[00:00:01]
          I'LL CALL TO ORDER. THIS IS THE 
          [1. Call to Order ]
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING WORK SESSION FOR AUGUST THE 13TH, AND THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. 
          MAYOR BRIAN MOCK. 
          HERE. 
          MAYOR PRO TEM PAUL STOVALL. 
          HERE. 
          PAUL STOVALL. 
          COUNCILMEMBER JIMMY FURST. 
          PRESENT. 
          COUNCILMEMBER JOHN MESA. 
          HERE. 
          COUNCILMEMBER LESLIE ROBSON. 
          HERE. 
          COUNCILMEMBER ELMER VEITH. 
          HELLO. 
          SOMEBODY HAD THEIR EXTRA CUP OF COFFEE. 
          HE ALSO SAID GOOD MORNING WHEN HE WALKED IN. ALL RIGHT, IF SOMEBODY WILL APPROVE THE AGENDA FOR ME. 
          MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. 
          SECOND. 
          MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 
          [2. Announcements and Presentations ]
THIS EVENING. WE'LL HAVE SOME FOR YOU ON TUESDAY. WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO PUBLIC HEARINGS. 
          [3. Public Hearings]
ALL RIGHT, YOU GUYS ARE IN FOR A TREAT THIS EVENING. THIS IS OUR NEW FORMAT OF DOING PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE NORMALLY GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS ALTOGETHER, AND THEN LATER IN THE AGENDA WE WOULD HAVE COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS, AND IT MADE PEOPLE STICK AROUND FOR MAYBE THINGS THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT. SO, WE ARE WE'RE GOING TO DO THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT STARTING TONIGHT. WE WILL GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ONE BY ONE. I'LL READ THE RULES OF ORDER IN JUST A MINUTE, BUT BASICALLY, YOU'LL HAVE TIME TO COME UP AND TALK TO US, AND THEN COUNCIL WILL GO IMMEDIATELY INTO THE QUESTIONS OR IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU, AND THEN THAT ITEM WILL BE MOVED OFF. THE AGENDA, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO STICK AROUND. IT WON'T COME BACK UP LATER IN THE AGENDA LIKE IT NORMALLY DOES. WE HAVE A NEW TIME CLOCK THIS EVENING. 
          THIS IS A NEW ADDITION TO OUR DAIS HERE, AND I GUESS IT'S GOING TO MAKE A NOISE FOR YOU TO LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOU GET STARTED, AND THEN IT WILL MAKE A NOISE FOR YOU TO LET YOU KNOW IS THAT RIGHT? WHENEVER YOUR TIME IS UP. 
          WHAT DOES THAT NOISE SOUND LIKE? IT SOUNDS LIKE RING, RING. 
          THAT'S NOT TOO BAD. 
          IT SOUNDS LIKE OUR ALARM CLOCK WHEN I WAKE UP. 
          THAT'S NOT TOO BAD. WE WERE TALKING EARLIER SUGGESTING A TRAIN HORN. BUT ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON DOWN TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING. I WILL READ THE RULES OF ORDER FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ZONING MATTERS. THE HEARING SHALL BE PRESIDED OVER BY THE MAYOR. 
          AFTER CALLING THE HEARING TO ORDER, THE MAYOR SHALL REQUEST THE PARCELS OF PROPERTY WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO THE ZONING PROPOSAL BE IDENTIFIED AND READ. FOLLOWING SUCH IDENTIFICATION AND READING, THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION SHALL BE PRESENTED. THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SHALL CAUSE THE DIRECTOR'S WRITTEN RECOMMENDATION TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD. PROPONENTS OF EACH PROPOSED ZONING DECISION SHALL THEN BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF 10 MINUTES FOR PRESENTATION OF DATA, EVIDENCE, AND OPINION CONCERNING THE ZONING DECISION. 
          IF ALL 10 MINUTES ARE NOT USED, THE PROPONENT'S REMAINING TIME MAY BE RESERVED FOR REBUTTAL. 
          OPPONENTS OF EACH PROPOSED ZONING DECISION SHALL THEN BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF 10 MINUTES FOR PRESENTATION OF DATA, EVIDENCE, AND OPINION CONCERNING EACH ZONING DECISION. THE PRESENTATION TIMES MAY NOT BE REDUCED BUT MAY BE EXTENDED BY MAJORITY VOTE, PROVIDED THEY ARE EXPANDED EQUALLY FOR PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS. 
          ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK SHALL COME TO THE MICROPHONE. GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS TO THE CITY CLERK, AND PLEASE DO NOT SPEAK UNLESS YOU HAVE THE MICROPHONE AND HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED. AND WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP THIS EVENING. 
          THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS 1983 L1 DRIVE. 
          EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          MATT ADAMS, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF CHAMBLEE. THIS IS PZ 2026-17. 1830 FOR 1983 ELWYN DRIVE. THIS IS A 0.29-ACRE LOT ZONED NR-1. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 7.5 FEET TO 4.3 FEET. SO, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE SITE CONSISTS OF A 0.27 0.27-ACRE LOT WITH FRONTAGE ON ELWYN DRIVE. IT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE HUNTLEY HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT 1 MILE NORTHWEST OF CHAMBLEE CITY HALL. SO, HERE YOU CAN SEE THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND THE LOCATION OF A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED 2-STORY DECK. I WOULD NOTE THAT THIS IS REPLACING A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING 2-STORY DECK. THEY DECIDED TO REPLACE THAT, AND THE SECOND STORY IS NOW A PORCH. SO, IT IS NOW A 2-STORY PORCH. I APOLOGIZE. SO, AFTER STAFF REVIEWED THE PLANS, WE NOTED THAT THE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING DECK AND THE CURRENTLY 
          [00:05:06]
EXISTING DECK WERE 4 FEET 3 INCHES FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS MUCH LESS THAN 7.5 FEET. AND HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT REFLECTED ON THE SITE PLAN. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE BUILDING IS SITUATED ON THE LOT SUCH THAT IT LIMITS THE AVAILABLE SPACE FOR AN OTHERWISE COMPLIANT DECK OR PORCH TO BE PLACED. 
          ADDITIONALLY, THE HOME WAS BUILT CLOSER TO THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE THAN CHAMBLEE'S CURRENT UDO WOULD REQUIRE. BECAUSE OF THIS, STAFF FINDS THAT A HARDSHIP IS PRESENT AND IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE. 
          ALL RIGHT, ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM, COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND TELL US WHAT YOU WANT TO TELL US. 
          ELWYN DRIVE. 
          OH, NO, GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD. 
          I WAS THINKING IT WAS OUTSIDE. 
          WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN GET APPROVAL FOR THIS. WE HONESTLY THOUGHT THAT TAKING A GREAT BIG, HUGELY UNSAFE DECK DOWN TO A SMALLER ONE. EVEN THOUGH THAT LOOKS BIG, IT IS SMALLER THAN THE OTHER ONE WAS. WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING, AND WE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE WERE EVEN IN VIOLATION OF THE 7.5 PROPERTY SETBACK WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING AT ALL BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS ONLY 4 FOOT 1. SO, WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WITH THE HARDSHIP OF BEING ABLE TO EXPAND IT AT ALL THAT YOU WILL SEE FIT TO THINK THAT THAT IS SATISFACTORY. ANYTHING, SIR? OKAY. MORAL SUPPORT. WE ALL GOT TO HAVE IT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? YOU CAN BE SEATED. YOU CAN BE SEATED. 
          YEAH. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? TO THIS ITEM. ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE OUT THAT PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL OPEN THIS UP TO COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? COMMENTS? WELL, I WILL MAKE A COMMENT BECAUSE I DID GO OUT AND TOUR THE SITE, AND OBVIOUSLY THIS WAS A PREEXISTING CONDITION, AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BETWEEN THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE THAT'S REALLY FAR AWAY AND THIS HOUSE IS HUGE. SO, IT IS NOT GOING TO HURT THE ABILITY TO PASS THROUGH OR WHATEVER THAT IS NECESSARY TO WHY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. AND IT'S THE DECK IS QUITE APPROPRIATE. 
          OKAY. 
          ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM COUNCIL, WE'LL MOVE INTO THE NEXT ITEM, AND THAT IS, 3669 NORTH PEACHTREE ROAD. 
          EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          PZ-2026-1735, 3669 NORTH PEACHTREE ROAD. THIS IS A WAIVER REQUESTING 3 ITEMS. ONE, TO REDUCE THE LANDSCAPE ZONE FROM 5 FEET TO 0 FEET ALONG THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE ABUTTING CLEMSON DRIVE, TO REDUCE THE SIDEWALK CLEAR ZONE FROM 5 FEET TO 0 FEET ALONG CLEMSON DRIVE, AND TO REDUCE THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE FROM A RANGE OF 5 TO 10 FEET TO 0 FEET ALONG THE FRONTAGE ABUTTING CLEMSON DRIVE. SO, HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. IT IS AT THE CORNER OF NORTH PEACHTREE AND CLEMSON DRIVE. 
          THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS. THE CURRENT SCOPE OF WORK TRIGGERED THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS AS THE COST OF THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED WORK IS 33% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE. 
          ADDITIONALLY, PREVIOUS WORK THAT WAS PERFORMED UNDER A PERMIT ISSUED IN THE LAST 36 MONTHS WAS VALUED AT 22% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE. 
          THEREFORE, THE CUMULATIVE REDEVELOPMENT VALUE FOR THE PROJECT IS 55% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE. 
          BECAUSE OF THIS, THE PROPERTY IS REQUIRED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AS IT RELATES TO STREETSCAPES. STAFF WAS ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THE PROPERTY QUALIFIES FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE DUE TO ITS AGE AND THE NATURE OF THE WORK. THIS MEANS THAT THE EXISTING STREETSCAPE FACILITIES ALONG PEACHTREE ROAD CAN REMAIN. HOWEVER, AS THERE ARE NO STREETSCAPE FACILITIES, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, ALONG CLEMSON DRIVE, THE UDO WOULD REQUIRE NEW ONES TO BE CONSTRUCTED MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE OVERALL SITE PLAN SHOWING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE STREETSCAPES. THE STREETSCAPE SUBJECT TO THE ADAPTIVE REUSE STANDARDS IS LABELED IN GREEN. AND THE 
          [00:10:02]
STREETSCAPE AREA THAT'S SUBJECT TO THE WAIVERS TODAY IS IN ORANGE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS SITE WAS CONSTRUCTED SUCH THAT SEVERAL OF THE EXISTING PARKING SPACES ALONG CLEMSON DRIVE ACTUALLY ENCROACH INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. 
          UNDER TYPICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, STAFF WOULD VIEW THIS AS A HARDSHIP BASED ON EXISTING CONDITIONS. 
          HOWEVER, THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS WOULD REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF STREETSCAPE REGARDLESS OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. SO, THEREFORE, AS THERE ARE NO BUILDINGS PRESENT THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HINDER STREETSCAPE FROM BEING INSTALLED AND IN THIS CASE, IT'S JUST PAVEMENT STAFF WOULD HAVE TO NOT SUPPORT THE WAIVER REQUESTS. SO, BECAUSE OF THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF WAIVERS 1 AND 2. HOWEVER, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF WAIVERS 3. THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE REQUIREMENT ON CLEMSON DRIVE WOULD NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT TYPE OF FEATURE AND WHAT IT'S TRYING TO ACHIEVE, WHICH IS NAMELY A PEDESTRIAN TRANSITION BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING ON DENSE URBAN AREAS. IT'S NEITHER IN AN AREA THAT IS THAT DENSE, NOR IS IT THE APPROPRIATE AREA FOR THAT TO GO. SO, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THAT WAIVER. AND AS A CONDITION, SHOULD COUNCIL CONSIDER APPROVING ALL 3 OF THE WAIVERS, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE INCLUSION OF A CLARIFICATION THAT THESE WAIVERS ARE APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE PERMITS THAT TRIGGERED THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS AND WOULDN'T CARRY FORWARD FOR FUTURE APPLICATIONS. 
          THANK YOU, MATT. SO, ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? COME ON UP. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND HOW YOU'RE RELATED TO THE PROJECT. 
          HELLO, I'M ANDREW KOKABI. I LIVE AT 3500 HILLSTONE COURT, BROOKHAVEN, GEORGIA 30319. 
          THANK YOU FOR GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I AM THE OWNER OF BOTH BROOKHAVEN FAMILY DENTISTRY AND THE BUILDING AT 3669 NORTH PEACHTREE ROAD. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT OUR WAIVER REQUEST. I WANT TO BEGIN BY SAYING THAT I UNDERSTAND AND SUPPORT THE CITY'S GOAL OF IMPROVING CHAMBLEE'S WALKABILITY, PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE, AND STREETSCAPE OVER TIME. I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS CODE EXISTS. AS A GENERAL RULE, IT MAKES SENSE WHEN PROPERTIES ARE REDEVELOPED REQUIRING SIDEWALKS, LANDSCAPING, AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS CAN GRADUALLY CREATE A MORE CONNECTED AND WALKABLE CITY. 
          AND THAT IS DEFINITELY A GOOD THING. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IS EXACTLY WHY THE CITY HAS A WAIVER PROCESS. BECAUSE A RULE CAN MAKE PERFECT SENSE ON PAPER AND STILL PRODUCE AN UNREASONABLE RESULT WHEN IT IS APPLIED TO A PROPERTY WITH UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES. 
