[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:01] 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.
[0:20] So to start off this evening we'll have a presentation and this is the Alpharetta Business
[0:27] Association canine donation presentation.
[0:30] If members of ABA would please come forward and members of the Alpharetta Public Safety
[0:36] Foundation would like to join us.
[0:49] Good
[0:58] evening.
[0:59] I mean, oftentimes when I get to speak in front of groups like this, I am a broken record
[1:06] and then I talk about how well supported we are as a public safety organization in our
[1:10] city.
[1:11] It's amazing.
[1:12] I was just at a conference last week with police chiefs all over the world and I'm
[1:17] like, my city is better than yours.
[1:18] It really is.
[1:19] So, this is a perfect example of that.
[1:22] The ABA, who's been a wonderful partner over the years in several different ways,
[1:25] has really stepped it up tonight.
[1:26] I'm gonna let her explain here just a second kind of what got us to this point
[1:29] But we are unfortunately we're down to canines right now
[1:32] And so we have been working toward filling those those two positions
[1:35] And they became aware that we have a need and wanted to step up and help us with that
[1:39] I'm gonna let you talk about that from this point
[1:43] We're so thrilled my name is Tracy Morton. I'm with the Alfredo Business Association on behalf of the ABA
[1:49] We would like to thank the city council for allowing us to be here today
[1:53] to present this very, very special gift to the Public Safety Foundation.
[1:59] The ABA has been an active presence and dedicated business professionals for over 25 years in Alpharetta.
[2:06] We work together to improve and support our local business climate and serve the greater community.
[2:13] The support of the city and our public safety department allows the ABA to hold such events
[2:19] is the very popular Alpharetta Farmers Market and the Breemoon Festival, and it runs smoothly
[2:25] and safely because of that.
[2:29] We would like to show our appreciation to the City of Alpharetta and the Alpharetta Public
[2:34] Safety Foundation for all you do to support our events and our community.
[2:39] With this donation, the Foundation would like to present a check for $17,000 to acquire and
[2:53] train a new canine police dog.
[3:02] Thank you to the Alfreda Public Safety Officers and Department for your dedication in improving
[3:10] and securing the quality of life for those who live, work, and play in Alfredo. Thank you.
[3:16] Thank
[3:20] you so much. Again, it's King of Generous and we're hoping early next year to be able to go
[3:24] and purchase the dog and send an officer training and we'll certainly keep you in touch with
[3:28] what's going on with that. I don't know if anybody else wants to.
[3:30] On
[3:34] behalf of the people of Alfredo, we thank you.
[3:41] That's good. Awesome. Thank you so much. Thank you.
[4:13] So next item up on our agenda this evening is Board and Commission appointments.
[4:16] appointments, and commission appointments by myself, Mayor, and City Councilman Binder.
[4:24] So perhaps we'll delay this until Councilman Binder's here.
[4:29] We can do that, Mr. Mayor.
[4:31] Yes.
[4:32] Okay.
[4:35] So we'll move on to the consent agenda.
[4:38] Consent agenda consists of the council meeting minutes from the meeting of October
[4:42] 17th, 2022.
[4:45] Bless you.
[4:46] City of Alfred a home-by-dark memorandum of understanding and the service contract community agriculture volunteer and education
[4:54] coordinator. Is there anyone who would like to remove anything from the consent agenda? Councilman Will.
[5:01] Mr. Mayor, I'd like to remove the meeting minutes from the consent agenda since I wasn't here last week.
[5:06] It's duly noted.
[5:08] Any other removals?
[5:11] So the consent agenda that we'll be voting on for the time being will be this city of
[5:16] off-road home-by-dark memorandum of understanding in the service contract, community, agriculture,
[5:22] volunteer, and education coordinator to have a motion from council.
[5:26] Yes, sir.
[5:27] Mr. Mayor, I'd offer a motion to approve the consent agenda this evening as presented
[5:32] by the mayor.
[5:32] Second.
[5:33] I have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Merkel, a second by Councilman Hypes, in discussion.
[5:39] All those in favor, please vote yes, otherwise vote no,
[5:45] and does pass unanimously.
[5:47] So now we'll go ahead and take up separately the Council meeting minutes for the meeting
[5:51] of October 17th, 2022.
[5:54] Mr. Mayor, I'd offer a motion tonight to approve the Council meeting minutes of 10,
[5:59] 17, 22.
[6:00] Second.
[6:01] We have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Merkle, second by Councilman Mitchell in discussion.
[6:08] All those in favor of approving the minutes, please vote yes, otherwise vote accordingly.
[6:13] And it does pass unanimously, but Councilman will abstain.
[6:20] So that'll wrap up the consent agenda for this evening and we'll move right into
[6:23] the public hearing.
[6:24] The first item under public hearing this evening is CLUP-22-03-Z-22-11-V-22-20, mid-broadball
[6:39] residential.
[6:40] Mr. Woodman, you have the floor.
[7:00] Good evening, Mayor and Council.
[7:02] The first item before you is a comprehensive land use plan amendment of rezoning and variances
[7:07] to allow for 17 for-sale single family detached homes
[7:12] and 26 for-sale town homes on 10.77 acres.
[7:16] The density is 3.99 dwelling units per acre.
[7:21] Comprehensive land use plan amendment
[7:23] is requested from commercial
[7:25] and medium density residential
[7:26] to medium density residential.
[7:28] A rezoning is requested from C2 general commercial,
[7:32] O&I office institutional and R10M
[7:34] dwelling for rent or for sale residential to R4A slash D.
[7:42] Variants is requested to reduce minimum townhome with,
[7:45] reduce front and rear setbacks,
[7:47] increase maximum building coverage,
[7:49] and reduce undisturbed buffers.
[7:52] And I do have the location map on the overhead.
[7:55] This property is located at 510 Mid-Broadwell Road
[7:58] and Zero Broadwell Road Rear
[8:01] on the southwest side of Mid-Broadwell
[8:04] and West of Wills Road.
[8:06] It's undeveloped property.
[8:09] It's heavily wooded property.
[8:10] It does have an intermittent stream on the property as well.
[8:13] The Lex apartments is located to the north
[8:17] and west of the development.
[8:19] Hunter's Oaks subdivision is located to the south
[8:21] of the development as well as the Cronin Cabinet Shop.
[8:25] And then we have Belvoir Manor
[8:27] and Broadwell Oaks across Mid-Broadwell
[8:29] from this property.
[8:31] property.
[8:34] As it relates to the variance request, this property does have an unusual shape. Its
[8:39] triangular shape property does have pretty significant topography on the property. This
[8:45] property is located just outside of the downtown. So the downtown limits are Wills Road south
[8:51] of Milton Avenue or mid-Broadball. And then the limit north of Milton Avenue is the
[8:57] east side of the Belvoir Manor subdivision. So this development is outside the downtown,
[9:02] downtown, but just outside the downtown.
[9:06] The applicant's request for zoning the R4A-D represents a transition from the lower densities
[9:13] that you see out in the west side of the city as they transition to the downtown area,
[9:20] which is where you have higher densities.
[9:25] This is the applicant's site plan.
[9:28] There are 18 townhomes oriented to Mid-Broadwell Road.
[9:33] Those have a 35-foot setback from Mid-Broadwell Road.
[9:36] These are two stories from Mid-Broadwell Road.
[9:41] There are three-story townhomes.
[9:43] There's eight right here that are positioned behind those townhomes that are along Mid-Broadwell.
[9:48] And then the 17 detached homes represent the remaining portion of the property.
[9:55] There is a 50-foot revegetated buffer depicted adjacent to the Lex development.
[10:01] The first 30 feet of this buffer is shown to remain undisturbed except for where lots
[10:12] D1 and D2 encroach on that buffer.
[10:15] And then the outer 20 feet of that 50-foot buffer is where they would re-vegetate that
[10:20] buffer where they would grade and replant.
[10:23] And then they would have a re-vegetated buffer here adjacent to the Cronin cabinet
[10:27] shop.
[10:28] up.
[10:32] The average lot side of the detached product is just under 7,000 square feet.
[10:37] The townhomes are, most of the townhomes are reloaded, as I mentioned, the ones along
[10:44] Mid-Broadwell with the townhomes here front-loaded.
[10:49] Townhomes are 24 feet wide here and 26 foot wide along Mid-Broadwell.
[10:58] Of course, access is from the new driveway.
[11:00] This is just up the street from the intersection at Wills and mid-broad wall sits about here.
[11:07] It's about a little over 300 feet away from that intersection, so it does meet the minimum
[11:12] separation requirements.
[11:19] Each of the townhomes as well as each of the detached homes will have the two required
[11:25] parking spaces in a garage, and then there will be two additional parking spaces within
[11:29] the driveway.
[11:30] They do have code compliant driveways.
[11:32] The UDC requires a total of 112 spaces for this development.
[11:37] They are providing a total of 180 spaces, which includes eight guest parking spaces by the
[11:44] mail kiosk.
[11:47] There are 20 specimen trees that were listed on the applicant's arborist report.
[11:52] They're depicting saving seven of those specimen trees.
[11:56] Then, of course, the buffer area here, especially the underserved portions of that, as well
[12:03] close to where the stream and the stream buffer, all the trees will be protected within that
[12:07] first 30 feet, except for this encroachment here. The trees around the stream will be
[12:13] protected. The applicant also, while not required by code to have a buffer between residential
[12:20] and residential, the applicant is showing a 25-foot revegetated buffer along the common
[12:26] property line with Hunter's Oaks subdivision. Hunter's Oaks sits to the south of this
[12:30] development, so there'll be some tree saves there as well.
[12:37] And then the two detention facilities are showing right near the stream.
[12:47] The applicant studied traffic along the mid-broad wall and specifically looked at a westbound
[12:53] left turn lane into the development as well as an eastbound right turn lane into the
[12:58] development to see if either of those would be warranted.
[13:02] The westbound left turn lane was warranted, however the eastbound right turn lane in was
[13:10] not warranted for this development.
[13:12] And they have accommodated that westbound left turn lane.
[13:23] Of course, looking at this development, actually before we go into those details, wanted to
[13:31] show the future land use map.
[13:33] So, this is an area that is predominantly low-density residential on the west side of
[13:41] the city.
[13:42] But as you see, as you come down Mid-Broadway approaching the downtown overlay area, you
[13:48] see areas of high density and medium density with future land use.
[13:54] As I mentioned, the predominant future land use of this property is commercial.
[13:58] This
[14:04] is a rendering of the townhomes lining Mid-Broadville Road and
[14:12] these are
[14:15] surrenderings of detached product that the applicant provided.
[14:30] Of course, looking
[14:31] at the applicant's proposal against the established review criteria, the area,
[14:37] surrounding areas developed with residential uses, not commercial, in a
[14:42] portion of the property already carries a medium density residential feature lane
[14:46] use designation.
[14:48] We do acknowledge that the properties outside the downtown, however, it is in an area that
[14:53] is transitioning from lower densities into higher densities, which is why we're supporting
[14:58] the applicants can, uh,
[15:00] Comprehensive land use plan amendment and rezoning request. The original application that the
[15:05] applicant submitted to the city was for R8A slash D. The density on that plan, this has
[15:12] a total of 43 units. That plan had a total of 83 units on the development, on the site
[15:19] plan. And they reduced the density basically in half from where they originally proposed
[15:26] that based on feedback they received at community zoning information meeting.
[15:34] As I mentioned some
[15:34] of the hardships to point to the unusual shape of the property as well as topographic
[15:41] challenges on the property to support the variances. The applicant did submit a citizen
[15:46] participation plan. They indicated that they met with Hunter's Oaks residents on June
[15:51] 21st of this year. Some of the concerns identified at that time was a desire for
[15:57] a buffer adjacent to Hunter's Oaks, which the applicant did provide.
[16:01] And then there was some discussion about some existing flooding problems near the western
[16:07] boundary of the property.
[16:10] City also received some correspondence from residents in this particular area.
[16:15] Concerns that we heard were concerns over density, traffic, timing of the traffic study.
[16:22] So the original traffic study was conducted before the school year started.
[16:26] The applicant did go back, based on concerns from surrounding residents, they did go back
[16:32] and update that traffic study during the school year.
[16:37] The buffer variance was a concern.
[16:39] The request for a buffer adjacent to Hunter's Oaks was identified, stormwater.
[16:44] There was a desire to have a
[16:52] one-to-one lot ratio within this development adjacent
[16:56] to Hunter's Oaks.
[16:57] At the time that comment was coming up, the detached lots were proposed on the site plan
[17:04] adjacent to Hunter's Oaks.
[17:06] The applicant actually flipped this.
[17:08] So they moved the detached product north and moved the road south, and then they provided
[17:15] a greater buffer.
[17:16] The previous plan where the detached directly abutted Hunter's Oaks only provided a 10-foot
[17:21] buffer, so they provided a greater buffer with that change.
[17:25] And
[17:28] then, of course, city staff met with Hunter's Oaks residents at their request on July 25th.
[17:33] That's where we heard a lot of those concerns.
[17:38] This applicant presented their request at two different community zoning information meetings.
[17:43] The first meeting was on July 13th.
[17:45] The plan that was submitted on that date was the R8A slash D plan.
[17:51] That was the plan with over 80 units on this development.
[17:55] It had a density of 7.75 dwelling units per acre.
[18:00] And there were a lot of the similar concerns that I've already mentioned were voiced at
[18:05] that meeting.
[18:07] And then, of course, the applicant revised the site plan, reduced the density, basically
[18:12] about reduced it from 7.75 to 3.99, and they changed the rezoning request to R4A
[18:19] slash D.
[18:20] They presented that plan at the August 10th Community Zoning Information Meeting.
[18:26] There's still some concerns with proximity of the project entrance to the wills in mid
[18:32] Broadwell intersection, storm water traffic, one-to-one lot ratio.
[18:38] And it was after the August 10th CCIM that the applicant actually flipped the detached
[18:45] in the road in order to address the one to one lot ratio concern.
[18:57] This item was
[18:58] taken to the Planning Commission on October 6. Staff recommended approval
[19:03] subject to 22 conditions. There were several public comments have that
[19:07] meeting some in favor and some in opposition to the request. Concerns
[19:11] identified at that meeting were traffic. Doesn't match the character of the
[19:16] area. There was a comment about removing lot D1 from the buffer, stormwater, and then the
[19:24] location of the hammerhead turn around. The applicant has worked with Hunter's Oaks and
[19:31] Hunter's Oaks has also tried to keep the city up to date with respect to whether they
[19:35] support this request. Based on what we have heard from the affected, the directly affected
[19:41] did lots in Hunter's Oaks that are adjacent to this development.
[19:45] It appears that there is one property owner that was not in support of this plan based
[19:52] on the location of the Hammerhead turnaround, but it sounded like most of the other residents
[19:57] were on board with this current plan.
[20:00] I'm not speaking for other residents within Hunter's Oaks, just talking about the
[20:05] properties directly adjacent to this development.
[20:08] Planning
[20:13] Commission ultimately recommended approval
[20:16] subject to staff's recommended conditions
[20:18] and they did accept some changes requested by the applicant
[20:22] and I will mention those as I go through the conditions.
[20:26] That was a, the vote was five to one on that.
[20:29] And so Planning Commission recommended approval
[20:32] subject to 23 conditions and I'll go through those.
[20:37] Condition one is a site plan specific condition
[20:40] tying to the paradigm site plan dated 928-22 and with R4A slash D zoning.
[20:50] Two, comprehensive land use plan designation of the property shall be medium density residential.
[20:55] Three, home and town home architecture and materials shall be substantially similar to
[21:00] the submitted renderings in elevations labeled exhibit A. Those are the elevations that
[21:05] I show to you, and shall have three-sided architecture
[21:08] and materials as approved by staff.
[21:11] Four, minimum 20-foot decorative landscape strip
[21:14] shall be provided along Mid-Broadwell Road,
[21:16] consisting of trees and shrubs and ground cover
[21:18] as approved by staff.
