HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-09-2013 regular meeting
City Council of Peachtree City
Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
1:00 p.m.
The Mayor and City Council of the City of Peachtree City met in regular session on Thursday,
May 9, 2013. Mayor Haddix called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Other Council Members in
attendance: George Dienhart, Vanessa Fleisch, Eric Imker, and Kim Learnard.
Announcements, Awards, Special Recoanition
Mayor Haddix proclaimed the week of May 13th as Paint the Town Purple Week in support of the
2013 Relay For Life. Joan Ernst accepted the proclamation for the American Cancer Society.
Fire Capt. Ron Mundy was recognized for 30 years of service to the City.
10-Minute Talk
Joan Velsmid, Clothes Less Travelled Thrift Shop, gave an overview of the non-profit thrift shop
and its operation. She said there was no business plan in place when the shop started business
15 years ago, just a mission to help people. Over the last 15 years, the thrift shop board had
given $2.4 million, including $600,000 in 2013. The list of charities continued to grow. Velsmid
thanked everyone on City staff that helped the shop do business and keep expenses low.
Fleisch thanked Velsmid for the donations the City had received for the Fire Department and for
the furnishings for the renovation of the Recreation Administration building into a facility to be
used by Fayette Senior Services.
Public Comment
Ann Hayes, a supporter of the proposed backyard hens' pilot program, told Council she had not
known if any of them had ever had farm fresh eggs before, and she gave them some fresh eggs
she had purchased at the Farmers Market.
Minutes
February 5,2013, Workshop Minutes
April 18, 2013, Regular Meeting Minutes
Fleisch moved to approve the February 5, 2013, workshop minutes and April 18, 2013, regular
meeting minutes as written. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Monthlv Reports
Haddix noted there were additional monthly reports on the dais from Administrative Services,
Building, and Finance.
Consent Aaenda
1. Consider Award of Contract for Citywide Phone System - Clear Choice Telephone, Inc.
2. Consider Request to Surplus Trailers
Haddix noted there was an additional document on the dais - the staff memo for Consent
Agenda 1.
Learnard moved to approve Consent Agenda items 1 and 2. Dienhart seconded. Motion
carried unanimously.
--
Old Aaenda Items
03-13-02 Public Hearing - Consider Variance to Floodplain Management/Floodplain
Protection Ordinance, Somerby Project, Rockaway Road
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 2
Planning & Zoning Administrator David Rast addressed Council, noting the Somerby project was
required to construct a fire access road around the perimeter of the assisted living and memory
component of the development on Rockaway Road. Construction of the fire access road
would require 165 cubic yards of fill to be placed within a portion of the 100-year floodplain
associated with Flat Creek. The fill would be placed in an old roadbed located on the property
that traveled along the floodplain. The applicant submitted a flood impact study, which had
indicated no rise in levels due to the fill, and it had been reviewed by the City Engineer.
In addition, the sanitary sewer line for Somerby and Meade Field would need to cross the
floodplain on the Somerby tract. requiring the disturbance of an additional 0.1 6 acres of
floodplain to install and cover the line in. No additional fill would be needed. Staff supported
the variance request with the following understandings and conditions:
). The applicant shall continue to coordinate with City staff to ensure disturbance within
the floodplain is kept to a minimum prior to, during and following construction activities.
2. The variance shall be limited to the disturbance as identified on the final site plan
approved by City staff on August 29, 2012, specifically Sheet C4.0 Grading, as prepared
by Eberly and Associates, InC. (last revised August 28, 2012). There shall be no other
disturbance within the floodplain without first securing additional variances.
The public hearing opened and closed, with no one speaking for or against the variance.
Learnard said she had no problem with the request asking if it was similar to the situation for the
recent variance for Braelinn Kroger. Rast said the situations were similar, but he did not recall the
acreage for Kroger. Learnard clarified that 0.16 acres would be impacted. Rast said that was
area for the sewer line. Approximately 165 cubic yards of fill would be needed within the old
roadbed for the fire access road.
Learnard moved to approve the variance to the Floodplain Protection Ordinance for the
Somerby project on Rockaway Road. Fleisch seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
04-13-12 Discuss Traffic Conditions on SR 54 West and Consider Traffic Engineering Study on
SR 54 West & MacDuff Parkway
Haddix said public comments would be taken after Council Members Dienhart and Fleisch
completed their comments.
Dienhart noted this was a continuation of the April 18 discussion. He continued that two years
ago Council had promised there would be no cut-through from any retail developments to
Planterra Way. This was an opportunity to restore the public trust that had been lost during the
last two to three years. They needed to protect the neighborhoods and honor Council's word.