          AND I BELIEVE THIS PROPERTY FALLS INTO THAT CATEGORY. THE QUESTION I'M ASKING COUNCIL TONIGHT IS NOT WHETHER SIDEWALKS AND LANDSCAPING ARE GOOD THINGS, BECAUSE THEY ARE. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER REQUIRING IT ON THIS PARTICULAR STREET, ON THIS PARTICULAR PORTION OF CLEMSON DRIVE, ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHES WHAT THE ORDINANCE IS INTENDED TO ACCOMPLISH. 
          IN OUR CASE, THE REQUIREMENT WAS TRIGGERED PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE VALUE OF THE INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO AN EXISTING BUILDING. WE ARE NOT CONSTRUCTING A NEW BUILDING ALONG CLEMSON. DRIVE. WE ARE NOT EXPANDING THE BUILDING ANY. 
          WE ARE IMPROVING JUST THE INSIDE OF THE BUILDING. AND THE CUMULATIVE VALUE OF THAT WORK CROSSED THE CITY'S REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLD. 
          HERE, REQUIRING THIS STREETSCAPE WOULD LIKELY REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF 4 EXISTING TREES, AS THE STAFF REPORT SAYS, 3 OF THESE TREES BEING SPECIMEN TREES. THE CITY'S OWN STAFF REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THOSE TREES WOULD LIKELY NEED TO BE CUT DOWN AND THAT DOING SO WOULD REDUCE THE EXISTING CANOPY ON THE PROPERTY. SO, IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE REMOVING MATURE, SIGNIFICANT TREES IN ORDER TO INSTALL A LANDSCAPE ZONE AND SIDEWALK. I ACTUALLY DID NOT KNOW WHAT SPECIMEN TREE MEANT, SO I LOOKED IT UP. AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT MEANS A SPECIMEN TREE IS MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN AN ORDINARY TREE BECAUSE IT MEETS CRITERIA THAT GIVE IT SPECIAL RECOGNITION AND PROTECTION. 
          TYPICALLY BASED ON THINGS LIKE SPECIES, SIZE, AGE, CONDITION, OR ECOLOGIC AND LANDSCAPE VALUE. YOU CAN'T JUST PLANT ANOTHER TREE AND HAVE IT GROW AND BE LIKE THESE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN GROWING FOR DECADES. I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU MY POWERPOINT NOW. 
          LOTS OF TREES WOULD HAVE TO BE CUT DOWN. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE UP THE STREET FROM ME OF WHERE STREETSCAPE WAS INSTALLED. THAT GOES TO 128 INCHES. I TOOK THAT SAME 128 INCHES HERE. THAT BIG TREE WOULD HAVE TO BE CUT, AS WELL AS THOSE 2 PLUS 1 THAT IS NOT VISIBLE IN THIS PICTURE. SO, THAT IS A MAJOR NEGATIVE. AND I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO THAT IN JUST A SECOND. THE CITY ZONE REPORT REFERS TO ITS TRAILS AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION GOALS. I SUPPORT THOSE GOALS. 
          BUT THE PLANNED TRAIL IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY'S PLAN IS ALONG NORTH PEACHTREE ROAD, NOT CLEMSON DRIVE. 
          [00:15:04]
SO HERE'S AN OVERALL PICTURE OF THE TRAIL NETWORK THAT IS PROPOSED. HERE IS A BLOW-UP, AND THIS IS NORTH PEACHTREE ROAD AND THIS IS CLEMSON DRIVE. SO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS STRETCH HERE, WHICH IT TOUCHES NORTH PEACHTREE ROAD, BUT IT IS NOT PART OF THE TRAIL NETWORK. AND WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING THINGS TO IMPROVE THIS STRETCH THAT THIS PROPOSED TRAIL IS ON. ON NORTH REACH TREE ROAD, WE ARE PARTICIPATING IN THOSE GOALS. 
          THERE'S ALREADY A SIDEWALK THERE, AND WE ARE REPAIRING THAT SIDEWALK. WE HAVE ALREADY ADDED $30,000 WORTH OF LANDSCAPING AND ARE STILL WORKING ON IT. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE ARE CONSTRUCTING A PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED PATIO AND BENCHES LOCATED EXACTLY HERE. 