[21:20] Existing tree groupings and trees of quality
[21:22] shall be saved in the landscape strip as approved
[21:25] by staff.
[21:28] Condition five addresses the building setbacks
[21:31] within the development.
[21:33] Condition six, project frontage and entrance
[21:36] and shall include a decorative wall, fencing and ornamental planning as approved by staff.
[21:43] Condition 7 addresses the 50-foot revegetated buffer.
[21:48] The applicant requested a sentence added in.
[21:52] The second sentence reads, applicant shall be granted a variance for the encroachment
[21:57] of lots D1 and D2 into the buffer as shown on the site plan.
[22:01] That was added by Planning Commission at the request of the applicant.
[22:07] And then the last sentence just addresses the 50-foot undisturbed buffer adjacent to
[22:12] the cabinet shop.
[22:15] Condition 8 addresses the 25-foot revegetated buffer that the developer offered adjacent
[22:22] to Hunter's Oaks.
[22:24] Condition 9, per applicants agreement, developer shall provide an 8-foot privacy fence.
[22:32] Our code only allows a 6-foot privacy fence on residential properties.
[22:37] The applicant at the request of Hunter's Oaks asks for that to be changed to an 8-foot
[22:43] privacy fence, and that was changed by Planning Commission.
[22:49] Condition 10 addresses the detention facilities.
[22:52] trees, having those developed as with a natural appearance and improved as a neighborhood
[22:58] amenity. Condition 11, developer shall plant street trees in the six-foot planter as approved
[23:03] by staff. 12 addresses the open space throughout the development. 13 addresses the mid-broadway
[23:11] road street frontage and how the developer shall improve that.
[23:17] Condition 14 requires
[23:18] requires the developer to remove exotic and invasive trees and shrubs within the stream
[23:23] buffers and tree save areas and replant or sparse.
[23:27] Condition 15 unfinished wood fences and decks shall not be visible from Broadwell Road.
[23:33] Condition 16 trees shall be preserved as depicted on the plan prepared by Paradigm
[23:38] dated 9, 28, 22.
[23:42] 17 requires additional tree groupings and trees of quality to be saved outside
[23:48] of required buffers, 18 streets less than 24 foot wide shall be marked no parking, 19 developer
[23:56] shall construct a westbound left turn lane on mid-broad wall at the project entrance to the site
[24:01] as approved by staff, 20 project access shall be designed to comply with applicable design
[24:07] standards including site distance and appropriate shift taper and storage length as approved by
[24:12] staff. 21 requires that utility structures head walls be finished with decorative stone
[24:19] if visible from offsite. 22 limits the number of residential units rented to no more than
[24:27] 10%. And then condition 23 was added by Planning Commission and references these conditions
[24:35] agreed between the developer and the abutting properties and hunter's oaks. That
[24:42] condition reads the agreed to seven conditions with hunter's oaks abutting
[24:46] property owners are incorporated herein by reference and made part of the
[24:50] conditions. And the condition those seven conditions are on the overhead. And
[24:56] that concludes the presentation. If you have questions I'm happy to answer
[24:59] those. Do we have any questions for staff on this item?
[25:07] Thank you Mr.
[25:08] wouldn't. The applicant would like to come forward now if there's a chance to do so.
[25:28] Members of the City Council, I'm Don Rowlater. My address is 200 Foothills Parkway, Marble
[25:35] Hill, Georgia. Yes, there is Marble Hill. It's full of marble. Glad to be here tonight
[25:41] on behalf of the applicant and on behalf of Toll Brothers, Toll Brothers being the
[25:47] chosen developer by the applicant to produce this project. I think Michael's done a magnificent
[25:54] job of giving you a description of what the request is and where the property is. The only
[26:00] note I'd like to add that that is is that two things. Number one, it's the most unusually
[26:06] zoned piece of property I've ever seen in the city of Alpharetta. I think Jimmy Buffett
[26:12] would say, how I got here, I don't have a clue. I don't have a clue, but it's
[26:16] interesting. The majority of it is owned commercial. A good chunk of it is owned
[26:21] office and the tailpiece is zoned for apartments. What a mess. So when you look
[26:27] at what's going on there and then you look at the southwest side of Mid
[26:31] Bravo Road, if you come from the fire station back into the city, past the
[26:38] fire station you will find the saddle creek apartments to the rear. You will
[26:42] find the habitat for humanity, community next coming along that side of Midbobble Road.
[26:49] Then you'll find the condominiums that have been there for a long, long time.
[26:53] And then you find the Lex apartments.
[26:57] And then you find this piece of property.
[27:00] So we hope that we have proposed and the staff and the Planning Commission support
[27:06] a transitional use for this property that makes sense.
[27:10] Nobody wants any commercial development in their backyard, and I don't blame them.
[27:14] It's not a proper place for office.
[27:17] I'm thrilled that it's Toll Brothers that will produce this product.
[27:22] They have an excellent reputation in the city.
[27:25] They have good reputation in the city.
[27:27] They bought their position from Tom Sharp and Sharp Properties
[27:31] and have come forward from there and have enriched and enhanced the product that was brought there.
[27:37] So, that's what we get to at this point.
[27:41] We've proposed 26 townhomes, and they're from $800,000 up, most of them up along the
[27:50] frontage of Mid Bravo Road, and then we've proposed 17 single-family detached homes along
[27:57] the boundary line of Hunter's Oaks, and those will run from a million one up.
[28:05] I love the product that Toll Brothers produces. Michael went to, in detail, to explain to you
[28:13] what we did to soften the impact for the people in Hudders Oak subdivision. Originally the
[28:19] houses backed up to it. There was only a 20-foot setback, a five-foot landscape strip,
[28:26] and a little old, we'd proposed a rod iron fence. That didn't make anyone very happy.
[28:31] The bad news was not only where the house is close, but you got to look at the backyard,
[28:36] which is where the grill is and where the hot tub is and where all those other amenities
[28:40] that everyone enjoys, but they're right up next to your neighbor.
[28:45] So we flipped the plan, and all only a five-foot landscape strip was required.
[28:52] We put in a 25-foot landscape strip that would be revegetated to buffer standards
[28:58] along there.
[28:58] And whatever good trees are in there, we'll save, we'll plant new trees, and that will
[29:04] become a very attractive area.
[29:05] More importantly is that that fence in there with your approval will be eight feet.
[29:12] That blocks the view of anyone on the lower or left-hand side of that subdivision who
[29:19] would otherwise look into the front of this subdivision.
[29:23] I personally don't see much wrong with looking at the front of a million-dollar
[29:27] house, but just the same with the 8 foot fence. That left side of the property is the
[29:33] only part that's close in topography to the new subdivision. The people up closer to Mid
[29:39] Bravo Road are high above this area. Any water that originates comes down into the subdivision
[29:47] so we don't flood other people. We're on the level with the last two or three
[29:53] lots on the left-hand side, and so our land planner has gone to great trouble to make sure
[29:59] we�
[30:00] We divert all of the water from our development down in that bottom part into our detention
[30:05] ponds so that we don't have any negative impact. They have some negative impact already. They've
[30:11] had some interesting challenges down there, and I know how this city loves to hear about
[30:16] stormwater drainage problems. So not only will we not make it worse, we will make it
[30:20] better. So I think that's an important thing to consider with this development as well.
[30:25] Now, the other important overall fact is that we asked for several of these variances which
[30:31] Planning Commission and staff have recommended approval of to compress the development more
[30:37] into the property.
[30:39] The benefit there is, is that you get substantial green space.
[30:45] In this instance, you get 48% of the property when we're done being green.
[30:52] I have an example of that.
[30:54] If you can turn it on, I'll put it on the overhead.
[30:56] This is the green area when
[31:03] we're done.
[31:04] And again, that's 48% of the development.
[31:09] So with those things in mind, we began to work with staff
[31:13] and to work with Hunter's Oaks.
[31:16] We've had multiple meetings with them.
[31:18] And we tried to listen to every concern that we could hear about.
[31:22] So we added those conditions that Michael showed you to make sure that we don't impact the lighting,
[31:29] that we don't do other things that cause problems, that we tend to the stormwater development,
[31:34] and do all of those things that make this a very plausible project.
[31:39] So we are asking you tonight to approve this application subject to the Planning Commission version
[31:50] of the conditions. There were only two minute changes from what staff had proposed to start
[31:57] with, and then in addition it added the seven conditions that are important to the people
[32:04] in Hunter's Oaks. We also heard some comments from people across the road and Broadville
[32:09] Oaks and the other subdivision over there who were afraid they would be looking down
[32:14] on to the housetops there. I went and looked on Google Earth and the Broadville Oak subdivision
[32:20] has a substantial line of trees between it and the roadway. There's one house on the
[32:26] other little subdivision right up on the corner that may get some view over the cabinet
[32:31] shop and into the subdivision. But our wish is that when they look down there that
[32:36] they find a very pleasing and plausible product that attracts people to the city.
[32:41] We're still suffering a housing shortage in the city of Alpharetta.
[32:47] We don't seem to be able to put enough good houses up quick enough to staunch the demand.
[32:53] I'm fascinated.
[32:54] I work in an office with a mortgage broker, and I listen to him cry and complain about
[32:59] what's going on out in the northern suburbs and how the market has withered and died
[33:04] somewhat, and we don't see that here.
[33:07] Everything that's put up, there are people standing in line to buy it.
[33:11] That's a credit to the city and what this city has created and what it's done.
[33:16] With it being a tech center, with it having downtown, with it having Avalon,
[33:20] with it having the park system that does, and with the trail system coming up,
[33:24] I saw the additions to that that are to be approved.
[33:28] I'm excited about it. $15 million, I think? Fantastic.
[33:33] So this subdivision is designed to be a part and parcel of that product.
[33:40] At this point in time, I would ask you, if you have any questions, we have representatives
[33:46] and toll brothers here.
[33:47] We have our land planner here.
[33:49] I'll answer what I can if necessary.
[33:51] Other than that, we'd like to close our presentation on the front side and reserve
[33:56] time for rebuttal at the end.
[33:58] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[34:00] Thank you, sir. We have any questions for the applicant?
[34:08] Seeing none. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
[34:12] Mr. Pirro, do we have any public comment cards on this item? Yes, Mr. Mayor. We have two that
[34:17] have been submitted at this point. Our first speaker this evening is Karen Miller.
[34:22] If you would like to come forward and just state your first and last name and your address
[34:27] into the podium microphone here, and please address all of your comments to Mayor and Council.
[34:34] Karen Miller, and it's five three four five hunters oaks drive
[34:40] And I am just
[34:42] Here I'm basically Michael and Dawn covered everything that I would want to say
[34:48] We have worked throughout the process with the development team. They have been
[34:54] Accessible and ready to meet with us and discuss any of our concerns all along so
[34:59] So we, my husband and I are property boarders.
[35:04] We'll share the property line with this development and we are pleased with this latest site plan.
[35:12] I feel like we've made a lot of progress and this is something that I think we can live with.
[35:19] And I am only speaking to the detached homes, the townhouses.
[35:24] that's you know that's something that we don't border so and I sent an email this
[35:32] morning so I think I covered everything thank you ma'am you said we had two
[35:39] public comment cards our second speaker this evening is Pamela Clark if you would
[35:46] also like to come forward just as a reminder state your first and last name
[35:50] in your address and as she comes forward if there's anyone who hasn't
[35:54] submitted a request. You can still come up. Just want to let you know.
[36:01] Good evening, everyone. Pamela Clark, 53, 2500 Oaks Drive, Alpharetta. I am a neighbor in
[36:12] the subdivision in question and my home sits at the hammerhead, opposite the hammerhead
[36:23] and D1 house. My concern is I've lived in Alpharetta in that same house for over 30 years. Never
[36:32] had a problem, no one ever. The wooded area, the nature, we enjoy that environment. My concern
[36:43] is for, like was read off, the runoff of water, the loss of nature, the loss of the
[36:51] trees and the lighting and the noise that would come from that road that is proposed.
[37:01] Yes, it is the best plan that was developed with us and the developer. However, my concern
[37:14] was that we don't have to use, agree to use the, allow the, I'm sorry, I don't remember,
[37:24] the un, the buffered area. D1, the D1 house does not need to be there. We, there are
[37:32] plenty of homes in that area. And to say that Alpharetta is in a hardship for homes,
[37:38] I'm having a hard time with that, with all the development that's going on in Alpharetta.
[37:43] However, the 50 foot on the buffer, if we remove that D1 home, we don't have to agree
[37:55] to disturb that buffer.
[37:57] And then the hammerhead road could be pushed further up in that area.
[38:04] It is a small area of land, 10 point something acres, and as many, I don't understand why
[38:13] So many homes are being squeezed into that small space.
[38:17] If we did the one-to-one ratio of homes, single-family homes, that would be fine.
[38:24] A lot of the neighbors that are affected by this did not come tonight.
[38:29] And they are, to the point, frustrated because there are just too many homes that are opposite them.
[38:36] When you have two and three homes in your line of sight where you didn't have it before,
[38:41] you had trees and nature. It's just too many homes. So I'm opposed to that. If
[38:50] there's another plan, and I said it at the planning committee, if there's another
[38:54] plan that would allow for that D1 home to be removed, the hammerhead could be
[39:02] pushed forward, that would allow less, I believe, runoff because we do have a
[39:09] water problem, and we've always had a water problem, yes, but I believe that it would
[39:15] be worse. The more land you try to take away to allow for the runoff of the stream or the
[39:23] creek that's there. So I'm asking you to relook at what's being proposed and maybe
[39:30] come up with another plan, particularly for the runoff of the lower portion, because
[39:36] yes, it is on a gradient. It's higher and then our homes and the homes that are at that
[39:42] very tip that was not being left alone because it is truly a problem with water would be
[39:54] resolved if we did less, if we took less of the land to build homes that one home
[40:02] home is not going to make a difference. And I just feel that there's so much of a financial
[40:10] issue that's going on with this property that it does not take into consideration what homeowners
[40:17] have lived and enjoyed for, as I said, I've been there 30 years and I know some of the
[40:23] other neighbors who have not shown up tonight. But I've been there for 30 years. And I
[40:29] know what the environment is like it's not we're not downtown if I wanted to
[40:34] live downtown I would live one mile downtown I chose to have my house built
[40:42] in an area where it was low density fewer people fewer neighbors not all of
[40:48] this traffic up and down the road and I just don't understand why we are
[40:55] taking on this venture, well, I do, from a financial perspective, that the city wins,
[41:04] the developer wins, but the homeowners don't win.
[41:08] So there's no win-win for the homeowners.
[41:10] There may be a win-win for the city.
[41:12] There may be a win-win for the developer.
[41:15] So I would like you to think about that before you agree to have this development
[41:21] go forward.
[41:23] Thank you.
[41:24] Thank you, ma'am. Is there anyone else that would like to come forward and speak on this
[41:29] matter?
[41:36] Good evening. My name is Shereen Hawk, and thank you so much, Mayor Gilvin, for supporting
[41:45] so far our efforts with the Kimball Corridor Parents Coalition that are very surprised
[41:52] and very frankly terrified at the current redistricting map that has come out from
[41:58] the Fulton School Board. I see some of you frowning, so maybe.
[42:03] No, I just wanted to check right quick. Are you talking about this zoning issue at hand?
[42:09] No. So is this public comment only for that?
[42:11] Right. This is an opportunity for people to speak on this item. The open public comment
[42:17] doesn't come towards the end of the meeting.
[42:20] Okay, all right.
[42:20] So you have your young children, so I don't know whether you'll be able to stay here.
[42:24] Okay.
[42:24] I appreciate your comments. And if you want to stick around, you're more than welcome
[42:28] Welcome to, but we're trying to make a decision based on this.
[42:31] I'm so sorry.
[42:32] Thank you very much.
[42:33] It's quite all right.
[42:37] Was there anyone else that wanted to come forward and speak on this particular item?
[42:43] Seeing none, we'll close public comment.
[42:48] Did the applicant want to rebut?
[43:00] Just like to make a couple very brief comments and rebuttal.
