. I'm not a sound engineer, so I've The literature I've read about the low frequency issues that we're seeing from data centers, that wasn't something that was previously recorded or tested. I saw measured in hertz, 20 to 2,000. I didn't see what you have there, but if that works, it works for me. Again, I don't have an expertise in this area of engineering. What I did is I sent over a presentation that kind of reiterated what we're trying to work here. and also drafted up slightly amended coding. And one of the intents I had of doing this was to pull more clarity into the output of how we're defining this. So the label is something that will be hard to chase. You know, what's a data center? It's different yesterday versus today, and now we have many different types. There are lots of data center models, the ones that we all are thinking of, like OpenAI and Meta. I would be here with a torch and a pitchfork to say there's no way that that makes any sense in Roswell. There are plenty of other data center business models and developments and architectures that would be Definitely valuable for us to consider would enable business development growth here in Roswell with the changing late Landscape of how businesses are started what you need to run etc and even just the operations of the city itself and perhaps I could send over some examples of And I think that might be a nice piece of education for everyone, as the coding needs to be passed regardless of our stance. We need to have the coding. But the business model is really where the impact to our business plan in our city comes into play more than anything. And in all cases, we have to make sure the impact to the environment, the cost of utilities and the impact to the people is not negative and is satisfactory. So put this together. I'm not gonna read anything from it, but it's there. I think we handed out some printouts as well. um i tried to tie not just um megawatt usage and electricity but also water um and then of course the the final kind of pull it all together big picture look is is this good for the city of roswell according to our growth plans so everyone's been doing a great job the planning commission's been fantastic i think everyone's been very much aligned on what we're trying to do which is just get some order from a fast-paced moving technology segment. And obviously if we were not late to the party, we would have built data centers when ChatGPT was released, which is the same time that a lot of us in the industry started investing in GPUs and data center companies. We're not at that point anymore, so there's no risk of FOMO and missing out on the boat here. I don't think there should be any stress around around that and anyone who tells you otherwise is Probably going to get a commission for building a data center So that's it for me.

Thank you Thank you for waiting up so late We've gone over this quite a bit. A lot of people are not here that would love to be here, but we can tell you a couple of things. This is not the end of the process. It's only the beginning. You're just outlining what you can and can't do in Roswell in terms of the word data center. We know that there are many permutations of that definition and that most businesses have some kind of a cloud solution in their own building. We're not applying it to that type of situation. Michelle Alexander and her staff have done an outstanding job, and the Planning Commission brought up some great material. There were a few things that we mentioned to them that did not get incorporated, and that's because this is a swiftly moving target. All over the country, counties and cities are dealing with this one-on-one, just like you are tonight, without any roadmap. So we know there are moratoriums going on in certain states, There's certainly action going on in Congress, and Congress in particular is concerned that we have environmental impact statements done before approval, and that we have a full ban on non-disclosure agreements. That seems to be what's happening. Many places like Effingham County just found out that they're going to have a major data center without anybody being aware of it in the general public. We don't want to be that type of a place. We want to be protected. And that's what we're asking our city council to do. I think we've come as far as we can go with getting this ready for sending it in. And I can warn you that there will probably be some problems even after this is done. One thing that's become apparent is that even in a closed-loop solution for the water, that there are heavy-duty chemicals that are put in instead of water, and oftentimes the discharge of those chemicals somehow ends up in rivers. And that example could be just using the Flint Riverkeeper who are filing a lawsuit with QTS, I believe it's called. And that company in particular has had some issues with stealing water in their town in Fayetteville. I think I'm right. So I'm just warning you that even though we've got this done and we've gotten it to this point, do not expect that this is the end of the problem or that this will protect you from applicants who might come in and not even tell you who they're representing. And that's been another source of problems around the country. And I know Zach knows this. So just be wary and always remember, have it come back to council for approval, all right? Because the buck stops with you. Thank you very much.

Are there any other speakers? Does council have any comments or questions? Council member Brumley.