          MY MOUSE SHOWS, WHICH IT DOES NOT. SO, RIGHT, PRETTY MUCH IT'S LOCATED RIGHT UNDER THE TREES THAT NEED TO BE CUT. THIS IS A LOCATION WHERE OUR IMPROVEMENTS, THE BENCHES AND THE PATIO WE ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING, ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO IMPROVE AND CONTRIBUTE TO AN EXISTING AND PLANNED PEDESTRIAN NETWORK. IN MY OPINION, CUTTING THESE TREES DOWN WILL WORSEN THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE BECAUSE THEY WILL NO LONGER HAVE A NICE CANOPY OF SHADE TO SIT UNDER. SO, I THINK PERHAPS IT WILL DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD TO CUT THESE TREES DOWN FOR THE LONG-TERM PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE, BECAUSE WHEN PEOPLE ARE WALKING AND THEY WANT TO TAKE A BREAK, THEY, I'M SURE, WOULD RATHER BE SITTING UNDER SOME NICE BEAUTIFUL SHADED TREES INSTEAD OF THE SUNSHINE. CLEMSON DRIVE IS DIFFERENT THAN NORTH PEACHTREE. THE REQUIRED SIDEWALK ALONG OUR IF WE WERE TO BUILD SIDEWALK ALONG OUR CLEMSON DRIVE FRONTAGE, IT WOULD FIRST OF ALL BE A VERY SHORT SEGMENT. 
          AND ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF MY MOUSE SHOWS OR NOT. I DON'T THINK IT DOES. BUT IT'S JUST THAT LITTLE STRETCH WHERE THE C IS IN CLEMSON OVER THERE. IT DOES NOT COMPLETE AN EXISTING CONTINUOUS SIDEWALK SYSTEM ALONG CLEMSON. IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE AN ISOLATED PIECE OF STREETSCAPE ALONG ONE PROPERTY. AND THAT IS WHERE I THINK THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE LETTER OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THE LAW AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUIREMENT BECOMES IMPORTANT. ON PAPER, WE CAN INSTALL A SIDEWALK AND STREETSCAPE AND SAY THAT THE REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN SATISFIED, HENCE THINGS ARE BETTER. BUT IF THAT SIDEWALK DOES NOT MEANINGFULLY CONNECT PEOPLE ANYWHERE, AND CONSTRUCTING IT REQUIRES REMOVING SPECIMEN TREES, THEN I RESPECTFULLY QUESTION WHETHER WE HAVE ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE. 
          CLEMSON DRIVE IS NOT A PEDESTRIAN STREET OR A PUBLIC PATH. IT LET'S GO BACK HERE. IT HAS MY OFFICE, THEN THERE'S A MECHANIC SHOP. 
          ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY OFFICE AND THE MECHANIC SHOP IS A BIG PLACE WHERE CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS AND EQUIPMENT IS HELD. 
          THEN ACROSS FROM THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES DOWN TO A BIG GATE FOR THE CDC OFFICES. THE CDC HAS A SECURITY GUARD THERE AND HAS A GATE. THAT GIVES ME AN IMPRESSION THEY PROBABLY DO NOT WANT PEDESTRIANS WALKING BY THAT AREA. FURTHER DOWN, THERE'S SOME LANDSCAPING COMPANIES AND SUCH. SO, IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S COFFEE SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS. 
          IN MY OPINION, THIS IS NOT A PEDESTRIAN STREET OR A PUBLIC PATH STREET. IN FACT, THE STAFF REPORT ITSELF MAKES AN IMPORTANT FINDING. STAFF STATES THAT ALTHOUGH IT BELIEVES THE SIDEWALK SUPPORTS THE CITY'S BROADER GOALS, NOT INSTALLING THE SIDEWALK OR STREETSCAPE WOULD NOT RESULT IN HARM TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY OR ITS CITIZENS. 
          SO, WAIVER 1 OR 2 WOULD NOT HARM ANYONE. WE ARE ALSO NOT ASKING TO DO NOTHING WITH THE PROPERTY. AS I SAID EARLIER, WE ARE GOING TO BE INVESTING A LOT OF MONEY ON THE LANDSCAPING, WHICH IS LOOKING MUCH BETTER NOW THAN IT DID A COUPLE YEARS AGO, AND WHICH IS BEFORE I OWNED THE BUILDING. 
          AND AS I SAID, MOST IMPORTANTLY, BUILDING A PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED PATIO WITH BENCHES THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING GIVEN SHADE BY THESE NICE SPECIMEN TREES. 
          THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE PART OF THIS PROJECT, AND COMPLETION OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS IS TIED TO OUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SO, IT'S NOT A MAYBE THAT WE WILL DO IT. WE HAVE TO DO IT, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO DO IT. 