[43:05] Most importantly, we completely revamped and redesigned this subdivision
[43:11] for the benefit of the people in Hunter's Oaks along its boundary.
[43:17] There's 25 foot of what will be re-vegetated buffer to buffer standards.
[43:23] There's a 26 foot road, there's a 26, there's a 20 foot front setback,
[43:28] and then there's the front of a million dollar home.
[43:32] Assisting that more is that within that 25 foot re-vegetated buffer,
[43:38] we've constructed an eight-foot fence.
[43:41] The sight line from the main floor of any of the homes
[43:44] down along that level will not cause any view whatsoever
[43:49] even into that kind of product.
[43:51] It's a nice home, but you won't have to look at it.
[43:53] You'll have an eight-foot fence to go with it there.
[43:56] If you count the number of lots in Hunter's Oaks
[43:59] and the number of lots budding the property,
[44:02] there are 10 of each.
[44:03] So we have not exceeded a one-to-one ratio.
[44:06] we have done it as we propose to benefit the people that we're closest to.
[44:13] So our statement is there that we've tried to be very sensitive.
[44:18] We've tried to do a lot of things to benefit.
[44:20] We originally had Home D1 all the way on the left side down there behind the turnabout.
[44:29] And that was more offensive, so we moved it back up into the development, shortened
[44:35] to turn around and save the substantial number of trees in this area.
[44:40] The last point I'd like to make for you is that Barry Dunlop, our engineer, has designed
[44:46] this development so that that buffer along Mid-Brawl and then the road catch all of
[44:54] our water and turn it in up into our detention areas.
[45:00] We don't leak any water onto the part of Hunter's Oaks that may be almost level with us. As I said,
[45:08] a majority of it flows onto us. We don't have a choice. We get water here. It comes. But
[45:12] down at the bottom there, we are lifting and changing our grading so that whatever hits
[45:18] in that subdivision will be directed toward the detention pond and on toward the apartments
[45:23] rather than toward our neighbors further to the left through Hunter's Oaks. So with
[45:27] That said, we're prepared to close.
[45:30] I'd be happy to answer any questions that any council member or the mayor might have before I sit down.
[45:36] Any other questions for the applicant?
[45:39] Councilman Derrida.
[45:40] Thank you, Mayor.
[45:43] Mr. O'Lata, thanks for your presentation.
[45:45] I also want to thank you and tell brothers for addressing some of the neighbors' concerns.
[45:51] I was part of the Community Information Zoning Meeting initially to listen in and, you know,
[45:59] suffice to say it was the plans come a long way from the initial plan.
[46:05] So I appreciate Tobler's listening and making some, you know, significant changes.
[46:10] With that said, I still have some concerns.
[46:14] I noticed the traffic study wasn't addressed.
[46:18] I'd like that to be addressed in a minute.
[46:20] but before we get to that, can you speak to Ms. Clarke's comment regarding D1 and why that needs
[46:29] to be there versus encroaching upon the buffer and possibly removing that? Yes, we moved D1 from
[46:35] where it was down in the corner, where it destroyed more trees and fit completely within the
[46:41] buffers without any penetration there. And because of the concerns of the neighbors
[46:45] of having homes that far into it. We relocated D1 back uphill into the property and shortened
[46:53] the hammerhead. Now this hammerhead is not a turnaround, Mr. Dorito, where people would come
[46:58] down there and make a loop and go back out into the street. It's for the purpose of emergency
[47:03] vehicles, fire trucks, ambulances, and large delivery trucks that might have a problem
[47:08] turnaround when they deliver the furniture there for the first time. So it's not an
[47:12] obtrusive thing, but we feel like with all of the pluses we have put in with 25 feet
[47:18] of buffer with an 8 foot fence with moving the homes up that we have done what we need
[47:24] to do and we have to reach a certain yield there to make the project work.
[47:30] These are wonderful homes.
[47:31] People are standing in line to buy them, even today.
[47:34] That's alpharetta.
[47:35] So we would propose that what we have proposed here is an ample solution.
[47:40] It was approved by the Planning Commission two weeks ago, and we think it's a reasonable solution.
[47:47] I think there was a, I'll ask Mr. Chairman or Kathy that's created.
[47:52] I think it was a four to two vote, the Planning Commission, but I may be wrong.
[47:56] Six-one.
[47:57] Six-one.
[48:01] It was five-one.
[48:02] I did watch the video.
[48:03] It was five-one?
[48:04] Okay.
[48:05] Mr. Rowlett, I just, I did want you to address the traffic study.
[48:08] There was a reference by Ms. Cook that the initial traffic study was done, I believe in
[48:14] July during the summer months, and then I think I'm paraphrasing what Ms.
[48:20] Let me find the right piece of paper.
[48:22] What Mr. Woodman mentioned.
[48:23] I anticipated your question.
[48:28] And on August the 26th, I believe, a new traffic study was conducted.
[48:37] on Thursday, August 25th, 2022, during schooltimes.
[48:43] The result of that was there was an increase in total vehicles
[48:47] in a day from 11,728 to 12,776.
[48:54] So we did take the new sample, run the new numbers,
[48:58] but it doesn't affect the traffic generated in the subdivision.
[49:02] We had those figures run with 43 total homes.
[49:07] That was filed with the city as well.
[49:10] And that's table, which is table two,
[49:13] shows total new trips in the AM peak hour
[49:16] of six in and 19 out for a total of 25 trips.
[49:23] On that same chart on the PM peak hour,
[49:26] it shows a total of 21 trips in
[49:29] and 12 out for a total of 33.
[49:33] So you have 25 peak hour trips in and 33 out.
[49:38] Based on what's going on in that area,
[49:40] those are insignificant numbers
[49:42] and they didn't justify a right turn in lane.
[49:46] They certainly justified the left turn in.
[49:48] It's important there with the amount of traffic
[49:50] that's on Midbrawl Road.
[49:52] But the numbers from the traffic specialist,
[49:54] Mr. Arkampora said that there's no use losing all of that vegetation and sidewalks and bushes
[50:02] on the front to bring a right turn lane in because so little of the traffic is coming
[50:08] in from that side. It's 80% the other way and 20% that way. So those were the figures.
[50:14] Those items should be in your report. If not, I'll be glad to lend you my copy.
[50:19] Okay.
[50:21] Thank you.
[50:25] Councilman Biner.
[50:28] Mr. Royder, I apologize.
[50:29] I was running in late trying to get acclimated here.
[50:32] The buffer for the D1 side, let's say, the height, I don't know the topography of that,
[50:39] but the height of that between the new homes and the existing homes, is there going to
[50:45] be any problems say if somebody is backing into their garage like I do and my wife makes
[50:49] fun of me all the time for but of headlights going into the house or
[50:53] the level and the garages there's those will be front entry garages and
[51:01] and they're at like say a minimum of 71 feet from the property line so you'll
[51:06] come down the road if you're coming down the road Hunter's Oaks is to your
[51:12] left you got the buffer you got the road and then the house is on the
[51:17] right. So you'll turn it into the garage there, the headlights, and I will be going into the
[51:22] garage.
[51:23] Not if it's me, but I say that in justice, just one example. I want to make sure, as a
[51:31] property owner, they have a right to build, and so you can't always have a nature preserve
[51:35] in your backyard, but it also means that you shouldn't have headlights hidden, a kitchen
[51:40] or a second to the second floor or anything.
[51:44] So I understand the buffer the width on there,
[51:47] but as far as height to make sure that there's...
[51:49] Well, there'll be an 8-foot fence abutting Hunter's Oaks.
[51:54] And so the ones down low, the one homeowner
[51:56] who expressed her dislike and complained
[52:00] is just about on the level with the houses
[52:03] that will be across the street.
[52:05] And with an 8-foot fence within that buffer,
[52:07] she shouldn't see anything on the bottom floor.
[52:10] And on the lighting there, we will take the lighting and direct it down into the property
[52:16] so that you don't get any bleed.
[52:18] That's pretty good science now.
[52:19] We've been doing that 20 years, but that will also be a consideration so that we don't
[52:23] have any problems.
[52:25] I'm not sure if I'm going to have a comment, but I do appreciate what you have done in
[52:30] the applicant as far as working with the concerned homeowners.
[52:34] owners, and you guys have done a good job of evolving this application as much as reasonably
[52:40] possible.
[52:41] So I've seen it go stonewall, and I've seen it where people work together, so thank you.
[52:51] Mr. Woodman, I've got a question I meant to ask you earlier just to clarify.
[52:59] Mentioned that the property is zoned commercial.
[53:02] was that C1 or C2 and if you could elaborate on what the potential by right uses for that
[53:10] parcel are?
[53:17] Yes, Mayor. The property currently has zoning of C2, so general commercial. It's about
[53:25] it's on this piece here. There's a diamond shaped piece right about here. It's about
[53:31] an acre, a little less than an acre that's O&I. And then the tail end has the for-rent
[53:37] zoning on at the R10M on this piece right back here but the bulk of this
[53:43] property right here is C2 general commercial auto service type uses gas
[53:51] station that's an allowable use within C2 so it is the heavy commercial zoning
[53:56] district. Would that be conditional uses? So gas station is allowed by right
[54:01] All right, auto repair is allowed by right in C2.
[54:06] Anything else?
[54:09] There's quite a few, anything that's allowed in C1 is allowed here so any retail use, restaurant
[54:16] use is allowed by right, C2 you can have a restaurant with drive-through, a car wash
[54:23] is conditional in C2, a variety of heavy commercial uses.
[54:30] Yeah, I was just trying to frame in my mind the potential uses.
[54:34] Okay, thank you.
[54:37] Councilman Mitchell.
[54:38] Thank you.
[54:39] I have a question for you as well.
[54:40] Are you all comfortable as a staff with the water runoff and the plan that's laid
[54:44] out?
[54:45] And so, our stormwater engineer did review this application.
[54:49] She was also involved in the meeting that we had with Hunter's Oaks folks and, yeah,
[54:55] she has signed off on this.
[54:56] any conditions that she felt that were needed with this development would have been included
[55:02] within the conditions. But, yes, she has signed off on this and she didn't find that there
[55:07] were any particular problems.
[55:10] Okay. And a follow-up on Jimmy's question. It's also allowed by right, the rental across
[55:18] the front.
[55:24] The rental zoning, so the R10M zoning, which is the same zoning that the Lex has,
[55:29] is just on this tailpiece on the back.
[55:33] There's a question of whether that zoning is even there.
[55:38] I went through the history of this property.
[55:41] This property is referred to as the Territude property.
[55:45] It is associated with the Lex property,
[55:48] goes back to the 60s the zoning does.
[55:51] There was some dispute over the zoning,
[55:54] whether it was C1 or C2 zoning
[55:56] that was on this property.
[55:57] and in fact, the state of Georgia's Supreme Court weighed in on this, and it was determined
[56:03] that it was C2 zoning.
[56:05] So there's a variety of zoning here.
[56:08] Yes, we did identify R10M, which does allow for a run product back here, but there's
[56:12] a question of whether that's really there.
[56:16] That zoning is really there on this tail end piece here or not.
[56:19] But there is definitely C2 zoning.
[56:22] It's not that far-fetched considering the Lex is right there.
[56:25] Correct.
[56:25] In fact, we believe the R10 entitlement was probably covered by the LEX development and
[56:30] not zoning is probably incorrect.
[56:32] We went back through old zoning maps and I wasn't able to find a situation where that
[56:38] R10M wasn't there, so I had to leave it.
[56:41] So if this is approved tonight, it will convert to the new zoning in perpetuity.
[56:47] So yes, so if it were approved, the recommendation is for R for A slash D, so the zoning
[56:53] would apply to this entire property.
[56:57] Thank you.
[57:01] Councilman Byter.
[57:03] Just to back up on the question I have with Mr. Rolater, as far as making sure there's
[57:10] no intrusion of light or anything to the existing neighborhoods, is there something like when
[57:16] we have new developments come up and we see that there is an issue, sometimes deciduous
[57:21] trees where they're full leaves when you bite and almost some fall happens and you can see
[57:27] through everything. Do we have anything protecting those existing neighbors that if there is
[57:34] an issue that we can put some kind of screen buffer height-wise, not between the houses?
[57:40] So our code says that buffers be replanted where sparse and the replantings would consist
[57:49] of primarily evergreen, 80% evergreen, 20% deciduous.
[57:54] So the buffer, the requirement to replant that we're sparse, of course, would apply to
[58:00] this buffer adjacent to the LEX.
[58:02] This buffer that the developer has agreed to provide here adjacent to Hunter's Oaks,
[58:07] that will be planted to our buffer standards as well.
[58:10] Perfect.
[58:11] Thank you, sir.
[58:15] Any other questions?
[58:16] Councilman Dorito.
[58:18] Thank you, Mayor.
[58:18] Just a quick question on the eight-foot fencing, there doesn't seem to be any
[58:23] conditions that require the aesthetics of the fence. When I hear eight-foot
[58:31] fence it sounds like a wooden wall to me, which is not aesthetically pleasing
[58:36] particularly over time. I don't think the neighbors would, you know, appreciate
[58:41] over a period of time when it starts aging. Was there any thought given to
[58:47] a decorative fencing with kind of what Councillor Bind alluded to with some evergreens of trees
[58:55] that actually are 8 foot tall, that in the combination will maintain the aesthetics of
[59:02] the green space back there versus a solid wall between the two developments.
[59:08] I think that question would be best for the applicant.
[59:12] The fencing requirement is in a city code requirement, so we only have it in the
[59:16] conditions because the applicant has made that agreement with Hunter's Oaks, so we want
[59:20] to capture it. But I do agree with you. The privacy fences, the wooden privacy fences,
[59:25] they do gray out over time, but it might be a question for them.
[59:30] Mr. Rito, I'd be happy to answer it. In one of the conditions, it was added for the
[59:35] benefit of the Hunter's Oaks people. In the end of condition number one, it says
[59:40] The fence shall be finished on both sides and be located interior to the development property line
[59:47] The purpose of that is to provide an attractive item there. The city has buffer
[59:53] Standards that are defined. I think Michael was talking about the 80 percent evergreen 20 percent deciduous
[1:00:00] That kind of thing, so what we anticipate there is a fairly solid screen because it is as beneficial to our homeowners as it is to the people and hunters folks.
[1:00:09] It will be controlled by the city. It's as approved by staff, I believe. If not, we're certainly happy to make it as approved by staff.
[1:00:19] Would that be, that would be agreeable to the applicant?
[1:00:23] Did you make it approved by staff?
[1:00:27] Any other reasons I said, by the time this gets approved and told Brothers Moves forward with it,
[1:00:34] I know if my home was there, I'd be looking for more of a decorative looking fence
[1:00:38] that blends in with the natural environment behind my home,
[1:00:42] versus a wooden, basically, fence.
[1:00:45] We had originally proposed a fence like that
[1:00:48] because we used one over on the east side in a recent zoning for Toe Brothers. We have
[1:00:55] an aluminum decorative fence product that looks like wrought iron, and it's more durable.
[1:01:03] And that was discussed early with this, but then when the need came for concerns about
[1:01:08] lighting, for concerns about noise, for concerns about lots of other things, we offered
[1:01:14] for the 8-foot wooden fence, and that was really the choice of the Hunter's Oaks people.
[1:01:21] So we didn't think it up, but we're more than happy to build it, and if it's finished
[1:01:26] on both sides and properly painted, it'll be fine.
[1:01:29] But that was, that wasn't, we offered that as an additional solution, which they accept.
[1:01:34] We, Ms. Related Member, we went through this discussion with the other toll brothers,
[1:01:39] Bellino from Kimberlidge Road there, and they end up putting the what iron, decorative fence
[1:01:44] that we talked about with the nice evergreens and all that.
[1:01:47] I just throw it out to the hunters' oaks people that maybe they're not thinking about that,
[1:01:51] they're just thinking of trying to protect their homes, and I fully understand that.
[1:01:56] But I think there's a better way that would actually enhance the buffer, the so-called
[1:02:02] wall between the two developments, but also give that kind of natural environment and actually
[1:02:10] beautify it behind their homes, frankly.