Building a grocery store rather than small shops would add even more traffic to the 1 .2-mile
stretch with six lights. Council needed to show the citizens they deserved to be in office.
Another light was not needed, and definitely no cut-through to the neighborhoods was needed.
Dienhart said the developer told him the tract was more valuable as zoned. He was presenting
the plan as a favor to a few Council Members who wanted to see something different on the
tract. This was the wrong stoplight the wrong development and the wrong action for Council
_ to take.
Fleisch said she was appalled the situation had gotten to this point. She referred to a proposal
to add a traffic light to the development agreement on January 7, 2010, and it had been voted
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 3
down, adding they had all campaigned against the additional light. The development
agreement for the Special Use Permit excluded gas stations and drive-through fast food
restaurants. During the four years after that vote, the land had gone into foreclosure, and the
City had even considered buying it at one time, but the bank wanted too much money.
Council had looked at every alternative.
Fleisch continued that on April 18, Dienhart had advocated closing the median at Line Creek
Drive. The discussion had been based on Dienhart's opinion, not the facts. Fleisch noted that a
2008 traffic study had said closing the median would make the traffic worse, which was a
significant fact that had been omitted from the April 18 discussion. Fleisch said the problems on
SR 54 predated this Council. adding the problems really started at Flat Creek and went down to
MacDuff Parkway. There had been no studies performed on the entire corridor, which Fleisch
found amazing. Fleisch asked the City Engineer Dave Borkowski to look at a traffic study and its
possible cost.
Borkowski gave a brief presentation on the history of the corridor, saying the widening had been
completed in 2006. Since that time, the functionality of the corridor had steadily decreased.
The traffic issues started at Lake Peachtree and went through the MacDuff Parkway intersection.
There were seven signals in the corridor. The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) had
spent $35,000 trying to synchronize the lights in the corridor. There had been several studies
done, but none were as comprehensive as the study Fleisch proposed. Alternatives to alleviate
the traffic problems included the grade separation at SR 54/SR 74, which was too expensive and
would greatly impact the busines~es in the area; and the extension of MacDuff Parkway to the
north Kedron Drive area.
~
Borkowski explained that a development impact study's only focus was to determine the impact
of that development on the existing conditions. He continued that the 2008 study looked at the
intersections of SR 54 with Line Creek, Planterra Way, and MacDuff Parkway, and what would
happen if a light was installed at Line Creek or whether the median should be blocked.
According to the study, the signal would have had the least impact and would not have
negatively impacted the other intersections. The DOT had issued a permit for the signal at Line
Creek, but the development never moved forward, so the light was never installed.
A development impact study was very specific, according to Borkowski, and every time the
square footage changed, all the parameters changed. The 2011 study looked at a signal.
closing the median at Line Creek, and adding a frontage road with access to Planterra.
Borkowski said that staff had commented on the study, but the plan never made to the
approval stage. The study specified that frontage roads to MacDuff Parkway or Planterra Way
would not make those intersections worse, unless the median at Line Creek was also closed.
Dienhart asked who paid for the studies. Borkowski said the developer had paid for them. The
2011 study had been reviewed by staff and a third party that was hired by the City. Dienhart
said he had not used those studies because they were paid for by the developer.
Borkowski said the current level of service on the highway was bad. It had been bad in 2011.
When those traffic counts were done, the levels of service at the intersections were either aD, E,
or F, and it was worse now. Borkowski said there were three options:
-
1. Status quo - notify DOT of issues
2. Formally request DOT to study the corridor and come up with alternatives
DOT would request engineering funding in their budget and establish a project
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9. 2013
Page 4
Could take "years" to complete
3. City could commission its own corridor study with alternatives
Cost $39.000 for a comprehensive study of the whole corridor
Alternatives
o Timing modifications
o Intersection lane configurations/storage length
o Access roads
o Alternate intersection controls (u-turns/superstreet)
o Widening
o Continuous flow intersection
Includes looking at any Line Creek development impacts
The pros for Option 1 included no cost. and the cons were there were no alternatives, and there
would be minimal impact on congestion. Option 2 was also no cost to the City. but the cons
included the study taking a long time. and there were no short term answers on what would
really work. Option 3 would be a relatively quick comprehensive study on what would and
would not work. but the con was the cost to the City.
Borkowski reminded everyone a traffic study did not include any relevant construction drawings.
If an improvement was selected. the City would have to pay to have it designed and
completed. No funding was allocated. The process would start with GOaT and the Atlanta
Regional Commission (ARC) for opproval. then getting the project on the Transportation
Improvement Plan (TIP), then finding funding.