          STAFF HAS ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF WAIVER 3 BECAUSE THEY CONCLUDED THAT STRICT APPLICATION OF THAT PORTION OF THE STREET STREETSCAPE WOULD BE UNREASONABLE. I RESPECTFULLY ASK COUNCIL TO TAKE THE SITE-SPECIFIC CONTROL APPROACH WHEN CONSIDERING WAIVERS 1 AND 2. FINALLY, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MY OFFICE. WHILE WE ARE A SMALL BUSINESS, WE ARE A HEALTHCARE SMALL BUSINESS, AND BY DEFINITION, WE ARE BETTERING OUR COMMUNITY, OF COURSE, BY MAKING THEM HEALTHIER. AND WE DO THAT BETTER THAN A MAJORITY OF DENTAL OFFICES, AS IS EVIDENT BY OUR GOOGLE REVIEWS. WE'RE ONE OF ONLY 2 OFFICES IN METRO ATLANTA THAT HAS OVER 1,500 GOOGLE REVIEWS AND A PERFECT 5-STAR RATING. I TEXTED MIKE ESCOBAR AND ASKED HIM FOR HIS PERMISSION TODAY, AND HE SAID HE IS WILLING TO VOUCH FOR OUR DENTAL OFFICE THAT IT DOES QUALITY DENTAL 
          [00:20:01]
WORK. BUT I'M GOING TO TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER. WE TAKE BETTERING OUR COMMUNITY 5 STEPS FURTHER. I FEEL COMFORTABLE LOOKING EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU GUYS IN THE EYES AND SAYING MY DENTAL PRACTICE IS IN THE TOP 1% OF DENTAL OFFICES IN THE ENTIRE WORLD WHEN IT COMES TO GIVING BACK TO ITS COMMUNITY. AND WE'RE PROBABLY LIKE IN THE TOP 5% OF SMALL BUSINESSES OUTSIDE WHEN IT COMES TO GIVING BACK TO THIS COMMUNITY. I WAS GOING TO SHOW A WEBSITE ON THIS, BUT I DON'T THINK I CAN. WE HAVE A COMMUNITY SECTION ON OUR WEBSITE WHICH SHOWS ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS WE'VE PARTNERED WITH. WE HAVE DONATED EASILY OVER $100,000 OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS TO LOCAL SCHOOLS, NONPROFITS, SUCH AS MANY OF THEM BASED HERE IN CHAMBLEE ST. VINCENT DE PAUL, IMMIGRATION HOPE ATLANTA, IMMIGRANT HOPE ATLANTA. CHOA, YOU NAME IT, WE HAVE PROBABLY PARTNERED WITH THEM. AND CHAMBLEE HIGH SCHOOL, CHAMBLEE MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND, HUNTLEY HILLS ELEMENTARY HAVE DEFINITELY BEEN SOME OF OUR PARTICIPANTS. THE CHAMBLEE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S HOLIDAY TOY DRIVE. AND WE DID NOT DO THIS JUST BECAUSE WE WERE PREPARING FOR THIS MEETING. WE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS, SO IT'S PART OF OUR ETHOS. WE HAVE NURSES APPRECIATION WEEK, TEACHERS APPRECIATION WEEK, FIRST RESPONDERS APPRECIATION WEEK. I HAVE, IF IT'S OKAY, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU GUYS SHH. 
          THESE ARE 2 LETTERS. ONE IS FROM THE HUNTLEY HILLS PTA AND ONE IS FROM THE DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS AT CHAMBLEE HIGH SCHOOL, BOTH OF THEM ACKNOWLEDGING THAT WE ARE GOOD FRIENDS TO THESE SCHOOLS. THE DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS, AND I'M TOOTING MY OWN HORN HERE, BUT THE DIRECTOR OF ATHLETICS AT CHAMBLEE HIGH SCHOOL SAID THAT OUR OFFICE IS PROBABLY NUMBER TWO BEHIND CHAMBLEE'S ACE HARDWARE IN REGARDS TO HOW MUCH WE SUPPORT CHAMBLEE HIGH SCHOOL, AND WE'VE SUPPORTED EVERY SPORT THERE. 
          WE SUPPORTED THE ARTS THERE. 
          WE SUPPORTED YEARBOOK. WE SUPPORTED PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING. SO, ONE TINY THING. 
          NOPE. 
          TEN MINUTES IS TEN MINUTES. 