[1:02:12] So I would like actually some flexibilities, the Hunter Oaks people along with Tollbethers
[1:02:17] could work with the city staff to make sure we put the right wall there, if I can call
[1:02:21] it that.
[1:02:22] We negotiated this with them in good faith, and it's what they asked for.
[1:02:26] If they choose to change it down the road before we construct it, I'm sure we'd
[1:02:30] be happy to re-address that with them. We're comfortable with building either fence. The
[1:02:34] one will soon go up over on the other side, on the east side. So it was a concession
[1:02:41] to meet their concerns. Thank you.
[1:02:46] Any other questions from council at this time?
[1:02:52] So we've
[1:02:53] already had public comment. We'll have a motion from council. Yes, Mr. Mayor, tonight
[1:02:58] I'd like to offer a motion for approval of public hearing on CLUP-22-03-Z-22-11-V-22-20-mid-Broadwell
[1:03:14] residential with the 23 conditions presented tonight by staff and the additional seven
[1:03:20] conditions presented tonight by staff in conjunction with the Hunter's Oak neighborhood.
[1:03:34] I'm going to take time to repeat a lot of what was said, but if you pull it all together,
[1:03:39] the common theme was that they work together. It's a very difficult piece of property. A
[1:03:45] combination of things. One, folks that are already stakeholders in the area, they have
[1:03:49] some rights. And I think that these guys showed great respect for those rights and
[1:03:56] discussions and what y'all are able to put together considering the size of the neighborhood
[1:04:01] and the amount of people that are still not happy.
[1:04:05] I'll be looking to make sure, ma'am, that I forgot Ms. Clark.
[1:04:11] If any of this goes the way it's not supposed to go, let us know.
[1:04:15] If you don't get the fence you were told, if you don't get the greenage you were told,
[1:04:19] our phone numbers are out there, so feel free to use us if you need to hold some
[1:04:23] accountability as well as anybody else in this, in any project that we do in the city.
[1:04:28] So I do want to commend both sides because, again, it's a very difficult piece of property
[1:04:33] and that property owner has the right to try to do something with it and I think really
[1:04:38] you're going to be happy that it was a medium density residential versus, you know, what
[1:04:43] he may be forced to put there or, you know, his next generation may come in, you know,
[1:04:48] if that property gets passed down in the family they're just looking to get paid.
[1:04:52] So, I think it was a great idea and it's going to be an amazing addition to that part of the city.
[1:04:59] Councilman Heights.
[1:05:02] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[1:05:04] I think this is a great looking project and I just wanted to say I'm historically very, very reluctant to make changes to the comprehensive land use plan and I'm always seeking for that elusive, compelling reason.
[1:05:18] I'm proud to say, in my own subjective opinion, this is the compelling reason to change the
[1:05:24] land use plan.
[1:05:26] A commercial designation surrounded by R-15 and an apartment complex seems like a unicorn
[1:05:33] sitting over there on that side of the city, and I can't speak to whether each individual
[1:05:40] and Hunter's Oak and surrounding area will be happy with what gets built.
[1:05:44] I hope and believe that they will be, but going through the list as the mayor had alluded
[1:05:50] to what commercial uses could be built there as a matter of right with the owner of the
[1:05:55] property never having come before council, the one that made me smile as you could
[1:06:00] have a bowling alley right next to you over there as a commercial use, then there's
[1:06:04] a long, long, long list.
[1:06:06] So, you know, my comment tonight is I wish everybody well, I appreciate how the applicant
[1:06:14] and a deeply rooted neighborhood in our city work together on this, and this is that compelling
[1:06:22] reason for a land use plan change that I'm happy to support.
[1:06:31] Yes, I echo Councilman Hype's comments as well, basically taking a piece of commercially
[1:06:39] zoned property and making it medium density residential, which I think is a great change
[1:06:46] to that piece of property.
[1:06:49] Again going back to the initial application of vision for this project that told Brothers
[1:06:57] brought forth my personal opinions that would have never been passed by our
[1:07:02] planning mission of this council and a lot of those issues were addressed and
[1:07:07] it's always nice when a developer works with the community to come up with a
[1:07:10] you know an acceptable plan that meets everybody's needs and addresses their
[1:07:15] concerns. We're up here to represent the folks from Hunter's Oaks and the
[1:07:20] people reside around there. When I drive over there and I look around the
[1:07:24] area when I was preparing for this. It's a beautiful part of the city as everybody knows.
[1:07:30] And it is a transitional point from downtown area of Alpharetta. And so, you know, the
[1:07:36] density itself was a concern from day one. I think Toll Brothers did a good job in addressing
[1:07:42] that and bringing the density down to lessen the impact on the traffic issues we already
[1:07:47] have in that area. And it's now going to be up to the city of this thing as realized,
[1:07:52] and I'm sure it will be to make sure that we address any sort of traffic improvements
[1:07:57] in that area, because we're going to set up here and approve projects like this.
[1:08:01] We also need to be prepared to address any accompanying issues that are caused by things
[1:08:07] that we approve.
[1:08:08] So we do have some traffic over there today, and we will probably need to address it.
[1:08:13] I know Pete Sukovitz and his team is always looking at that stuff, and we've talked
[1:08:17] about it, Pete, as far as the current situation there and what could happen in the future.
[1:08:23] So we're on top of that already.
[1:08:24] But I wanted to thank the neighbors out there that we represent for working well with Toll
[1:08:30] Brothers and bringing it to this point and prepared to support this this evening.
[1:08:34] Thank you.
[1:08:37] Any other comments from Council?
[1:08:40] I'll just say one quick thing.
[1:08:41] I appreciate both the homeowners that came forward and spoke.
[1:08:45] I know that takes a lot of courage for most people to come down to a City Council
[1:08:48] meeting and stand up and talk to us. Unfortunately, with only two people speaking and both of them
[1:08:56] having different points of view it wasn't really decisive in my decision because both of you
[1:09:04] are adjacent property owners and so I kind of have to go back to the fact that I've seen
[1:09:15] Zoning Decisions where residents were happy when they left here and it wasn't zoned a
[1:09:21] certain way behind their houses and then two years later something came back and they were
[1:09:27] not happy.
[1:09:28] And so especially with something with a commercial zoning back there, I think they could do
[1:09:35] it and we wouldn't have any conditions.
[1:09:37] We wouldn't be able to get them to plan anything.
[1:09:40] We wouldn't be able to require anything because if it's owned by right
[1:09:44] They don't there's nothing we can do about conditions because they don't need a rezoning and so that's why I support this application
[1:09:54] That being said in the matter of cl up dash 22 dash o 3 slash z dash 2 2 dash 1 1
[1:10:02] V dash 2 2 dash 2 oh
[1:10:06] mid-broadball residential motion was to approve with conditions as outlined by
[1:10:12] Mayor Pro Tem Merkel. All those in favor please vote yes otherwise vote accordingly.
[1:10:19] And it does pass unanimously.
[1:10:24] If I could I apologize on my my later arrival here.
[1:10:28] I had to do I had a last-minute pickup for my daughter at soccer practice but on that note
[1:10:35] this young lady here I would like to see if I can make a motion
[1:10:39] and so that she can participate in the civic process
[1:10:43] and she can get her kids to bed early in there.
[1:10:45] So I'd like to make a motion to amend the agenda
[1:10:47] for public comment and to move it up next
[1:10:50] and hopefully get a second.
[1:10:52] I was going to ask the public if they minded
[1:10:55] if I allowed this young mother to come forward anyway.
[1:10:58] We can do it formally if we'd like, but
[1:11:02] please come forward.
[1:11:05] We typically allow three minutes for a public comment.
[1:11:07] I
[1:11:11] want to apologize first of all
[1:11:13] for causing a little bit of a problem.
[1:11:16] It's okay, it's always good to see new faces.
[1:11:19] Okay, well, councilmen and women,
[1:11:22] we are so thankful that several of you have communicated
[1:11:26] with us your support of the concern
[1:11:30] over the Fulton County School Board redistricting process.
[1:11:34] We, as parents, got involved back in August.
[1:11:37] In September, we were apprised of how this would work.
[1:11:40] work. We were told by the Fulton County School Board that their primary agenda would be to
[1:11:46] offload or rebalance elementary school capacity and to look at the opening of Crabapple Middle
[1:11:53] School. We have reached out to our school board member. We've been very engaged in
[1:12:00] the process. We have attended all the meetings and we've had a very active level of community
[1:12:04] engagement. On Tuesday, October 18th, our entire life turned upside down when all
[1:12:10] of the maps that were presented at round two, they were not represented in map four.
[1:12:17] So along Kimball Bridge, which is a 2.6 mile stretch of road, they have divided the community
[1:12:25] in a very choppy way where one neighborhood on one side of the street will attend Haines
[1:12:31] Bridge Middle School and Centennial High School. The neighbors across the street
[1:12:36] will attend OC, Webbridge, and Alpharetta High School.
[1:12:40] Currently, this plan is dividing friends
[1:12:44] who have been together, you know,
[1:12:47] I'm trying not to cry, but families.
[1:12:51] I moved to Alpharetta for a lot of reasons.
[1:12:56] I'm an anesthesiologist.
[1:12:57] I practice medicine.
[1:12:59] I have a very stressful life.
[1:13:01] I tried to cohort my children's schools,
[1:13:04] schools, their activities, my job. So if this plan goes through, we can't attend after school
[1:13:13] activities because we don't have neighborhood carpal and there's no public bus to take the
[1:13:18] children to any of the activities after school. Just a few weeks ago when my nanny was sick,
[1:13:24] one of my daughter's friend's mother was able to pick her up and take her to school.
[1:13:29] otherwise I wouldn't have had the means to take her to school. She's not really
[1:13:34] willing to get on a school bus and there's a whole lot of reasons why. Later on
[1:13:39] as she ages that'll change but right at this point she's not. There's a lot of
[1:13:44] kids who have special needs who may not want to get on a school bus and get
[1:13:49] on a school bus for 35 to 40 minutes. There are siblings that can't attend
[1:13:53] the same school with their sibling. There are so many social problems that
[1:13:58] will come. And we can't understand the benefit. We simply can't. We can't find how the math
[1:14:04] justifies this kind of community disruption. When we look at the data for Webbridge, we
[1:14:09] don't see a clear pattern of overcrowding. When we look at the enrollment numbers and
[1:14:14] the birth rates, we see a declining enrollment. And we really are confused and we really
[1:14:20] respect the Fulton County Board of Education. We respect their process. We are just
[1:14:24] confused and we are scared because November 8th, we don't have the opportunity to give
[1:14:30] any more input. This map came so late in the process. It came on a Tuesday morning and
[1:14:35] feedback closed the following day at midnight. And there's no more community engagement.
[1:14:41] They're going to present whatever attendance zone they come up with to the board. And
[1:14:46] then it's a vote. So we as parents, I mean, we formed a coalition. It's called Keeping
[1:14:51] Kimball Bridge kids together. We got 200 members and 48 hours. We have 800 signatures on a
[1:14:58] petition that was started.
[1:15:00] On Friday, we are panicked. We have members that have, you know, completely fallen apart.
[1:15:08] And we think this is unfair and this is not the right thing to do. And this is not the
[1:15:12] right time to do two years after the pandemic already disrupted these children in so many
[1:15:18] ways. Why are we isolating these pocket of children? Why are we causing more problems
[1:15:24] then we're solving. Is this really necessary? Can they show us the case? Can they explain
[1:15:31] to us how they got there? Can they provide us a traffic study? Can they provide us, you
[1:15:36] know, the promise that if they do this, then there will be public transportation for all
[1:15:42] the elements of public education, not just the school day. So if you will write your
[1:15:47] letters, we're going through the process, we're trying to stay positive, we are
[1:15:51] are linking out neighbor to neighbor
[1:15:53] and we're not saying anything negative about the process.
[1:15:56] We don't want overcrowded schools.
[1:15:58] We agree, Creekview is overcrowded.
[1:16:00] Rebalance Creekview.
[1:16:02] But please don't tear this community up.
[1:16:05] I love Alpharetta.
[1:16:07] It has been an amazing experience.
[1:16:10] So help us to stay here.
[1:16:12] Thank you.
[1:16:14] Thank you.
[1:16:23] So next item up on our public hearing agenda
[1:16:27] is CU-22-08, Pavlova by Marion, 302 North Main Street.
[1:16:49] Thank you, Mayor and Council.
[1:16:51] The next item before you is the conditional use
[1:16:54] to allow a bakery and restaurant
[1:16:57] in a 1,648 square foot suite
[1:17:00] in an existing two-story building in the downtown overlay.
[1:17:04] The conditional use is for Pavlova by Marion.
[1:17:08] The business will serve as a coffee shop and bakery.
[1:17:13] Coffee shop in our zoning is categorized as a restaurant.
[1:17:20] Property owner intends to utilize the second floor of the building, a two-story building
[1:17:25] for their professional office, which is a permitted use on this property.
[1:17:29] Do you have the location map on the overhead?
[1:17:31] The property is located at 302 North Main Street.
[1:17:34] This is on the west side of North Main Street and north of Mayfield Road.
[1:17:40] Property is about .38 acres, so an O&I office institutional.
[1:17:47] It was developed in 1955 as a two-story, just under 3,000 square foot duplex.
[1:17:52] So it was being rented as basically apartment, two apartment units.
[1:17:59] And the building on the property was developed at the rear of the property.
[1:18:05] So here is the site plan.
[1:18:08] This is North Main Street frontage here.
[1:18:11] And the building is all the way on the back side of the property, this existing building.
[1:18:20] Pavlova by Marion is a new concept serving baked goods, coffee, and other prepared foods.
[1:18:27] The applicant is proposing to utilize the first floor of this building.
[1:18:33] There will be a service area.
[1:18:35] The applicant did provide some floor plans as well as a new elevation.
[1:18:41] They're going to spruce up the front elevation of the building.
[1:18:45] And this is the proposed first floor plan here.
[1:18:51] There will be about a service area that's about 400 square feet.
[1:18:54] so we have minimal tables and chairs.
[1:18:58] Hours of operation are Sunday through Wednesday 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and then Thursday through
[1:19:05] Saturday 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.
[1:19:08] And the applicant anticipate approximately three employees for the business.
[1:19:15] Going back to the site plan, there are 16 parking spaces on this plan.
[1:19:19] the use for the bakery and restaurant as well as for the office space up above
[1:19:26] would in the downtown the requirement is seven parking spaces so they do comply
[1:19:31] with parking. They do have the applicant property owners not the
[1:19:36] applicant but the property owners do have some future plans they're not
[1:19:39] ready to bring that forward yet but they would like to develop a building
[1:19:43] at the front of this property sometime in the future and they would have to
[1:19:48] come back through the process to do that.
[1:19:52] Of course, we looked at the conditional use against the established review criteria.
[1:19:57] We believe the proposed use would be compatible with surrounding uses, which are similarly
[1:20:03] situated along commercial areas and in downtowns.
[1:20:09] We believe the applicant's business will add to the variety of bakeries and restaurant
[1:20:13] offerings in the downtown.
[1:20:16] We did show this applicant's request to the public at the September 9th Community Zoning Information Meeting.
[1:20:23] There was one public comment in support of the request.
[1:20:28] And then this item went to the Planning Commission on October 6th.
[1:20:33] Staff recommended approval subject to six conditions.
[1:20:36] There were no public comments at Planning Commission.
[1:20:39] And Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval subject to staff's recommended conditions.
[1:20:44] and they did make a change to the hours of operation at the applicant's
[1:20:48] request. Staff Planning Commission recommendation is to approve CU 22-08
[1:20:56] Pavlova-Bimerian slash 302 North Main Street subject to the following
[1:21:00] conditions. One restaurant and bakery shall be added as conditional use at
[1:21:05] 302 North Main Street and limited to no more than 1,648 square feet. Two
[1:21:11] Two conditional use approval shall be limited to Pavlova by Marion.