Haddix opened the floor for comments from the public.
Mike Lorber asked what the status was on the MacDuff Parkway extension. Borkowski said the
project had been part of the failed 2012 Regional Transportation SPLOST. and the extension was
still part of the agreement with the developers. Staff did not know how beneficial the extension
would be to the issues on SR 54 WeSt. Lorber asked if the extension had been studied. Borkowski
said there was a study. which said the extension would improve traffic on SR 54 West. Lorber
asked if the extension of TDK Boulevard into Coweta County was still an option. Borkowski said
the project had been cancelled. Lorber asked if the extension of TDK had been studied.
Borkowski said he was not aware of any studies on that project.
Haddix said the TDK extension had been cancelled because of the plans for a 2.000-home
subdivision and one million square~foot commercial area in Coweta County, so there would be
no gain for the City.
Lorber questioned whether there had not been an access road on the plans for SR 54 West.
Haddix said there was an access road on the 2001 overlay plan for the area. but the developer
had not wanted to build the connection. It was doable since there was property dedicated for
it. as well as a space to connect it to Fulton Court. Lorber recalled there had been an issue with
the road going through the Line Creek Nature Preserve. Haddix said the developer did not want
to do the connection then, but now the developer was willing to do the connection to MacDuff
Parkway.
Lorber asked where the proposed grocery store would be located. Dienhart said it would be on
top of the cliff currently visible behind the RaceTrac site under development. Lorber asked if the
area was zoned for a grocery store. Dienhart said that was one of the arguments. plus the cut-
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9,2013
Page 5
throughs required by the developer, who had already stated there would be no grocery store if
there was no cut-through to Planterra Way.
Lorber asked why the developer wanted a cut-through to Planterra Way, when there could be a
connection with MacDuff. Haddix said he was told by the developer that Publix would only
build there if there was a connection to Planterra and MacDuff, as well as a light at Line Creek.
If any item was missing, there would be no development. Haddix said he had no problem with
an access road to MacDuff Parkway. Lorber said it was obvious the traffic impact was either
people headed to or leaving from Coweta County. Crosstown/TDK could possibly help. He was
not sure sewer was available fora large commercial development in that area of Coweta
County.
Dienhart said developing the Line <:;reek property under the current zoning would have a lower
impact on the traffic than the current proposal. Lorber said there were solutions, but the City
would have to give up something.
Tim Lydell, a resident of Cardiff Park, reported that, as a general rule, the neighborhood residents
were opposed to the current plan. The building would not be recessed into the ground, and
would be 15 feet about ground level, which would be a beautiful view of the back of the
buildings. They opposed the cut-through to Planterra Way and had opposed it before. The
current plan was a negative, not a plus for the area. There was no room for a Publix, especially if
it degraded the value of the homes. Lydell said a traffic study done by the City would be
objective. Closing the median at Line Creek would not be fair to the businesses located there.
Facts were needed to make a good decision and before Council took drastic actions.
Patrick Staples, president of the Cqrdiff Park homeowners association (HOA), said a cut-through
to Planterra Way was a non-starter regardless of what was developed on the property. It would
create a ridiculous traffic situation. His concern about another traffic study on SR 54 was
whether it would be comprehensive enough, asking if the traffic coming from SR 74 South would
be considered. Council needed to make sure the whole question was answered if a study was
done. There were also concerns about the buffers, including the elevation, which were not the
same concerns as the light and the median. He asked Council not to forget the underlying
interests of the residents of Planterra and Cardiff Park.
Haddix said the 2008 traffic study was irrelevant because they could not get the cross
connection to MacDuff. This was a request for a second traffic light for that property since they
would connect to MacDuff now. The corridor stretched a long way, and every study done to
find an alternative in the past had destroyed the commercial space. Closing the median was
not an issue to Haddix with access to MacDuff, where u-turns could be made. All of the
alternatives for SR 54/SR 74 would wipe out three shopping centers, which was the reason those
ideas had been rejected. The entire corridor had to be looked at. It would cost $2.5 million to
remove all the granite, and the developer still had to blast it out for the tanks for the gas station.
Dienhart asked if there was any way to dig down to hide the development from Cardiff Park; he
believed the 30-foot cliff would stay there. The developer did not need the connection to
Planterra Way or the light since they could connect to the light at MacDuff Parkway. Dienhart
added a specialty Publix could be built on the site. He asked Council to consider a traffic study,
saying he was asking for a commitment not to allow the curb cut on Planterra Way or the light.
If Council ignored that, they were riot representing the residents of Planterra or Cardiff Park.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9,2013
Page 6
~.