          TEN MINUTES IS UP, SIR. BUT I WAS. I'M NOT GOING. I'M NOT GOING. I WAS HOPING YOU'D RUN THROUGH ALL THE TIME BECAUSE I WANTED TO HEAR WHAT THIS WAS GOING TO SOUND LIKE. 
          BUT 7 PARKING SPOTS, AND THAT WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR YES, SIR. 
          WE HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF GIVING MORE AND MORE. 
          YES, SIR. THANK YOU, SIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT, THAT WAS ALL RIGHT, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT? AND OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THAT OUT, AND WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION AMONGST COUNCIL. 
          IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? I HAVE A QUESTION. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SITE PLAN, I GUESS, IF YOU WILL, OF WHAT YOU PLAN TO DO. 
          ON THE SIDE ON CLEMSON AS FAR AS THE SIDE NOT SIDEWALK, BUT THE BENCHES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. 
          MATT, DO WE HAVE THAT? WE DO NOT HAVE THAT, YET. I DON'T KNOW IF DR. 
          KOLCABI COULD POINT IT OUT ON THIS SITE PLAN. HOWEVER, IS EVERYONE ABLE TO SEE THAT? I CAN SEE IT. 
          I SEE THIS. I JUST DON'T SEE THE LANDSCAPING. I DON'T SEE THE PATHWAY THROUGH OR WHERE THE BENCHES ARE GOING TO BE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          AT THE CORNER OF WHERE THE GREEN AND THE ORANGE MEET, YOU GO TOWARDS THE BUILDING. 
          DOCTOR, COULD YOU PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM? THANK YOU. 
          WHAT I WANT TO SEEI DON'T WANT YOU TO EXPLAIN IT BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE WHAT YOU'RE EXPLAINING. I CAN'T SEE THE POSITION. 
          OF BENCHES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IF YOU'VE GOT A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT. IF YOU DON'T, YOU NEED TO HAVE ONE BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS MY DECISION OF WHETHER OR NOT TO NOT MAKE YOU CUT THOSE TREES DOWN. SO, IF YOU COULD GET TO US, GET THAT TO US, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          WE DO HAVE THAT IN THE BUILDING PERMIT IF YOU'LL GIVE ME JUST OKAY, THAT'S FANTASTIC BECAUSE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. 
          WHILE MATT'S LOOKING THAT UP, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? HOW OLD IS THE BUILDING? THERE ARE TWO COMPONENTS TO THE BUILDING. 1954 IS WHEN IT WAS SAID IT WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT. I DO NOT KNOW. I BOUGHT THE BUILDING TWO YEARS AGO. I DO NOT KNOW WHEN THE SECOND COMPONENT OF THE BUILDING WAS BUILT. 
          UNDERSTOOD. THE THE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE DECISIONS, THIS LONG-TERM DECISION. 
          DECISIONS, RIGHT? AND WE HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT'S COMING IN THE FUTURE. AND WHILE IT'S NOT A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY TODAY OR THOROUGHFARE TODAY, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE CASE IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS, NEXT 5 YEARS. SO, FOR ME, IT'S A CHALLENGE BECAUSE I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I'M SYMPATHETIC AND EMPATHETIC TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          BUT THERE'S ALSO IT'S GOING TO CHANGE. IT'S GOING TO BECOME MORE RESIDENTIAL. 
          WE'RE GOING TO LOSE A LOT OF THAT COMMERCIAL. WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE CONNECTIVITY IN THAT AREA. WE HAVE A DCI 
          [00:25:02]
PROJECT THAT'S COMING IN FRONT OF US. NEXT MONTH. EXCUSE ME. 
          IT'S GOING TO ADD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF HOUSING IN THAT AREA, ALONG WITH THE TOLL BROTHERS COMING ONLINE AND OUR RAIL TRAIL GOING THROUGH THERE, IS WHAT'S GOING TO BRING MORE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC, ALONG WITH ASSEMBLY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET IS HAVING THEIR SECOND PHASE BE BUILT RIGHT NOW. SO, THERE'S CHALLENGES THAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE. BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TODAY. 
          TODAY. BUT IN 5 YEARS, IT MAY CHANGE DRAMATICALLY. IS THERE LIGHTS ON THE SITE TODAY? IN THE STREETSCAPE, THERE IS NO STREETSCAPE ON CLEMSON DRIVE, SO THERE IS NO LIGHTS OTHER THAN LIGHTS FROM MY BUILDING. 