[1:21:15] No additional restaurant or bakery uses or sub-leasing shall be permitted within the
[1:21:19] approved space.
[1:21:21] Three hours of operation shall be limited to Sunday through Wednesday 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.
[1:21:27] Thursday through Saturday 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.
[1:21:31] Four developers shall provide the required 10-foot landscape strip along the property
[1:21:35] frontage, parking lot landscaping and 5-foot landscape strips along the north and
[1:21:40] and south property lines as approved by DRB.
[1:21:43] Five is the site plan specific condition,
[1:21:46] tying it to the grade engineering site plan dated 921, 2022.
[1:21:52] And six is the change to the front building facade,
[1:21:57] tying it to the elevation prepared
[1:21:59] by HRIM Design LLC dated 411, 2022
[1:22:03] with final approval by DRB.
[1:22:05] This is on Main Street, so it would go to design review board
[1:22:08] As well as being in the downtown and that concludes the presentation. If you have questions, I'm happy to answer those
[1:22:16] Councilman Hubs
[1:22:19] Mr. Woodman, it's an it's an interesting
[1:22:21] Piece of property when you do a street view from Highway 9 how far back it sits almost all to the rear setback
[1:22:28] Which my question is are you aware of any comments pro or con from the?
[1:22:34] property owner that's behind them on Canton Street. It looks to me like 319
[1:22:40] Canton Street. So I have not received any comments from the public sent to me by
[1:22:47] email. We did receive one comment in support at the community zoning
[1:22:51] information meeting. I'm not sure if that who that came from that particular
[1:22:56] comment but I'm not aware that we have received any comments for against from
[1:23:01] that property owner but to your knowledge it was properly noticed for the
[1:23:04] community yes yes it was appreciate it thanks any other questions from
[1:23:10] council did the applicant bring any samples tonight for the audience no any
[1:23:18] other questions from council see none this is shock tank now thank you mr.
[1:23:25] women welcome with the applicant like to come forward at this time my
[1:23:34] name is
[1:23:34] Mary and and I'm used here to answer any questions that you have and I didn't bring
[1:23:41] nothing but you can go and visit me when I open yeah you can visit the place any
[1:23:49] questions for the applicant thank you Mary public
[1:23:59] comment cards we do not Mr.
[1:24:01] Mayor however if anyone would like to come forward and speak on this item now
[1:24:06] is your chance to do so. Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Do I have a motion from
[1:24:12] Council? Yes, Mr. Mayor, I'd offer a motion tonight to approve CU-22-08, Pav Lava by Marion
[1:24:20] slash 302 North Main Street as presented tonight with the six conditions. Second? I'll second.
[1:24:26] Have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Merkle, a second by Councilman Dorito by a noes.
[1:24:34] Any discussion?
[1:24:34] All
[1:24:38] those in favor of the motion to approve CU-22-08,
[1:24:44] Pavlova, Bimmerian, 302 North Main Street,
[1:24:48] with the conditions as outlined by Mayor Pro Tem Merkle,
[1:24:51] please vote yes, otherwise vote accordingly.
[1:24:54] And it does pass unanimously.
[1:24:56] Congratulations.
[1:24:59] Final public hearing item this evening will be CU-22-07
[1:25:06] media care slash 0 North Main Street.
[1:25:11] Director and
[1:25:14] housekeeping note.
[1:25:17] I believe we will go ahead now that we have some of the appointees after the public hearing
[1:25:24] before we get to the new business if that's okay.
[1:25:27] Please proceed.
[1:25:28] Thank you, Mayor.
[1:25:29] The next item, the applicant.
[1:25:31] Peachtree Immediate Care is requesting a conditional use to operate a clinic in a 4058 square foot building, which was previously developed and used for an IHOP.
[1:25:41] The Fulton Greens master plan requires a conditional use in order to allow the change to a clinic from the restaurant.
[1:25:49] Properties located at 870 North Main Street near the northwest corner of North Main Street and Oneward Parkway.
[1:25:55] If approved, it would allow Peach Tree immediate care to operate the clinic.
[1:26:01] The building, again, previously used for the IHOP, and that was part of one of the allowed uses within the Fulton Greens Master Plan.
[1:26:10] The building was built in 2003, and it's only operated as a restaurant since that time.
[1:26:16] And it's subject to the Fulton Greens Master Plan, Pod A, and let me put the site plan here.
[1:26:21] Of course, to the north and the east is the Lowe's.
[1:26:25] The Burger King is located to the east of the property, and then you have the retail
[1:26:30] that's located across the street to the south.
[1:26:35] Site plan of the existing site.
[1:26:38] There are several parking spaces.
[1:26:40] They actually have more parking spaces than are needed.
[1:26:43] There are 54 parking spaces, although the code only requires 20 parking spaces.
[1:26:49] And Peachtree Immediate Care operates 53 different urgent care clinics throughout Georgia.
[1:26:55] And they're the exclusive urgent care partner of Emory Health Care.
[1:26:59] They have another location you may be familiar with, which is on Haines Bridge Road.
[1:27:03] That's at 10905 Haines Bridge Road.
[1:27:06] It's across the entrance to North Point Drive, North Point Mall.
[1:27:13] Their hours that they're proposing are Monday through Sunday from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.
[1:27:18] And they did submit changes to the renderings, changes to the elevation which would of course have to go through the design review board process.
[1:27:27] They are proposing removal of the blue awnings and painting of the brick which will require the design review board review and approval.
[1:27:42] They also submitted their traffic numbers and there is a reduction in the number of trips moving from a restaurant to a clinic use.
[1:27:49] With the restaurant, there's 39 a.m. peak hour trips and 37 p.m. peak hour trips
[1:27:56] that would be reduced to 11 for the a.m. And then 15 for the peak hour trips in
[1:28:02] the evening. This item was also presented at the citizen's owning
[1:28:07] information meeting. We didn't have any comments at that meeting that was held
[1:28:11] on September the 14th. And it was also presented to the planning
[1:28:17] Commission on October 6.
[1:28:19] Staff recommended approval subject to six conditions.
[1:28:23] And there was no public comments at that meeting.
[1:28:26] And after discussion, the Planning Commission did recommend unanimously to recommend approval
[1:28:33] to the City Council with six conditions.
[1:28:36] Number one, clinics shall be added as a conditional use at 870 North Main Street and limited
[1:28:42] to no more than 4,058 square feet.
[1:28:46] Two, conditional use approval shall be limited
[1:28:48] to Peachtree immediate care.
[1:28:51] No additional clinic use or sub-leasing shall be permitted
[1:28:54] within the approved space.
[1:28:57] Three, clinic shall be limited to an urgent care clinic.
[1:29:00] Four, exterior changes to the building shall require final
[1:29:04] approval by the Design Review Board.
[1:29:06] Existing blue awnings shall be replaced
[1:29:08] with awnings approved by DRB.
[1:29:11] 5 hours of operation shall be limited to Monday through Sunday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.
[1:29:17] And 6, property owners shall assess site landscaping or replace missing, dead,
[1:29:22] or dying landscape material as approved by staff.
[1:29:26] And that should actually say as approved by Design Review Board.
[1:29:29] Apologies, since they have to go through Design Review Board for the elevation change.
[1:29:36] This assessment shall include monument-signed landscape material as well as trees, shrubs removed by the GDOT construction.
[1:29:46] And that is the Planning Commission recommendation. If you have any questions, I'll be glad to try to answer those.
[1:29:52] Councilor Mitchell
[1:29:56] miss cook the number six condition
[1:30:00] I've noticed when it lows, that site has some, it's the landscape material on the backside is
[1:30:10] so overgrown and so old, it's just taken over, and it does not have the offer to look at all.
[1:30:19] Is there any way this could be worded so that they can reassess the existing landscaping
[1:30:25] So that we can send that the DRB with the confidence that...
[1:30:30] And I think number six, it does.
[1:30:32] And we even went so far to make sure that we pointed out that you have to include the
[1:30:38] Monuments on Landscaping because exactly what you've seen, we see some of those shrubs
[1:30:44] are so large and it's kind of an outdated look.
[1:30:48] So I think that the applicant can talk more about what they plan to do.
[1:30:53] but we even included as well as tree shrubs that are removed by GDOT.
[1:30:58] So that will be something that's required for the design review board.
[1:31:03] So you're comfortable that number six addresses that fully.
[1:31:06] Okay, thank you.
[1:31:08] And on six it does need to say as approved by DRB instead of staff.
[1:31:15] Any other questions for staff?
[1:31:20] Thank you, Director Cook.
[1:31:21] Would the applicant likely come forward at this time?
[1:31:24] Good
[1:31:34] evening. My name is John Richmond. I'm happy to answer any questions that you guys have.
[1:31:39] And with your approval, we are very excited about the opportunity to open a new medical
[1:31:46] clinic to serve Alpharetta. We provide high quality, convenient and affordable healthcare.
[1:31:53] Regarding the question on landscaping, we have not engaged a landscape architect yet.
[1:31:58] we I was thinking that we were going to have to be approved by staff and if we
[1:32:02] need to include that as part of the DRB submission and we'll get on that but we
[1:32:07] agree it has overgrown and we certainly plan to thin it out and we'll do what
[1:32:11] makes sense for the community so I don't foresee any obstacles there. Any
[1:32:18] other questions for the applicant?
[1:32:21] Thanks sir. Thank you. Mr. Pirro, do we have any
[1:32:24] public comment cards on this item? We do not Mr. Mayor. However, anyone would
[1:32:29] I'd like to come forward and speak on this matter now is your chance.
[1:32:33] Seeing no one will close public comment.
[1:32:36] Do I have a motion from council?
[1:32:38] Yes, sir.
[1:32:38] Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion this evening to approve CU-22-07 slash Peachtree
[1:32:45] immediate care slash 870 North Main Street with the six conditions and noting that in
[1:32:51] condition number six where it says of dying landscape materials as approved by staff,
[1:32:57] I would strike the word staff and replace with designer view board
[1:33:02] Have a motion by mayor pro temp Merkel a second by councilman binder, and that was to approve
[1:33:07] CU dash 2 2 dash 0 7 p3 immediate care slash 8 7 oh North Main Street with conditions as
[1:33:14] Outline by mayor pro temp Merkel
[1:33:17] any discussion
[1:33:20] All those in favor of the motion, please vote yes otherwise vote accordingly and
[1:33:28] it does pass unanimously
[1:33:30] Thanks, sir.
[1:33:31] Congratulations.
[1:33:34] All right.
[1:33:35] And so now that we have our distinguished guest here, we'll go ahead and pull forward
[1:33:40] the item that we had put off at the beginning, which was the appointments and swearing in.
[1:33:48] Ms. Shapiro, do you want to handle that?
[1:33:51] Yes, Mr. Mayor.
[1:33:52] Our first Boards and Commission appointment, I think, was by Council Member Binder.
[1:33:57] You'd have someone that you'd like to appoint to Boards and Commission.
[1:34:07] And Mr. Mayor, I believe you had two appointments that you'd like to make to our Board of Ethics this evening.
[1:34:16] Yes, just a second.
[1:34:23] Councilman Beiner, feel free.
[1:34:25] Yes, sir. I have Art Leach as my new appointment to the Ethics Commission, and he is not here today.
[1:34:34] So we will swear him in on a future meeting.
[1:34:36] There we go.
[1:34:37] Yes, sir.
[1:34:42] And my appointments to the Ethics Commission will be Heather Wagner and Dale Sizemore.
[1:34:46] Wonderful. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you and our next item under this portion of tonight's agenda is this wearing in of our
[1:34:55] Code enforcement board member mr. Dick Freeman if you'd like to come on up, please sir
[1:35:28] Well, good evening, but a while since I've been here
[1:35:34] I just want
[1:35:41] to make sure we have the same writing on ours.
[1:35:44] I typically did not do the swearing in, so this is a new exercise for me as well.
[1:35:51] So if you would, Mr. Freeman, if you'll raise your right hand, I, state your name.
[1:35:58] I, Richard Freeman.
[1:36:00] Hereby accept the honor of serving as a board member of the Code Enforcement Board.
[1:36:05] Hereby accept the honor of serving on the Code Enforcement Board.
[1:36:09] Or Board of Ethics of the City of Alfredo, Georgia.
[1:36:12] Or Board of Ethics of the City of Alfredo.
[1:36:15] That was when we were supposed to have two people sworn in, Mr. Mayor.
[1:36:18] Yeah, I told you this was my first time.
[1:36:21] Yeah.
[1:36:22] I do solemnly swear or affirm that I am not the holder of an unaccounted
[1:36:28] unaccounted for public money due of this state or any political subdivision or authority thereof.
[1:36:36] I am not the holder of any unaccounted for public money.
[1:36:44] Okay.
[1:36:51] Okay.
[1:36:53] Let me start that again.
[1:36:54] Yeah, let's go ahead.
[1:36:55] I am not the holder of any unaccounted for public money due to this state or any political
[1:37:00] subdivision or authority thereof.
[1:37:02] I am qualified to hold set office according to the Constitution and Laws of Georgia.
[1:37:10] I am qualified to hold set office according to the Constitution and Laws of Georgia.
[1:37:15] And I shall support the Constitution.
[1:37:18] And I shall support the Constitution and Laws of the State of Georgia and the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America.
[1:37:26] Further, I do solemnly swear or affirm that I shall.
[1:37:30] further I do solemnly swear or affirm that I shall faithfully perform the duties
[1:37:36] of a board member regularly attend meetings uphold the ideals of community
[1:37:40] and service act and conduct business in accordance with the city code of ethics
[1:37:46] conduct and support the charter and laws of the city of El Verde so sworn this
[1:37:53] 24th day of October 2022 congratulations sir thank you for
[1:37:59] your service. Thank you,
[1:38:07] Dick. Thank you, Mr. Freeman.
[1:38:13] We
[1:38:40] lost
[1:38:56] someone.
[1:39:01] We lost our mayor
[1:39:02] pro 10.
[1:39:08] So next item up on our agenda this evening is new business. First item under
[1:39:14] new business is the Milton Avenue and Canton Street pedestrian scramble director Robson.
[1:39:19] Mr.
[1:39:23] Mayor, if I could just real quickly as the Chief is walking up here, I do want to
[1:39:27] highlight that we did have a couple of Council members request the item on the agenda tonight.
[1:39:32] We're certainly happy to lead with the staff presentation, but I also wanted to defer not
[1:39:36] get in front of the Council if either of the two members who indicated their desire
[1:39:40] to speak on this tonight had a comment that they wanted to lead with before the
[1:39:44] Chief made his presentation.
[1:39:45] I'll just offer that out there.
[1:39:49] Okay.
[1:39:49] Okay, so then I'll turn it over to the Chief and he can talk about some of the study that
[1:39:53] they have done in the area.
[1:39:54] Thanks, Chief.
[1:39:55] Yes, sir.
[1:39:55] Good evening, Mayor and Council.
[1:39:57] I think with this, I'll just go ahead and start with the background of kind of what
[1:40:00] got us here tonight and then talk about our recommendation based on the study.
[1:40:04] So back in August, when school went back in session, we all, including you, immediately
[1:40:09] started getting flowed with phone calls about traffic issues downtown.
[1:40:12] And sure enough, we were having some major traffic congestion issues, which of course
[1:40:16] is always a concern for public safety, particularly around the Innovation Academy from there up
[1:40:21] until nine in an intersection of Milton and Canton as well.
[1:40:25] So with that, I was directed to please send our team down there to do a study to see
[1:40:32] what was maybe causing the congestion and the issues, and if we could determine that
[1:40:36] and maybe make a recommendation on that.
[1:40:38] So we sent our team down, our traffic teams specifically down there for several
[1:40:42] days, actually a couple of weeks to observe the traffic. As you can imagine, the major
[1:40:48] traffic issues were in the mornings and afternoons when school was being let out, when students
[1:40:52] were being picked up or dropped off, as we assumed. And so after a couple of weeks of
[1:40:57] observation and studying the situation, our traffic unit came back and made a report,
[1:41:02] gave me a report stating that they felt that the all-cross or the scramble was
[1:41:07] was certainly the major reason for the traffic congestion that we were seeing in that area.