Imker said he did not care for another light, adding he had asked the developer about a right-in
and right-out only onto Planterra Way. Everyone seemed to support a connection to the
MacDuff Parkway light, so they needed to find a way to make that happen. It seemed like a
smart thing to do. There were two basic choices, either to have the developer proceed with the
plan as zoned or to build a quality store that desired a traffic light. The question was how much
traffic each type of development would bring. The basic questions needed to be understood
before a final decision could be made.
Learnard asked Haddix what his vision was for the area. Haddix said it would be an ideal school
setting or office area, something quiet with minimal impact on the residential areas. Quality
could not be defined by a big box; size did not determine quality.
Learnard said she preferred greenspace, but the property had been zoned commercial since
around 1977. Council had voted down the developer's plan in january 2010 because it
included a light. She continued that the mistake Council had made was they had not said what
they were for. They had always said what they were against, and it was time for Council to say
what they were for. The plan brought to Council in 2010 had been worked on among the
neighbors and the developer for months. A fast food restaurant and a gas station were
negative progress, but was what the area had been zoned for. Another proposal had been
submitted. A cohesive plan that worked for the City was needed. She asked Dienhart and
Fleisch to meet with the developer and the neighbors, to close the door and come up with
something everyone could live with.
Dienhart said he had no problem with Learnard's proposal. The developer had choices A and
B, and he could make more money off choice B, even though it would have smaller stores. The
developer had been very explicit that Publix would not come without the light, saying their legal
department would not sign off on it.
Haddix said he was not against anyone talking, but the developer owned the land, and he
could build whatever he wanted as long as it was allowed by the zoning ordinance. He was not
saying there was no point in having a discussion, but any plan would have to be something the
developer wanted to build. Dienhart added the developer also had to be able to sell it. Haddix
noted that Kohl's had never committed to the development, but the developer had asked for
the relevant square footage, which brought the special use permit into play.
Learnard said the developers had compromised with the neighbors before, and she asked if the
neighborhoods were willing to try again. Lydell said a sea of concrete had been proposed in
january 2007. It included two big boxes, and people had been opposed. The development
also had not looked like Peachtree City. Twenty-five to 30 people had worked on that, not just
Planterra or Cardiff Park residents. The developer had worked and argued with them, and the
residents realized the property was commercial. The issues were to get something acceptable
to the City and to take care of the neighbors. The special use permit process had been used
effectively to get a development that had looked pretty good. The ordinance for the speCial
use permit included 24 specific it~ms that were not usually negotiable. jim Lowe was the
common thread in that plan and the current one. Unless they tried to talk, they would not know
if the developer was willing to talk. It had been well worth the time it took to get good solid talks
going on in the past. It would also be good to have a good traffic study. Good decisions could
not be made without all the facts.
Haddix said the plan that had been presented at that time was not something the rest of the
City had wanted. Learnard said she believed in jim Lowe and Tim LydelL and she believed they
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 7
could come up with a solution the City could live with; but nobody was going to like it 100%.
Solutions called for compromise.
Learnard presented the following list as the overarching vision for the developer/citizens group:
· Commercial tract will have commercial establishments on it;
· Development that is in the spirit and intent of Peachtree City;
· A cohesive, comprehensive plan for the site;
. Good aesthetics overall;
. High end architecture, lighting, landscaping;
. Include golf cart paths and connectivity;
· Minimize negative impact on already problematic traffic areas;
· Protect the neighbors visually with elevation, berms, screening, landscaping;
. Protect the neighbors regarding truck traffic and noise;
. Protect the neighbors with lighting strategies;
. Keep Peachtree City green;
· Partner with Southern Conservation Trust and optimize the site plan with respect to the
Line Creek Nature Center;
· Minimize cost to the City regarding the roads, as Line Creek Drive and Line Creek Circle
are in need of paving and upgrades;
· Minimize cost to the City regarding the dam and pond at the Line Creek Nature Area;
. Attract high quality tenants as they evidence low turnover rates; and
. Get the best possible economic development return to Peachtree City.
Imker liked Learnard's list. adding that the City had a great bargaining chip in the Line Creek
Nature Area since the developer wanted to use the pond in the preserve for detention rather
than constructing a detention pond. The City could use that as an enticement to get the
developer to work on a connection to the MacDuff light. Traffic would get worse regardless of
what was built; the challenge was to minimize the effect of the development.
Haddix said the pond was discussed in the past. and he could not remember the specific
reasons why, but the end result was the developer would have to build their own detention
pond. Fleisch said that could be worked out later.