I think during the committee meeting I was asking if we could have like a class three just to very specifically say from here on we're not even entertaining

Yes, thank you for bringing that up. What we put into the ordinance is to say that it was capped at 20. So instead of adding another tier to it to say that it's NA or not allowed, we added to the overlay language, excuse me, Sorry, the ordinance language, we added that it was capped.

Okay, thank you. And then the other thing regarding the inspections, you had some, I think it was a recommendation from the Planning Commission, like annual inspections of the power.

So there would be. Eight, yeah. right that there would be monitoring um their usage no we wouldn't go in to conduct an inspection we would require some middle of documentation along with business license so we would get an annual yes sounds good but i think we should do that not just for power but also for noise level and for water and air quality yes Yes, that's in here. Sorry. Let me see. I know, yes, that was a requirement for the noise level. Did I make it separate? Forgive me. We're not having that at my fingertips, but we had for an annual submittal noise survey Ah, it is, okay, sorry. So section C1A requires that the noise assessment report shall be provided annually with business license registration, so also the noise.

So we have power and noise? Yes. But we don't have anything for water and air?

We only have water at the beginning, so when they come in for their conditional use permit, they would come in and show you what their water consumption would be.

but I'm talking about water quality, like inspection of water quality. Like Ms. McIntyre mentioned that they found chemicals leaking somewhere else, and I'm just trying to see how we can prevent that. Like if we have some sort of inspection of the environmental waste, or I don't know how to phrase it,

Yeah, the only thing that I was bringing up in response to that was we do have illicit discharge protections. So if there was any leak or if there is something that would be observed, that they would be subject to our laws, our rules about that, like any other illicit discharge.

Okay, all right, yeah, we can talk about it later, just more, because I think we kind of need to wrap it up to make sure that it's consistent, just because we know of that, and also the air quality around that area. Those are things that are not, people don't see them, and then all of a sudden, people are getting dry ice or something, and without consistent monitoring of that, we wouldn't have been able to know when that changed.

Yes, let me look better and more deeply into air quality. Okay, thank you. Controls and monitoring and regulations, existing regulations.

Council Member Hall.

Thank you, I'll be quick. I just wanted to, I mean, we embarked on this journey in January when it just started bubbling up hearing about it in other cities, municipalities, states, and I just want to commend your team, you, your team, thank Lynn McIntyre, Chattahoochee, water keepers, I'm sorry, I know I'm saying river keepers, I'm saying it wrong, but everybody that participated in providing information because this has evolved and into something that, we want it to be right for our city. And each municipality, everybody's gonna have something different that's right for them. And like Ms. McIntyre said, this is not going to, this is the first step because we can continue to update this. We'll implement it if we find there are things that we missed or as things change, we may have to update it. So we just have to stay vigilant. but I do wanna tell you an interesting story. The work that we've been doing, that your team, that Roswell's been doing, somehow made the news or somehow made it out there because I got a call from a city in Michigan that is similar size to us and they wanted to know what we're doing and where we're getting the information. And they were so impressed with what we're doing. And I did forward that call to somebody in ComDev. But thank you very much. So we made it all the way up to Michigan. Our work.

I would say not just Michigan, it's Colorado, California, New York, no, these are the ones I've got, and across Georgia, across the South, and then beyond. But Colorado, California's have called me, New York, and others, so congratulations, at least looking at things. Any other comments, Council Member Phillippe?

I just wanna thank our residents for staying the night with us.

Okay, any other comments or questions? May I have a motion? Council Member Beeson. A second by Council Member Zak. All in favor, please raise your hand. Passes unanimously. The next item on the agenda is the City Attorney's Report. Assistant City Attorney Cusack, please read the item.

I just have a recommendation to go into closure at 5.30 p.m. on Monday, August 10th, 2026 to discuss personnel litigation and or real estate.

Do I have a motion? Council Member Beeson by the second. Council Member Zach, all in favor, please raise your hand. Thank you. Passes unanimously. Being that there are no other items, this mayor and council meeting on Monday, now Tuesday, January 27th, 2026 is adjourned.

Thank you.