[1:41:13] So with that, we decided to test our hypothesis and we had it turned off.
[1:41:19] Had Pete worked to get it turned off for several days and again our traffic team was
[1:41:23] down there observing and observed that when the all-cross, the scramble was turned off
[1:41:28] and back to the way it was before the scramble was installed, we basically had
[1:41:32] very little, if any, traffic issues at all.
[1:41:34] So after the study that was done, the work that was put in, my staff recommended to me
[1:41:42] that the scramble be removed, and that would basically take care of the traffic problems
[1:41:48] we've been having downtown. I agree with your recommendation on that, and therefore I'm bringing
[1:41:52] this recommendation to you tonight. One caveat I was asked also about turning off the no turn
[1:42:00] on red, or getting rid of the no-turn on red signs in that area, and I did disagree with
[1:42:06] that. We do believe that does provide an extra layer of safety for our pedestrians walking
[1:42:10] in that area, and we think that should stay. So part of my recommendation is to have that
[1:42:16] continue to be in place moving forward. And then, of course, Pete has done his work
[1:42:22] with Public Works regarding the cost with the ongoing project downtown, which would
[1:42:26] be 27 to 47 and 50 cents and that is how we arrived at this moment. That's how I arrived
[1:42:32] at this recommendation that I'm presenting to you tonight.
[1:42:36] Thank you, George Robinson. Any questions from Council? Councilman Binder?
[1:42:43] You said who directed you? Councilman Will asked me to come visit. Check it out.
[1:42:51] And
[1:42:55] then the another another was I think I must have gone past that eight times today going back and forth.
[1:43:05] The hotel have we have we worked on that too? I know that was a big cause.
[1:43:11] We have we've we've had several meetings and I guess James is probably about a month and a half ago we met and things have been much better.
[1:43:18] I won't tell you they're perfect, but we definitely have seen great improvements in that area regarding the plan and working with the hotel to
[1:43:24] come up with a better way to handle valet parking and
[1:43:27] Making sure that we keep whole can clear it out. And and so we have made progress that I wouldn't say it's it's a hundred percent
[1:43:33] It's definitely been much better. Okay, and then I noticed that the crosswalks getting built right now
[1:43:40] I think it's right in front of
[1:43:43] They're building it right in front of the vet.
[1:43:46] When is that going to be online?
[1:43:52] I didn't know since the chief's doing traffic counts now
[1:43:54] if he was also doing the construction for the crosswalk.
[1:43:56] We used all the help we could get.
[1:43:59] There's supposed to be doing the resurfacing the week of the 24th.
[1:44:04] Okay.
[1:44:05] So the 24th and the week of the 31st they'll be doing the resurfacing.
[1:44:08] So beginning of November it'll be done.
[1:44:10] Beginning of November.
[1:44:11] And then there's a crosswalk going by our Baptist church.
[1:44:17] That is shown on the Downtown Pedestrian Safety Plan study.
[1:44:21] It's a concept that has not been 100% determined yet.
[1:44:25] So we're just starting that process now.
[1:44:27] That was just awarded a couple of weeks ago.
[1:44:29] Okay.
[1:44:31] Is there a way for that scramble to be shut off during peak?
[1:44:36] When was the traffic happening?
[1:44:41] Is there a time of day that we just turn it off maybe for peak?
[1:44:44] The traffic was obviously worse during morning, schools on hours, and after new schools on hours.
[1:44:50] Obviously we had a lot of traffic going back and forth to Innovation Academy.
[1:44:53] Okay,
[1:44:57] that works for me. Thanks, Mayor.
[1:45:01] Councilmember Mitchell. Director Robinson. Are you familiar with, have we done any studies
[1:45:10] in the last ten years on how our pedestrian traffic has increased in our downtown? I believe,
[1:45:16] I hate to throw this on Pete, but I believe we've had a study done. We had a study back
[1:45:20] done in 2019. And what were the results of that? There was recommendations on how to
[1:45:27] improve the pedestrian safety in different areas of different intersections. And that
[1:45:31] It included this intersection, did it not?
[1:45:34] It included this intersection, yes.
[1:45:36] It included the recommendation was a no-turn-on-right signage.
[1:45:41] They had some other grandiose plans as well as a roundabout and some other things, but
[1:45:46] the low-hanging fruit was a no-turn-on-right.
[1:45:49] And how many pedestrian accidents or near-accidents are you familiar with that have happened
[1:45:55] in our city in the last year?
[1:45:57] Can you give me a stat on that?
[1:45:59] In our city, no, within the last year, I know we had one hit-and-run incident, not at that
[1:46:06] intersection.
[1:46:08] I'm off the top of my head, not familiar with any others, but I can't say that for sure.
[1:46:12] I'd have to go back and check, but it's very few, if any.
[1:46:16] It feels to me that this is more autocentric and our comprehensive land use plan for
[1:46:22] downtown and every plan and study that we've done.
[1:46:25] When we issued a $100,000 study for pedestrian improvements, it all is to mix not only vehicular
[1:46:34] conveniences but also save pedestrian accidents.
[1:46:37] The best pedestrian accident is the one that never occurred.
[1:46:41] And I do believe the scramble has helped.
[1:46:43] I was there the other weekend on a, it was, no, it was a Thursday night.
[1:46:48] Every corner was filled with people trying to cross and you couldn't cross.
[1:46:51] It delayed the action because you had to go you had to wait and then there were some people who were crossing
[1:46:57] darting across the the road
[1:47:01] When traffic wasn't coming and this occurs a lot it hasn't occurred with the scramble as much
[1:47:07] So I'm I'm curious as to why we're only looking at the vehicular and not really judging it based on
[1:47:15] pedestrian safety as well
[1:47:19] My only response to that is we were directed to specifically look at the vehicular traffic
[1:47:25] to your point regarding the issues we're having here in the day and that's what our department
[1:47:29] did.
[1:47:30] Okay.
[1:47:31] What are we doing as a public safety department to improve pedestrian safety?
[1:47:35] Is it through education?
[1:47:36] What are we doing right now as a city?
[1:47:40] Education enforcement.
[1:47:41] enforcement. I mean, we do at times, especially when we have issues with people improperly
[1:47:47] crossing, creating dangerous situations. Also, people speeding through downtown, we will go
[1:47:52] down and utilize enforcement, right citations. So, I think education, I think long-term,
[1:47:58] any, you know, enforcement is always one of our number one options. But we, like any
[1:48:02] other area of the city, we always try to make sure that we are addressing any areas
[1:48:06] of concern regarding vehicular or pedestrian safety.
[1:48:09] Okay.
[1:48:11] I looked online, I didn't see anything that was addressing vehicular traffic to watch
[1:48:17] out for pedestrians and things like that and how they could be a safer driver.
[1:48:21] There may not be right at this moment, but I mean, you know, like other educational
[1:48:25] presentations we make online, we do different ones, so I mean, it may be time for us
[1:48:30] to do that again.
[1:48:30] We have done it in the past, but I can't say we have one right at this moment,
[1:48:34] no.
[1:48:34] Okay, I've looked up some statistics and I'd like to share them. Perhaps that's better during discussion
[1:48:40] Okay, thank you
[1:48:44] Any other questions for staff on this item, I
[1:48:50] have a few it
[1:48:52] Mr. Robison have you
[1:48:55] have any evidence that
[1:48:58] Safety has improved in that quarter since
[1:49:02] The scramble was in place. Yes. There's no evidence of that at all
[1:49:06] That's it.
[1:49:06] Pete, are you aware of any?
[1:49:09] Nothing I could put my hands on.
[1:49:12] Okay.
[1:49:14] And, Pete, while you're here, I remember us going through this whole process before.
[1:49:19] Did you recommend the scramble as a solution to pedestrian safety or moving traffic faster?
[1:49:27] It's a component.
[1:49:28] I think it was not the volume of counts at the time that we were working forward,
[1:49:33] forward, that it would be the perfect solution for that intersection. It would not be the
[1:49:39] best solution, the perfect solution for that intersection due to the not being the traffic,
[1:49:44] the pedestrian warrants. I mean, downtown Atlanta has a scramble, a Georgia attack, and it's
[1:49:50] a much larger volume going forward more frequently. And it's the, I mean, as we watch on the
[1:49:56] video, we'll see kids come by and push the yellow button and cross perpendicular.
[1:50:02] So that 46 seconds, 40 plus second delay does increase traffic and it's also just not working
[1:50:10] functionally for us in the whole corridor, but the no turn on reds have helped.
[1:50:14] I mean, we've had it off for a while and the no turn on reds, people are following
[1:50:19] it, thanks to the enforcement that people are following it, and that is, that's working
[1:50:24] very well.
[1:50:27] You know, we've gotten several e-mails about, you know, claims of higher safety and you know,
[1:50:35] so I just, I remember going through all this before and so I went back through my e-mails
[1:50:41] and I specifically saw where you had recommended a study before we invested $100,000 in putting
[1:50:48] in a scramble.
[1:50:50] Do you recall that?
[1:50:51] I recall it would determine the warrants for it.
[1:50:54] Everything we do in our world of engineering is warrants, stop sign warrants, traffic signal
[1:50:58] warrants, even doing traffic calming itself. We would like to have a warrant so we could
[1:51:04] put our hands on something that says it's valid for us to move forward.
[1:51:08] And as I recall, because I went back and pulled the email today,
[1:51:13] you specifically asked for
[1:51:15] that study to be done for the warrants. And then a former council member told you
[1:51:20] there was no need. He already had the support for installing a scramble. Is that correct?
[1:51:25] I have a vague reminder, but yes, something similar to that.
[1:51:36] One other thing I wanted to ask you about, because as we were getting these complaints
[1:51:40] about the backup on Milton Avenue and the traffic in that quarter, one of my concerns
[1:51:47] was, and I've known you've spoken about this in the past, that stretch of road
[1:51:52] between Canton Street and Highway 9 is problematic, correct?
[1:51:59] It's got challenges.
[1:52:01] Especially since the hotel's opened up.
[1:52:03] But I've heard you say in the past that if we don't provide a good flow of traffic through that corridor
[1:52:10] that the State Road Highway 9 is impacted,
[1:52:17] Then G dot Georgia Department of Transportation has the ability to take control of our lights. Is that correct?
[1:52:24] They had the control to take control of the single timing of state route night
[1:52:28] So what we try to do is we try and blend it all together and try to balance it out
[1:52:33] With doing additional traffic counts to modify our single timing in that area
[1:52:38] What we don't want is to keep the flow going so well on East West and the North South backs up so much
[1:52:44] That's adversely impacting the flow on a state route
[1:52:47] So we can't let it flow so well east-west and then hinder state route 9 and vice versa
[1:52:53] We don't want it to flow so well on 9 that it backs up on
[1:52:56] Molton Avenue and Mid-Broadwell
[1:52:59] So it's a challenging balancing act the
[1:53:05] Okay, thank you
[1:53:07] Any other questions from council council like to follow up on
[1:53:11] You say that you don't know what the pedestrian safety has been.
[1:53:19] I don't have a study to put my hands on it to say that yes, there has been an improvement
[1:53:26] of X scale out there.
[1:53:28] I do know that the no turn on reds have benefited downtown tremendously.
[1:53:33] I do know that the rapid flashing beacons on Canton Street have helped out tremendously,
[1:53:38] especially at night with people walking across.
[1:53:42] the hawk signal with the lights and with the refuge island has helped out
[1:53:45] tremendously. So elements that we have put in and even moving forward with have
[1:53:51] helped out very well. I had not done a study and determined there was an accident
[1:53:56] here or not a pedestrian accident here. Okay so you the truth is you don't know
[1:54:00] either way. I can't qualify and say yes there's been yes or no sir. Okay when
[1:54:07] And you put in the crosswalk at Old Roswell Street with the flashing lights.
[1:54:11] I remember I had citizens complain about that as we've had citizens complain about being
[1:54:17] able to cross as a pedestrian at Milton and Highway 9 and also Roswell and Canton.
[1:54:24] So back up when we go to where Pure is crossing over at Roswell, the Old Roswell Street,
[1:54:30] you put in the crosswalk, did you do a study to determine if it was needed pedestrian-wise
[1:54:36] or has it just benefited?
[1:54:38] We put, we did a study in the fact that we actually wanted to put a roundabout in that location
[1:54:42] and we did a study where we could not engineer-wise get the grade to work for us
[1:54:48] and in return we did a rapid flashing beacon crosswalk to be a temporary measure
[1:54:54] until if we come up with a more permanent solution for that area.
[1:54:57] So yes, studies were done in that area and the number one reason why we needed one out there
[1:55:02] was for visibility because there is a topography challenge in that area
[1:55:05] So we had to make sure that our poles were the right height. So yes, and we raised the as I recall we raised the
[1:55:11] the crossing area
[1:55:14] somewhat and I got calls from pedestrians who were walking
[1:55:18] Throughout the morning and stuff like that that that they they feel much safer with those improvements as I have from the scramble
[1:55:26] So but either way we haven't done a study to see how much safer pedestrians are from those
[1:55:33] have we? I have not, sir. Okay, thank you.
[1:55:39] Councilman Dorito. Hey Pete, can I want to
[1:55:44] address the walkability and pedestrian safety study done in 2018-19? I went through it today
[1:55:53] and I didn't see any reference to one of the potential solutions for creating more
[1:55:58] walkable downtown area that a scramble would be one of those options. Is that somewhere
[1:56:05] where in the report that I missed or?
[1:56:06] It's not in the report.
[1:56:07] Okay.
[1:56:11] Second, I gotta be real honest.
[1:56:13] I'm just gonna be very honest with everybody
[1:56:14] on the council and the public.
[1:56:16] I'm really disgusted with some of the inferences
[1:56:19] made by some council members up here
[1:56:20] against yourself and our chief.
[1:56:23] You are here to answer questions on an issue
[1:56:27] that former elected officials voted on and implemented
[1:56:31] it without a safety study, a pedestrian safety study, and without a traffic study. But now
[1:56:39] the same two of those people who still are on council.
[1:56:42] Councillor Mendrita, is there a question in here somewhere?
[1:56:46] Well, I'll wait to let discussion in. I just want to keep things moving in the
[1:56:51] right direction. Any other questions for staff?
[1:56:57] Thank you, gentlemen.
[1:56:57] Thank you. So there better be one line.
[1:57:01] Mr. Pirro, do we have any public comment cards on this item?
[1:57:04] We do not, Mr. Mayor.
[1:57:07] However, if anyone would like to come forward,
[1:57:09] now's your opportunity to do so.
[1:57:12] If you will, please state your name and address
[1:57:15] for the public record.
[1:57:17] And you've got three minutes to speak your piece.
[1:57:21] Good evening.
[1:57:22] My name is Karen Quinn.
[1:57:24] I live at 169 Ladder and Ridge Court.
[1:57:27] We moved here in 1987.
[1:57:30] My daughter called this Alphatator.
[1:57:32] there was one traffic light.
[1:57:38] Getting through downtown was nothing. It was just very easy.
[1:57:42] My kids went to the old Milton that's gone.
[1:57:47] Alpharetta Elementary, Haynes Bridge. So we've
[1:57:51] been here a long time. Milton Avenue East West is a quarter for people from Cobb County,
[1:58:00] from people from other counties to get through, to get to 400 now to get to all the different
[1:58:08] places they go. That has always been, at Canton and Milton, has always been a dangerous area.
[1:58:19] In these intervening years, to the wisdom of someone that I cannot feature, has decided
[1:58:27] to put tall buildings, many tall buildings, with people who live in these buildings, and
[1:58:34] you're creating tunnels. Psychologically, it's frightening. And in my driving, I traveled
[1:58:45] in that area as little as possible. I will go out of my way to miss the downtown area
[1:58:51] because it's scary. Yes, I'm an old lady but I've been driving for a long long
[1:58:57] time and I know how to drive. I like the scramble. I know it really angers people
[1:59:06] and a lot of these people don't live here and a lot of the people who do live
[1:59:11] here haven't lived here very long. Every time the city decides that they want
[1:59:18] to do something for the betterment of the people who don't drive, the people who don't
[1:59:24] live in the fancy houses in the fancy neighborhoods, they're screaming. It's fussing. And there's
[1:59:31] no patience. We put this thing in. I like it, obviously. I've seen it happen in other
[1:59:40] cities, larger cities, where it's a lifesaver. And I believe that this is a lifesaver.