Fleisch reiterated a need for a loqk at the big picture, saying the City needed to do its own
traffic study. All the studies had been paid for by developers. If the City did its own, it would not
be tainted in any way. She continued that she had the accident reports on SR 54 West pulled,
and the top three and four areas of high traffic incidents were along the corridor. Learnard said
if the developer/citizens group decided a traffic study was warranted, she would support it.
Haddix noted the study at SR 54/SR 74 had been done by the DOT and ARC, working with the
County and City. Fleisch said she would like to vote on the study, since it would take at least two
months for the study to be done.. Dienhart said they needed an actual price before voting.
Meeker said the agenda item said "discuss," so staff would come back with a contract and a
firm price. Staff had an idea of what needed to be included in the study due to this discussi on.
Haddix asked if they proceeded \^,lith the study, whether Council could end up having to vote
on the traffic light while the study was in progress. Dienhart agreed. He asked what the
developer's deadlines were, saying Council needed a big picture of the developer's situation,
too.
JIT
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 8
Fleisch said she had been concerned about that too, and she had asked staff to contact the
developer. Rast reported that an e-mail had been sent, but as of the meeting time, there had
been no reply.
Imker said he would rather not vote on a traffic study until the group had met. He wanted a
traffic study to include the option of the completion of MacDuff Parkway. Consensus for the
study was it should include the entire area along SR 54, from MacDuff Parkway to the Wyndham
Peachtree Conference Center, and all the side streets.
There was a question on whether to call the developer/citizen group a committee or not. The
decision was to not call it a committee. The consensus was to not move forward on anything
until Council heard from the group.
New Aaenda Items
05-13-01 Public Hearing - Consider Variance from Watershed Protection Buffer Ordinance,
323 Watermark Drive
Rast said the applicants, Richard and Caroline Burnett. applied for the variance in order to
construct a swimming pool at the rear of their home, which had 466 feet of frontage on Lake
Kedron. One of the adjacent properties was owned by the Peninsula subdivision HOA, and the
lot on the other side was undeveloped. The tract was 1.49 acres, but after taking out the buffers
and setbacks only a small buildable area was left, which was where the home was located. The
100-foot undisturbed buffer around the lake would not be impacted by the pool. They were
asking for a six-foot variance into the 50-foot no impervious buffer in one area and eight feet in
another. Rast noted there had been an error in the memo, and it only included the six-foot
encroachment.
Looking at the variance criteria, Rast noted that 82% of the lot could not be developed. The
City Engineer had also looked at the application and agreed the pool would have minimal
impact on the no impervious buffer based on the way the retaining wall and pool would be
constructed. The water would be able to infiltrate into the ground. Staff recommended
approval with the following understandings and conditions:
1. The applicant shall continue to coordinate with City staff to ensure disturbance within the
floodplain is kept to a minimum prior to, during, and following construction activities.
2. The variance shall be limited to an encroachment as shown on the "Backyard Pool for
the Burnett Residence" landscape plan as prepared by Mike Lorber, AS LA. There shall be
no other encroachments permitted without first securing additional variances.
3. Evergreen plant material sholl be installed at the base of the wall to assist in screening
views of the wall from properties across the lake.
4. Following completion of construction and prior to issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy, the Applicant shall provide a revised Foundation Survey identifying the
location of the new construction. The purpose of this survey is to ensure the new
construction does not encroach any further into the impervious setback than permitted
by this variance.
Haddix opened the public hearing.
Mike Lorber, the landscape architect for the Burnetts, assured Council that the applicants
understood protecting Lake Kedrbn. The encroachment would provide enough room for
people to walk around the pool. Lorber noted that guidelines for pools were to locate the pool
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9. 2013
Page 9
10 - 12 feet from a house. The pool would be enclosed in a pervious system. which eliminated
the impact on the lake.
Richard Burnett said the pool could be built abutting the side of the home, but there would be
no access to the pool from the home, and they did not want to compromise the safety of
anyone using the pool that might need help. He said the HOA had approved the plans pending
Council's approval.
No one else spoke. The public hearing closed.
Haddix said not having written approval from an HOA was a concern for him. Burnett said they
had recently moved to the City from Washington, D.C., adding the HOA had required approval
from his neighbors for the fence. When he explained that he would need to go two lots over on
each side, the HOA representative said it would not be necessary since HOA property was on
one side and an undeveloped lot on the other. Dienhart asked Council if they were willing to
approve the variance pending written notification from the HOA.
Learnard said she was not aware HOA approval was required for a variance. City Attorney Ted
Meeker said HOA approval was a matter of course for variance requests. From a legal
standpoint. it was two separate sets of requirements, for some reason. Most of the time. the
applicants had gone before their HOA before coming to Council.
Imker said he had no problem with the variance. but he was not going to vote on it without HOA
approval. which would set the City up for problems with the HOA. Haddix said there had been
at least a few times when Council had approved a variance without HOA approval. and the
HOAs had been very upset. He wanted to see it in writing. Burnett said they had written
approval pending Council approval; however, he had not sent it to Rast. He added he would
e-mail it to Rast that night. Imker offered his computer for Burnett to log into his e-mail and look
for the letter.
Haddix asked Rast to go over the buffers and what they meant. Rast explained the watershed
protection buffer included a 100-foot natural buffer from normal pool elevation. designed to
filter out sediment from the drinkingwater reservoirs. and the 50-foot no impervious buffer was an
additional buffer that allowed residents to use the yard. Some things were allowed in the no
impervious buffer as long as the water could still percolate. Pavers were pervious if they were on
a sand or gravel base.
Imker reported to Council that he had seen the e-mail from the HOA with its approval pending
Council approval of the variance request. Burnett was sending him the e-mail. then Imker would
forward it to everyone else.
Learnard asked if the pumps couldbe moved to the side of the home if there was any possibility
at all. She felt that was an appropriate measure to take.
Learnard moved to approve the variance request from the Watershed Protection Ordinance for
323 Watermark Drive based on the conditions outlined in the staff report. Dienhart seconded.
Motion carried unanimously.
05-13-02
Consider Amendments to Chapter 66, Signs, Specifically Related to
Temporary Signs
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 10
Rast noted that, when the ordinance was amended in 2006 - 2007, language was added to
allow temporary signs on residential and non-residential property. One temporary sign was
allowed for an extended period of time, with basically no limit to the time the sign could be on
display. Some businesses were using the temporary signs to their advantage by having more
signs than were permitted by ordinance. The proposed amendments would provide a
mechanism for enforcement by setting time limits. The size of the signs would not change, but
the date the sign was posted muston the sign, and the signs could not be displayed more than
30 consecutive days at anyone time, provided no more than six temporary signs were located
on the property during a calendar year, and there be no less than 30 days between the displays
of the signs. Staff hoped the amendments would help reduce clutter on primarily commercial
properties.
Learnard moved to approve the amendments to Chapter 66, Signs, specifically related to
temporary signs. Fleisch seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
05-13-03 Consider Ordlnance<Amendments Regarding Blankets and Tarps
City Manager Jim Pennington reported that Public Information Officer/City Clerk Betsy Tyler and
Meeker, along with several other staff members, had worked on the proposed amendments,
noting they addressed a difficult situation. People were either for or against putting blankets
and tarps out early for the Fourth of July events. There was no middle ground.
Tyler recalled the blanket and tarpfrenzy that had started five days prior to the Fourth of July last
year. The City's streets and parks were lined with blankets, tarps, and other items placed to
reserve seating. Council had asked for a recommendation on what to do about the issue. Tyler
continued that she and Meeker had worked with Recreation, Planning, Fire, Police, Code
Enforcement, and Public Works, finding two sections of the Code of Ordinances needed to be
addressed - Parks and Streets and Right-of-Ways.
The proposed amendments would allow staff to remove any blankets or tarps left unattended
for 60 minutes or more, which would keep them from going up days prior to an event. Tyler
noted there might not be enough employees available to tag the blankets and tarps and then
go back and get them on July 4th. The Police Department followed state law regarding vehicles
that appeared to be abandoned .on roads, which included placing a tag on the vehicle for a
certain amount of time before removing it. The ordinances had previously not included
anything for parks.
Learnard noted that runners often left vehicles and items at the boat launch on Battery Way,
then would go on a long run that lasted two hours. Meeker said a separate set of rules applied
to abandoned vehicles. A sticker had to be placed on vehicles, and they had to be in place
for 24 hours before they could be moved. Police Chief H.C. "Skip" Clark added it usually took
some time before the vehicles were notice and reported.
Imker said he was not comfortable with the 60-minute requirement. Changing the time to
midnight the day before an event would give City residents first choice on locations. Tyler
reminded Council that there were other events where there were issues. The proposed
amendments did not specifically address July 4th.
~
Fleisch said the safety aspects of stakes were still a problem, even with the time change to
midnight. Tyler said there would be even fewer staff than normal at that time, adding canopies
could block the view of motorists.
~/l~_~~,._
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 11
Imker said he did not want to see any citizen confrontations because of a one-hour rule.
Dienhart said July 4th was the City's showcase event, and he had no problem with an hour.