[1:59:47] I was through that area the other day because I simply could not avoid it.
[1:59:52] And there's a lady with a stroller, and she's watching, watching, watching, watching for the light.
[2:00:00] She gets the light and has to run across the street because somebody who's not watching
[2:00:05] the light was in a hurry.
[2:00:10] Now, I've made my views known to you. Some of you have responded
[2:00:15] to my email, and I appreciate that. I appreciate your comments. But I am asking for patience.
[2:00:23] If you want to turn it off like Mr. Binder says during the very busy times, maybe, but
[2:00:30] And of course that's a very busy time when you have a lot of pedestrians.
[2:00:36] So you have people trying to get to and from school and they're very important.
[2:00:40] You can tell by the cars they drive.
[2:00:43] But the people on the street are important, too.
[2:00:49] And I've not seen anybody get killed.
[2:00:52] I'm very fortunate, but I've seen people have really close calls.
[2:00:56] calls, and I've had close calls myself. And I really would appreciate you tabling this,
[2:01:05] doing some more study, being patient, letting people get used to it,
[2:01:15] and seeing if maybe
[2:01:16] it isn't a help, because I believe it is. Thank you for your time.
[2:01:22] Thank you very much.
[2:01:28] Anyone else that wants to come forward from the public now is your
[2:01:31] chance.
[2:01:32] Good
[2:01:40] evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Daniel MacLennan. 1995, Will Shariglin, Alfreda
[2:01:45] 3-3-0-0-9. I think you might have met me or talked to me at least once before, and
[2:01:50] if so, you know that I'm a pretty big proponent of pedestrian safety in the downtown district.
[2:01:56] That's a guaranteed way to get me to come to these meetings every time. I love it
[2:02:01] when you put this on the agenda.
[2:02:01] to. I'm a little concerned about this item tonight though. I've like some of what I've
[2:02:07] heard tonight from various council members concerned by some other commons. I'll tell
[2:02:11] you what I think about it and I'll do my best to keep it under three minutes too. I was
[2:02:16] excited last year when the city decided to implement this great piece of safety for pedestrians.
[2:02:23] That is a busy corner. That corner has a number of restaurants. You've got the animal
[2:02:31] traffic. I walk it all the time. I walk it with my dog. I walk it with my wife. I walk
[2:02:35] it with my parents. I see people using it all the time. And if I recall, I'm not an
[2:02:40] expert on traffic engineering or anything, but if I recall when it was implemented a
[2:02:44] year ago, the scramble was only going to be activated when someone pressed the button
[2:02:49] to scramble diagonally across the intersection. I don't know if that's still the case,
[2:02:54] but that's how it was originally talked about. So if it is causing delays, that
[2:02:59] That means it's getting use, which is good.
[2:03:02] It's protecting pedestrians in the right of way.
[2:03:06] The city spent 100,000 on this last year, a little bit over that, and there were some
[2:03:10] concerns on council at the time that it was just too much to spend in an uncertain economic
[2:03:15] environment.
[2:03:16] That's a fair position to have.
[2:03:18] To spend even more money tonight, just one year later after spending that money,
[2:03:23] to me. It seems to be quite frank, a bit ridiculous to me. As was mentioned a few times, studies
[2:03:31] were the studies. I love words, Mr. Mayor, you asked, is there any evidence to show that
[2:03:35] safety has been improved as a result of this? The answer was no, there's no evidence. But
[2:03:41] there's no evidence to say anything. There's no traffic numbers. There is no times. There
[2:03:46] is just this objective opinion that traffic is worse. I guarantee you I could pick
[2:03:52] a number of intersections around Afaretta, sit there and say, oh, this traffic is very
[2:03:56] much a problem here. If you guys ever go to the farmers' market, on a Saturday morning
[2:04:00] I do, that hawk is active more often than not. You can't drive down Main Street while
[2:04:06] that hawk is active. That's not a concern for traffic backup. Granted, I'm G-DOT and
[2:04:12] other things I don't understand. But I think we need more data. I think something
[2:04:17] First thing can be done before spending $27,000 to just remove it.
[2:04:21] If you're going to fault the previous counsel for not having data and deciding to implement
[2:04:26] this, then you guys are also at fault for not having data and deciding to remove it.
[2:04:30] Don't repeat the mistakes of your previous counsel.
[2:04:33] Show them better.
[2:04:34] Try disabling it during the school rush hours.
[2:04:36] Maybe shorten the time from 30 seconds scramble to 20.
[2:04:41] That saves 33% time.
[2:04:42] time. There are a lot of things you could do. At least try it first. Come back with the
[2:04:48] data and then I think I would be convinced and members of the public would be convinced
[2:04:52] if the data showed that it wasn't a good idea to have this here. But until that happens,
[2:04:57] you're spending money and you don't know why. That's the way I see it and I hope you
[2:05:01] guys will choose to at least keep the intersection long enough until you have more data
[2:05:05] to make a choice. Thank you.
[2:05:08] Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else that would like to come forward and speak on this
[2:05:13] item? Seeing none, we'll close public comment. Do I have a motion from Council?
[2:05:20] Yes, sir. I move to approve the disable and remove the pedestrian scramble at Milton
[2:05:24] Avenue and Canton Street to award a contract change order to complete all necessary work
[2:05:29] and to authorize the merit to execute necessary documents only after the completion
[2:05:33] of the crosswalk directly to the west of said scramble we
[2:05:42] have a motion do we
[2:05:43] have a second
[2:05:46] motion fails for no second do
[2:05:53] we have any other motions yes
[2:05:56] sir mr. mayor I make a motion to approve to disable and remove the pest
[2:05:59] pedestrian scramble at Milton Avenue and Canton Street toward a contract
[2:06:03] change order to complete all necessary work and to authorize a merit to
[2:06:06] execute necessary documents we have a motion do we have a second I'll
[2:06:15] second
[2:06:16] We have a motion by councilman will second by councilman to read out.
[2:06:21] Any discussion? Yes, sir.
[2:06:24] Councilman binder.
[2:06:26] Um, no, I want to add a little bit more of a backstory to keep hearing about a former council member. I was one of those that
[2:06:34] sponsored the idea as one of only two at the time that lived west of highway nine.
[2:06:41] Taking my family and having to go and meander and having to do two crosswalks was pretty
[2:06:47] scary and things were not happening and we moved at a fast pace to have that north-south
[2:06:52] connection between Milton Avenue and Academy.
[2:06:56] Also on the other end, there was multiple discussions by council members to add scramble
[2:07:02] studies into the discussion.
[2:07:05] mostly where it began was Highway 9 and Milton Avenue Academy because that's such a dangerous
[2:07:13] area of having to cross twice in such a busy intersection, whereas to Pete to his credit
[2:07:19] said that would be pretty difficult to prove to GDOT.
[2:07:22] So we used it as an opportunity as a proof of concept.
[2:07:26] I do believe that scrambled works.
[2:07:28] I know a lot of families really enjoy it.
[2:07:31] To say that it causes traffic, I think it's pretty silly when we have a study that says
[2:07:35] that we want to slow down traffic to improve pedestrian friendly.
[2:07:39] But I have to disassociate how I feel that I sponsored it to saying, where are we today?
[2:07:46] Those crosswalks that we are implementing are improving.
[2:07:50] However, why are we rushing to close that off now?
[2:07:53] Why not just do it when we have that crosswalk for our West Side residents to use and then
[2:07:58] you can shut off the scramble.
[2:08:00] That's what the majority of council wants.
[2:08:05] For small things like this, I'm a big fan of just hitting the vote and let's move on
[2:08:09] because we got bigger fish to fry.
[2:08:11] We got North Point, Web Bridge, fixing up in there, so whatever happens there.
[2:08:16] But I would ask that we consider keeping the scramble until that crosswalk's finished,
[2:08:20] which Pete's doing a good job with that.
[2:08:25] But additionally on my bigger concerns, and I think where I was mostly frustrated on is
[2:08:33] the word from the Chief saying I was directed.
[2:08:38] And the liaisons, which have been our job as liaisons per our code, is to serve for
[2:08:47] information from those departments to City Council, but shall not direct the activities
[2:08:52] these are the department directors.
[2:08:54] And I think we need to work on that as a council.
[2:08:57] I mean, it's not an official there,
[2:08:58] but our liaison ships really need some help
[2:09:00] where we're supposed to be conduits and not directing.
[2:09:04] And there is, and since I guess it was an inferno,
[2:09:07] I was really trying to say, you know,
[2:09:08] I'll just stay quiet and be there.
[2:09:10] But when one of the sponsors writes to me and says,
[2:09:14] I thought it was sponsored by a past council member
[2:09:18] and he is not on my good list,
[2:09:23] the political gamesmanship's got to stop.
[2:09:25] So let's move on and make this vote on there,
[2:09:29] but I would hope maybe cooler heads can prevail to say,
[2:09:32] let's hold this off for 30 days
[2:09:33] and then we can disamble the scramble
[2:09:34] until the crosswalk.
[2:09:37] And that was my only intent to throw in all of brands,
[2:09:39] to say, I hear what y'all are saying,
[2:09:41] but please wait there.
[2:09:43] So I just hope, I know we can do better
[2:09:46] on liaison ships.
[2:09:48] That needs to get improved.
[2:09:49] And but we can we can get there and work together as a team
[2:09:54] Councilman hypes
[2:09:58] Thank You mr. Mayor, and I
[2:10:00] Wholeheartedly agree about you know looking forward looking backwards doesn't accomplish anything and you know what I wanted to say
[2:10:07] Is there's been a lot of discussion about pedestrian safety, and I look around the room and other than
[2:10:13] My fellow resident Daniel over here. I suspect I do more walking around downtown than anybody in this room
[2:10:20] Let's take my reputation on that.
[2:10:22] And I'm through that intersection quite a bit and occasionally on that rear instance
[2:10:28] while I'm in my car.
[2:10:30] And I do believe since pedestrian safety has come up, it's been presented as a false
[2:10:35] choice because we do provide to get our pedestrians across those intersections in a safe manner
[2:10:43] going with traffic like a traditional intersection.
[2:10:49] As a council member, trying to determine what's best for Alpharetta, I have to take into account
[2:10:56] what our staff says, and I put a lot of credence into anything that addresses safety from our
[2:11:02] staff and the chief.
[2:11:04] I have to take into account what I hear from the public, and I've heard from the public
[2:11:08] like prior to the issue coming up on the agenda, mostly negative comments is what I had heard
[2:11:16] about the scramble. And even now when it's been put out there on social media by some
[2:11:24] people, it's about, you know, 50-50 or maybe a little bit more negative toward the scramble
[2:11:30] than positive from what I have seen, but that's anecdotal. But lastly, I would be
[2:11:38] remiss if I did not rely upon what I see and experience.
[2:11:42] And what I see and experience is sitting in the left-hand turn lane at Canton, Turn Left
[2:11:48] on Roswell, and the cars behind me are backed up through the Highway 9 intersection.
[2:11:54] Now that's not somebody telling me that.
[2:11:57] That's something that I've experienced.
[2:11:59] And it was happening fairly regularly in August and into September.
[2:12:03] And meanwhile, while I'm sitting there waiting to turn left, one person is using the diagonal
[2:12:09] and four lanes of traffic trying to get someplace in the morning, you know, are stopped in all
[2:12:16] four directions while one person was using the diagonal.
[2:12:20] Now, I'm all about pedestrian safety, but I think the choice between safety or not
[2:12:26] safety is the false choice.
[2:12:28] I think it's a choice between safety and convenience.
[2:12:32] And the convenience of that one person using the diagonal, it was far greater in favor
[2:12:37] of that person than it was all the myriad of other people in all four directions trying
[2:12:44] to get some place at that moment in time.
[2:12:46] I will also tell you that when I have been stopped at Highway 9 to turn left on Academy
[2:12:57] Highway 9 from Academy Street, I was seeing the box, the intersection, blocked on a regular
[2:13:04] basis in morning traffic around 8 o'clock in the morning.
[2:13:07] And most of those cars blocking the traffic, we're trying to go northbound on Highway 9
[2:13:13] and turn left onto Milton Avenue like they're heading toward Innovation Academy.
[2:13:17] And I would submit to anybody who is getting ready to vote on this, their pedestrian
[2:13:23] safety is now becoming an issue.
[2:13:25] issue.
[2:13:26] We created convenience down there at Canton where the scramble was.
[2:13:31] We created convenience, I don't believe we enhanced safety, but we created a safety issue
[2:13:36] at Milton and Highway 9 with cars blocking the box.
[2:13:40] And once again, I would be remiss when this item is brought forward if I didn't take
[2:13:46] into account those things that I experience and can bring to the table as a council
[2:13:52] person being a downtown resident.
[2:13:54] So,
[2:13:57] you know, it's, I think we need to look forward and I think we just need to do and
[2:14:03] make the best decision we can for our residents.
[2:14:07] And so to that I want to echo Councilman Binder's statement.
[2:14:12] Councilman Mitchell.
[2:14:15] I would agree with Councilmember Hype's assertion that Highway 9 and people blocking
[2:14:21] the box.
[2:14:22] I know there's a way we can put up signs that say do not block the box and start ticketing
[2:14:28] those vehicles.
[2:14:32] But pedestrian deaths are up 51.5 percent since hitting a low of 4,109 in 2009.
[2:14:42] That's 51.5 percent according to GHSA.
[2:14:46] They now make up about 16% of all road deaths, up 12% in 2009, death on foot.
[2:14:55] More than 7,000 pedestrians were killed in our nation's roads and crashes and
[2:15:00] Involving a motor vehicle in 2020. That's about one death every 75 minutes. And there were also
[2:15:08] an estimated 104,000 emergency department visits and pedestrians treated for non-fatal crash-related
[2:15:17] injuries in 2020. So my whole thing is, if we want to change it and adjust the scramble
[2:15:25] so that perhaps like you had suggested one person was walking across where it has to
[2:15:30] be pressed twice before the scrambles activated, I'm good with that. But I'm not good with
[2:15:36] going backwards as a city and going backwards when we say our long range comprehensive land
[2:15:42] use plan for our downtown is to create a pedestrian friendly and the vehicular
[2:15:47] friendly downtown. And we've done that. We've gotten more density in the last
[2:15:52] 10 years. Consequently, as you just so eloquently said, ma'am, we've increased our pedestrian
[2:15:58] traffic exponentially. And thereby, there are misses and near misses of people on who almost
[2:16:07] had an accident or who have darted across our street. So pedestrian safety is a main
[2:16:13] factor for why I will not vote to remove this scramble, because scramble's whether
[2:16:19] whether you choose to admit it or not, they're suggested by national pedestrian experts who
[2:16:27] major in these areas. They are suggested as means to get traffic across busy intersections.
[2:16:35] So it's not just something that the previous council dreamed up. It's something that's
[2:16:39] real and it was something we did look at. Now, I think we need to do some pedestrian
[2:16:44] studies in our downtown. I think we really need to know whether or not how many people
[2:16:49] there versus how many people were there 10 years ago or even a year ago. It's
[2:16:54] increased even a year. Our bicycle traffic has increased in our downtown
[2:16:59] area and we really don't know those studies and quite frankly to me a
[2:17:05] public safety department, our main concern should not only be automobiles
[2:17:10] but it should be pedestrian safety as well because that's what our city is
[2:17:14] all about now. It's what every mixed use development area of our city is
[2:17:19] about is about making people, allowing them to walk around without being hit or injured
[2:17:24] or killed. And so I can't support this tonight. I think it's a ridiculous thing to go back
[2:17:29] and spend $30,000 after we spent $100,000 implementing it just a year ago. It's a bad
[2:17:37] use of funds and it's a retaliatory political thing, if you ask me. Thank you.