Haddix said, if the time were changed to midnight, he had visions of thousands of flashlights in
the dark as people tried to find a space. Imker suggested 6:00 a.m. be considered rather than
midnight. Learnard said that would address the issue of putting them out days in advance.
Imker said it was not about restricting people from doing it, just how early they went out.
Clark said it was Council's choice. The Police Department would not be able to monitor how
long tarps and blankets were out on July 4th. They had many obligations that day. He wanted
to make sure there were no safety issues.
Pennington said the problem was having the blankets and tarps out four to five days
beforehand. The City did not have the personnel to monitor it, but putting them out six days
beforehand was ridiculous. Clark said there would be a mad rush of people getting their spots
with the time restricted. Haddix suggested keeping the amendments inline with the rules for the
parks, which used the wording "dusk to dawn." Dienhart felt that was too subjective.
The Council consensus was to allow the blankets and tarps beginning at dawn the morning of
an event. Meeker said the amendments would need to be re-written, and they could be ready
for the June meeting.
~
05-13-04 Consider Budget Amendment for Crosstown Road
Pennington said there had been many presentations on the roads, and Crosstown was at the
top of the list. The road was declining rapidly, and staff believed the full-depth reclamation
(FDR) used on Dividend Drive should be used for Crosstown Road. The problem was the $261,000
grant the City had received had 9 time limit, and there was only $134,000 left in the Special
Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) fund for roads. Another $305,000 needed to be transfer
from the cash reserves, which would total $700,000 for the project. Pennington said the City
needed to move ahead with the project, but he wanted Council to understand there would be
no funds left in the SPLOST fund for roads. The remaining SPLOST money was for cart paths.
Financial Services Director Paul Salvatore said there would be approximately $331,000 left in the
SPLOST fund for cart paths. All the money could come from the SPLOST fund without the
requested budget adjustment, but then there would no money for cart paths and staff would be
requesting the adjustment for those projects.
Pennington reiterated the $261 ,000 grant had to be spent by June.
Learnard moved to approve the budget adjustment in the amount of $305,000 from General
Fund reserves for the completion of an FDR for Crosstown Drive. Imker seconded. Motion
carried unanimously.
A short break was called at 9:23 p.m., with the meeting reconvening at 9:28 p.m.
-
Council/Staff Topics
Hot Topics Update
Pennington noted the City's Employee Picnic would be held the next day, May 10, at Shakerag
Knoll.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 12
,~
Pennington said staff was proceeding with work on the Comprehensive Plan, at least on the SR
54 East area. A great deal of data had been collected. Staff was looking at the near term and
long term.
Pennington said there had been some discussion on a name for the Recreation Administration
building since it had been renovated for use by Fayette Senior Services. Several names had
been discussed, and in looking at the entire area, staff recommended calling it Mcintosh Place.
It would be nice to put a placard up with the name. Council consensus was that was fine.
Imker discussed the potential SPLOST that would be on ballot in November. Imker talked with
County Administrator Steve Rapson, asking him when the County needed the City's list of
projects so the wording for the question could be done. Imker said Rapson wanted something
from the City by May 28. Imker told Rapson that would not happen. Imker wanted to layout
some possible options that could be discussed, saying the two-year penny tax would generate
$12.8 million for the City.
.~~
Imker suggested the funds could be used for a millage rate reduction, street/cart path
maintenance, new cart paths/streets, debt payoff, paying cash instead of leasing equipment
each year, a new fire station, any other ideas that might come up, or any combination of those
ideas. If the SPLOST were approved, the items could be moved around if worded properly. He
continued that, in one year, the SPLOST would yield approximately $6.430,000, which was the
equivalent of 3.76 mills of property tax for City residents based on the net digest value that one
mill was equivalent to $1,710,000. The average homeowner would pay $368 in additional
property taxes each of the two years a 3.76 mill tax was in place based on the fair market value
of the average $245,000 home. The equivalent cost for each household paying the 1 % extra
sales tax for two years was about $180 per year to achieve the same $12.8 million in revenue.
Imker continued that, in order for each household to generate $368 in SPLOST tax for the City,
they would have to ring up $123,000 in sales in Fayette County that were subject to the 1 %
SPLOST. The five-year 2006 SPLOST yielded only $10,130,000 for the City or $2,025,000 each year.
Imker continued that Public Services Director Mark Caspar had presented a list at the May 7
workshop, recommending $7.5 million be used for roads, $2.5 million on cart paths, and $2.6
million on cart path bridges and tunnels. As for the streets, $5 million could be spent on 185
streets of the streets in the City that rated 77 out of 100 or below (with the worst street, Crosstown
Drive from SR 74 to Peachtfee Parkway, fated at 49). The $5 million cost did not include milling,
patching, or FDR if that was needed, so Imkef said they really did not know how many streets
would be covered by $5 million ori$7.5 million. There were 606 cart paths in the City, and $2.5
million would address the worst 91 cart paths.