[2:17:46] Any other comments?
[2:17:48] Councilman Dorito?
[2:17:49] Let me start out apologizing publicly to Councilman Mitchell and Binder.
[2:17:55] I wasn't intended on, you know, attacking you on my comments.
[2:17:59] It wasn't intended.
[2:18:00] I was just emotionally concerned about our directors, at least my perception.
[2:18:09] I won't suggest what you were attempting to do.
[2:18:12] but, you know, being the so-called punching bag to the issue that we're discussing tonight.
[2:18:19] Let's all be honest and be very transparent.
[2:18:22] This issue happened before Councilman Will and I got on the City Council, and it was
[2:18:28] very political.
[2:18:29] In fact, all the time I spent researching public discussions on before the scramble
[2:18:35] was approved and the money was appropriated, that by the way, from at least what I've
[2:18:39] read from minutes and things that there was no appropriation in the budget for a scramble
[2:18:46] that the money was allocated at the time. And there's very little discussion on it by those
[2:18:52] who sponsored it. I'm not suggesting that their intentions are bad. I think we're all
[2:18:57] here to improve pedestrian safety and traffic safety whenever we can. And Councilman Mitchell
[2:19:04] right, I mean, we've seen a dramatic increase in the activities of downtown
[2:19:09] Alpharetta, and on top of that, while we talk about traffic safety and pedestrian
[2:19:14] safety, this council and our retreat of your call and subsequent to that, which
[2:19:19] Chief Roberson has discussed, just public safety in the city center areas
[2:19:23] as far as beefing up our police presence and making sure that we
[2:19:27] maintain a very safe environment all around. With that said, I got to be
[2:19:33] To be honest with you, I struggle with this.
[2:19:35] I struggle with this because first of all, I wasn't here to create the political football in the last council that led us to this discussion tonight.
[2:19:46] I don't think, by the way, Chief Oberson was directed.
[2:19:50] He was probably requested to take a look at it.
[2:19:54] I've had multiple discussions with our public works director on it.
[2:19:58] You know, they're here answering our questions and it would have been nice if a traffic study
[2:20:05] was done as part of the consideration for implementing a scramble anywhere in the city
[2:20:10] or a pedestrian study to support the investment of a little over $103,000 of taxpayer funding.
[2:20:18] I even asked Pete today, you know, for the $27,000 and change whatever the exact
[2:20:22] amount is in the agenda tonight. To remove the scramble, you know, it seems to me if
[2:20:30] you remove the striping and you turn off the switches, it could be a lot cheaper, but he
[2:20:35] provided a full explanation of why it would cost that much, which made a lot of sense
[2:20:39] from an aesthetically pleasing standpoint. To remove those stripes from the street,
[2:20:43] it's a lot bigger project than it looks. You can't just cover up the yellow walkways
[2:20:47] in that sort of thing. So I've done a lot of, I spent a lot of time on this issue. I knew
[2:20:54] it was going to become political tonight. Not because I wanted it to be or anybody wanted
[2:20:58] it to be. It's just there's a lot of heat on this discussion even when it happened
[2:21:02] in the last council.
[2:21:06] I, you know, looked at the walkability study from 2018. Yeah,
[2:21:10] a lot of things have changed. And maybe the good thing that will come out of this
[2:21:13] discussion tonight is as Councilor Mitchell already suggests is maybe we do do a current
[2:21:20] study of pedestrian safety and traffic safety in the downtown area or other parts of the
[2:21:25] city where we see a high growth level and an impact on current safety standards that
[2:21:32] we have around the city.
[2:21:36] I just think that and my personal experience and I'm going
[2:21:40] to take it down to that because I do go down the city center on weekends with my wife and
[2:21:45] sometimes my kids when they're in town and friends and family.
[2:21:51] Every time we go through
[2:21:52] that scramble there's a lot of confusion by people. And to me that's a pedestrian safety
[2:21:58] concern because people are not used to a scramble. And typically scramble is from at least
[2:22:03] my research and I think the only one in the region is Georgia Tech. I have thousands
[2:22:07] thousands of students crossing it on that intersection.
[2:22:10] And I think it's a timed intersection.
[2:22:12] I don't think you hit buttons and turn on the scramble to turn off the scramble.
[2:22:15] And so there's a little bit better safety precautions given to how that scramble operates for,
[2:22:22] you might have 30 students on each corner trying to cross it between classes or what have you.
[2:22:28] We have a different situation down here where you don't have that type of value unless you have the blue moon or
[2:22:34] some big event going on in city center,
[2:22:36] where you have 30 people in each corner trying to cross.
[2:22:41] And I think the confusion of hitting the buttons
[2:22:42] and which button and which way to go,
[2:22:44] I've seen a lot of people confused.
[2:22:46] And that itself is a pedestrian safety issue in my mind.
[2:22:50] And so I wanna leave with this thought.
[2:22:54] Removing the scramble does not remove pedestrian safety
[2:22:57] at that intersection.
[2:22:58] In fact, I think it will enhance it
[2:23:01] and by bringing it back to a what I'll call normal intersection where the lights will change
[2:23:06] and people will cross with the right signage and all that stuff.
[2:23:10] And we eliminate the turns that Pete spoke about earlier to kind of just provide some
[2:23:19] consistent traffic though there but also safely for the people who are trying to cross that
[2:23:23] intersection.
[2:23:24] And for that reason that's why I believe it's the right thing to move forward and
[2:23:28] and change this intersection to, you know,
[2:23:31] basically bring it back to an intersection
[2:23:33] that people can understand.
[2:23:34] And the low value that we have of what typically hits
[2:23:38] a scramble around the country in Alpharetta,
[2:23:42] it actually will enhance the safety of that intersection.
[2:23:45] And that's the conclusion I'm coming to.
[2:23:50] Any other discussion?
[2:23:52] Councilman Buyer, do you have a question?
[2:23:54] Question, I asked and it kind of floated,
[2:23:57] but after making my comments,
[2:23:59] Is there any interest to executing this today, but holding it until Pete's crosswalk is completed in November at the end of November?
[2:24:11] Can I comment on the question?
[2:24:13] Yeah, I mean, if you want to make comments, there's your opportunity.
[2:24:15] My understanding is it's not even operating right now, correct? It hasn't been operating.
[2:24:26] Yes, no, I understood that. I was asking to put it back on until it got back on November. Sorry, sir.
[2:24:30] All cars on the table, it is not operating now.
[2:24:34] However, we did notice that the light went in flash
[2:24:36] about two weeks ago when we checked our records
[2:24:38] and when we reset the signal, unfortunately,
[2:24:41] yes, the scramble was not working.
[2:24:43] However, when someone did push the yellow call button,
[2:24:48] the two perpendicular pellet tracks,
[2:24:52] the white lines were actually holding still.
[2:24:56] So in other words, it was working as a scramble,
[2:24:59] unfortunately, there was no countdowns for diagonal.
[2:25:03] So all the traffic was stopped for a little bit.
[2:25:05] So we caught the air, reprogrammed everything.
[2:25:10] What happened is we went back to factory setting.
[2:25:12] So we had to reset everything again.
[2:25:14] So it is not operational now, that is for sure.
[2:25:17] The one thing I had to air on caution,
[2:25:20] Councilman Binder, is they're gonna be doing
[2:25:22] milling resurfacing.
[2:25:24] So when we fin, I can't finish this,
[2:25:28] the mid-block crosswalk and keep the scramble open because milling or sourcing operations
[2:25:36] are going to remove the scramble crosswalk. At the same time, we're finalizing the mid-block
[2:25:42] crosswalk.
[2:25:49] Thank you, sir.
[2:25:55] Any other comments? I'll
[2:25:58] just make a couple. One is to Councilman Dorito's point, you know, several years
[2:26:04] ago I was in Nashville and I actually remember saying, well, maybe a scramble could work.
[2:26:10] But there's ways we typically go about making investments with the public's money. And typically
[2:26:20] we know that if we're spending $100,000, we've got some data or some experience or
[2:26:30] recommendation from staff to rely on and none of that took place. I share
[2:26:35] Councilman Mitchell's frustration. It annoys me to no end that we're sitting here
[2:26:40] talking about spending more money to fix something that we never ever studied to
[2:26:47] see if it was going to have the wanted impact. And I'm disappointed on that. I
[2:26:52] trust Pete, I trust John Robinson, despite what anybody thinks, we have
[2:26:58] have the best safety record of pedestrian safety of any of the cities around us. And yes, do
[2:27:06] we need to improve? Yes, we do. And have we? Yes, we have. We spent millions of dollars
[2:27:12] on pedestrian safety downtown. And to the nice woman who was talking about downtown,
[2:27:20] it is a shame sometimes that when zoning decisions were made, that pedestrian safety
[2:27:26] he wasn't taken into consideration and traffic, quite frankly, at those times.
[2:27:30] And I share your frustration with some of that as the only person who voted against that
[2:27:36] hotel, not because it wasn't great and it wasn't good for the economy and it's been
[2:27:41] great for downtown economically, but the traffic patterns it created has been tremendously
[2:27:46] problematic.
[2:27:48] And that was foreseeable, but it's there now and it's going to remain there.
[2:27:52] So we have to do the best we can to keep people safe in that built environment now.
[2:27:58] So I do support it.
[2:28:03] That being said, the motion was to approve the Milton Avenue County Street pedestrian scramble approval to disable.
[2:28:14] All those in favor, please vote yes, otherwise vote accordingly.
[2:28:20] And it does pass, 5-2.
[2:28:22] that wrap up that part of the new business and we'll move on to the
[2:28:27] Intergovernmental Agreement Alfredo jail facility and operations director
[2:28:34] Robinson you have the floor okay that's fine he's taking enough air I'm sure
[2:28:43] y'all will have questions for him but so as you all know we have the Alfredo
[2:28:48] jail facility which Fulton County had been or the Fulton County Sheriff had
[2:28:53] been operating I think until 2019 and it's been out of commission since then this
[2:28:57] IGA with Fulton County is intended to get it back up and running and so I think
[2:29:02] that Fulton County is already working on the jail itself but this agreement
[2:29:07] provides our city with basically relief for our officers so that when they
[2:29:13] find someone and they need to book them it's more convenient it's located
[2:29:17] here it's quicker turnaround because the sheriff's office is handling it in
[2:29:22] city so our officers can get back out on the street. It gives the city a minimum of or at
[2:29:29] all times 20 spaces for alpharetta inmates specifically. So the jail is going to be operated
[2:29:38] fully by the Fulton County Sheriff. We would pay booking fees for our individual alpharetta
[2:29:45] inmates, be responsible for utilities which was I think the same as it was with the
[2:29:50] prior agreement, though we do not currently have any other agreements in place.
[2:29:56] We are going to be, and I think you'll have actually already approved a conflict resolution.
[2:30:00] We have a motion for our office to work on agreements with other North Fulton municipalities
[2:30:05] so that they can also utilize the jail. So that might actually offset some of those costs.
[2:30:10] So I think there was, let me see what the actual cost is. It's, yeah, it's $60 a day for a
[2:30:19] booking fee after they've spent their four hours in the jail facility and then the
[2:30:26] costs for utilities, but the cost for utilities could be offset with additional agreements depending on if you know Milton or
[2:30:34] John's Creek or anybody else wants to use it
[2:30:36] And those separate agreements which would come to you at a different date would provide for them to have
[2:30:41] Allocated spaces as well
[2:30:43] But ultimately this is intended to provide some relief to to our public safety department and have the jail operational again
[2:30:52] Any questions from my last line on this?
[2:30:56] Councilman will have
[2:31:00] we implemented the additional fees on tickets in court cases yet so that
[2:31:05] we can cover costs so
[2:31:10] that will be the next step that yes apparently that will be the
[2:31:14] next step apparently was not the answer I'm looking I can go ahead take a shot of that
[2:31:18] yes yes we will but the precursor to doing that is to have this idea in place until
[2:31:23] you all vote on this idea there was nothing for us to do to start that process but if
[2:31:27] If you approve this tonight, then the answer to your questions, yes.
[2:31:30] Thank you.
[2:31:33] Any other questions for staff on this item?
[2:31:38] Thank you, gentlemen.
[2:31:40] Mr. Shapiro, do we have any public comment cards?
[2:31:43] We do not, Mr. Mayor.
[2:31:44] However, if anyone would like to come forward and speak on the JLIGA, how's your chance
[2:31:48] to do so?
[2:31:50] Seeing no one, we'll close the public comment to have a motion by Council.
[2:31:58] Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to approve an intergovernmental agreement by and between
[2:32:01] the City of Alpharetta, Georgia and Fulton County Sheriff's Office and Fulton County,
[2:32:04] Georgia to board and provide for the housing of inmates at the Alpharetta County jail, Alpharetta
[2:32:10] jail, sorry.
[2:32:11] I'll second that.
[2:32:12] The longer version.
[2:32:14] That would be third.
[2:32:16] So we do have a motion by Councilman Will, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Merkle, and that
[2:32:20] was to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement, Alpharetta Jail Facility and Operations
[2:32:24] as outlined by Councilman Will.
[2:32:27] All those in favor please vote yes otherwise vote accordingly councilman
[2:32:36] will and it does pass unanimously
[2:32:41] So that wrap up new business portion of tonight's meeting
[2:32:46] Now there's an opportunity for public comment if anyone might come forward at this time
[2:32:52] Seeing none will close public comment
[2:32:56] any reports
[2:32:59] Councilman Mitchell. I'd like to wish all of our South Asian residents, which
[2:33:04] comprise about 13 percent of our population, our largest minority group,
[2:33:08] happy Diwali that is today and wish them the best and bringing light into the
[2:33:14] world.
[2:33:17] Any other reports? Mr. Mayor, if I may, I'd like to give a report on our
[2:33:22] election season. Thank you for asking. I would love to hear that. Wonderful. So
[2:33:27] So as you all may know, it is election season.
[2:33:30] Early voting began earlier this month and will go until November 4th.
[2:33:35] So our local early voting location is the Alfreda Library just right next door.
[2:33:40] As a friendly reminder, early voting is on the upper floor of the library, so the lower
[2:33:45] floors are locked when the library is not typically open.
[2:33:49] But earlier this spring, we did start some poll worker training within the City of
[2:33:55] Alpharetta hosted right here in City Hall and our turnout was okay it could
[2:34:00] have been better so we had about two days of poll worker training but I'm
[2:34:03] happy to report that we have had an incredible turnout for this season's
[2:34:09] poll worker training so that's where we coordinate four days on our schedule
[2:34:15] this year to offer classes two classes a day to our poll workers in our city
[2:34:21] also in residence in North Fulton.
[2:34:24] So each class allows about 25 citizens to participate in the poll worker training sessions.
[2:34:32] And we had several days that the poll worker classes were completely full.
[2:34:36] So we had never experienced that in town before.
[2:34:38] So just wanted to say a big thank you to everyone in our community that's participating
[2:34:43] in our local election for this season.
[2:34:46] And we're also going to be coordinating additional days.
[2:34:49] It's one of the greater turnouts that they've had in Fulton County for pole worker training.
[2:34:54] So we look forward to getting to hosting next time we have it.
[2:34:59] Great job Lauren.
[2:35:00] She was telling me about that the other day and I thought I would like for you to share
[2:35:05] that with the public and with the rest of council because you've done a tremendous
[2:35:08] job and an issue that was very pointed a couple of years ago and while it's still
[2:35:13] as critical, Alpharetta has been the most proactive community I've seen in North
[2:35:18] and so I appreciate it. Well thank you Mr. Mayor. You're welcome.
[2:35:25] We have no
[2:35:26] executive session necessary tonight.
[2:35:30] Have a motion to adjourn?
[2:35:35] We have a motion by
[2:35:37] Councilman Binder, a second by Councilman Mitchell, all those in favor of
[2:35:42] adjourning please vote yes. Thank you ladies and gentlemen.