Dienhart said this was the perfect timing since the 2006 SPLOST funds wefe funning out. Imker
asked if a genefalized statement was all that was needed. Haddix said there had been specific
projects in the 2006 SPLOST. Meekef said there wefe projects listed, as well as a catch-all
statement for cart paths. Imker proposed including all the projects so the City could pick and
choose, saying the money should clearly be used for street and cart path maintenance in his
opinion, but the others on Council might feel differently. He wanted to know how to get started.
Meeker said there would also be an intergovernmental agreement that would have a listing of
how the funds could be used by eoch jurisdiction. Meeker noted the County could put forward
a SPLOST refefendum on its own, but had asked fOf an agfeement to be put in place. They were
now working on formulating an agfeement, so it could all be done at one time.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 13
Haddix said he supported debt repayment. The money from the last SPLOST was running out. If
this SPLOST passed, the City would be in the same position when the funds ran out. He wanted
something more permanent, to get rid of the debt and have the ongoing savings that could be
used every year for the roads, cart paths, or other issues.
Dienhart asked Salvatore if he had the figures regarding the debt currently held by the City.
Salvatore said the City had apprO,ximately $15 million in debt. Every year, some of the debt
rolled off. One year's worth of debt payment was approximately $2.7 million. Dienhart said that
money could go back in the budget to pay for streets and cart paths.
Imker said anytime there was an infusion of $12 million there had to be a success somewhere,
whether it was debt reduction or spending it on street and cart path maintenance. Currently,
the City had 13 line items of de.bt, and four were revolving, and those four accumulated
anywhere from $500,000 to $1 million. The rest of the $2 million would be paid off in four years,
which would free up that $2 million after four years. There was merit to both approaches. He
wanted the discussion to focus on which route the City wanted to take and how it would get
there, not to debate the merits of one or the other. Learnard said staff must have a scenario of
what they wanted to see.
Fleisch noted that businesses in the City contributed approximately $8 million annually to sales
taxes in the County. Fayetteville contributed approximately $7 million, and the County
contributed $3 million. With the proposed SPLOST, the County would get $20 million. Peachtree
City would have contributed $16 million, and would get back $12 million. Fayetteville would
contribute $14 million, getting back $5 million. Salvatore said the method of distribution was not
based on how much sales taxes each entity's businesses collected. There were other services
involved. Fleisch said the residents needed that information. Haddix said that was an argument
to vote down the SPLOST and to go with a Municipal Option Sales Tax (MOST).
Pennington said it was logical that the revenue from a sales tax would come from the entities
with businesses that sold goods. The commercial centers in the County were in Peachtree City
and Fayetteville. There was minimal commercial adivity in the County proper, and the cities
were also part of the County.
Dienhart said the City would come out in a more favorable position with the proposed SPLOST
than it had with past SPLOSTs. Fleisch said City residents were already paying for stormwater.
She was not saying it was double taxation, but the residents should be aware of that when they
went to the ballot. Dienhart said that was why it was called a core infrastructure SPLOST.
Stormwater was the way some entities would use the money. Haddix agreed with Fleisch that
the citizens deserved to know whaf was going on. Dienhart said, in the interests of full disclosure,
they needed to know there was not a Plan B to replace the expired SPLOST money. Haddix said
the City was contributing more than they would get back.
Imker clarified that only the City of Atlanta could legally have a MOST. Haddix said he thought
that had changed. Meeker said that, unless something had changed, the City could not do a
MOST, but he would research it. Learnard suggested getting a recommendation from staff. The
City was out of money for cart paths and streets, and the proposed SPLOST was the most
sensible way to go about it. Imker said he also wanted staff to come back with an approach for
debt reduction.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 9, 2013
Page 14
Pennington said Council had asked for reports on the walking sign and food truck ordinances
passed the previous year. There had been no problems with either. There had been no
complaints at City Hall.
Learnard moved to convene in executive session for pending and threatened litigation at
10:01p.m. Dienhart seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Imker moved to reconvene in regular session at 10:14 p.m. Dienhart seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
Dienhart moved to deny the claims of Ed Eiswerth as such claims were presented, and to
authorize the City Attorney to file the counterclaims discussed in executive session if a lawsuit is
filed. Learnard seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business to discuss, Dienhart moved to adjourn the meeting. Imker
seconded. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:16 p.m.
~ I2Mcty
Don Haddix, Mayor
~