          AND MATT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT PART OF THE STREETSCAPE WOULD BE THE INSTALLATION OF LIGHTS AS WELL. THAT IS CORRECT. SO, THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE WITH THAT AS WELL, ADDING LIGHTS AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, WHICH, AS YOU KNOW, IT'S PRETTY DARK AREA AT THE EVENING TIME. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? DID YOU LIKE IT? NO, WE'RE STILL WAITING ON THAT. 
          I'M STILL WAITING ON THAT BECAUSE I DO WANT TO SEE IT. AND YOU BRING UP A GOOD POINT. THE LIGHTING IS A REALLY I THINK THAT NO MATTER WHAT, THERE SHOULD BE SOME LIGHTING. 
          THE END OF CLEMSON, IF YOU HAVE EVER DRIVEN DOWN THERE, IS PRETTY NARROW. AND IT'S GOING TO BE A WHILE. I MEAN, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT BE DEVELOPED INTO SOMETHING THAT OUR CITIZENS DO USE. IT'S VERY CUTE AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF RIGHT NEXT TO THE CEMETERY. 
          BUT I STILL AM I STILL WANT TO SEE WHAT YOU HAVE PLANNED FOR THE LANDSCAPING ASPECT OF CLEMSON DRIVE. 
          SO COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU'LL SEE ON THE SCREEN HERE, IT IS NOT PROBABLY TO THE LEVEL THAT YOU'RE EXPECTING TO SEE FOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS BECAUSE IT WAS USED TO SATISFY STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS ALONG NEW PEACHTREE. BUT THESE ARE THE PLANS THAT WE HAVE FOR THAT PLAZA AREA. 
          HONESTLY, THIS DOESN'T MAKE VERY MUCH SENSE TO ME AT ALL. 
          IT DOESN'T SHOW ME REALLY WHAT I WANT TO SEE. 
          BUT DO WE HAVE TIME TO BY TUESDAY IT GOES EXACTLY. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO EXPLAIN. SO, WHAT I WANT TO SEE, IF YOU'RE INTENDING TO PUT BENCHES IN THERE AND DO YOU'VE GOT SOME LANDSCAPING GOING ON, BUT MORE LANDSCAPING AND SOME SORT OF A PATHWAY THROUGH THERE, BE IT GRAVEL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I WANT TO SEE ALL OF THAT BECAUSE IN MY MIND THAT IT'S VERY POSSIBLE THAT THAT WOULD BE A GREAT SUBSTITUTE FOR CUTTING DOWN THE TREES AND PUTTING IN A WIDE SIDEWALK. 
          FOR THE TIME BEING, SO I WANT TO SEE THAT. 
          SO TUESDAY, I SHOULD COME BACK WITH A PICTURE. 
          IF YOU COULD SUBMIT IT, SUBMIT IT TO STAFF PRIOR TO PRIOR TO TUESDAY AFTERNOON, SO THAT WE HAVE TIME. 
          EMAIL YOU GUYS A PICTURE OF WHERE THE PATH WILL BE OUT TO STAFF THAT GOES FROM THE STREET TO THE PATIO AND BENCHES. 
          YES, SIR. YES, I CAN DO THAT. 
          YEAH, SOME DETAIL OF WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON PUTTING IN, WHETHER IT'S MORE NAPKIN SKETCHES OR SOME PICTURES OF THE. 
          INVITING AND HOW INTERACTIVE IT'S GOING TO BE. 
          JUST SOMETHING. 
          AND SAFE FEELING, IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. I WANTED THE SAME THING. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. 
          I WANTED IT. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. 
          SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO THE NEXT, NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS, 2137 DOWDELL DRIVE. 
          BEAR WITH ME ONE MOMENT. 
          WHILE HE'S LOOKING THAT UP, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE FIRST 2 ANYMORE THIS MEETING. SO, THE FOLKS WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THAT, THEY CAN LEAVE IF THEY WANT. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. SO, AS WE GO THROUGH EACH ITEM, THAT'S ALL WE'RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT IT TONIGHT. WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON IT ON TUESDAY NIGHT. 
          SO, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO STAY AROUND FOR THE REST OF THEM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN TONIGHT. WE'LL DO THAT ON TUESDAY. 
          CAN I JUST HAVE MAKE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION? YEAH. 
          HISTORICALLY SPEAKING, IT'S DOWDLE. 
          DOWDLE. DOWDLE. 
          I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT, IF YOU DO DECIDE TO LEAVE, IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT OUR DECISION. JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE TO BE HERE. 
          YEAH. DOES THAT COUNT FOR ME AS WELL? YOU ARE WITH US FOR A LONG TIME, SIR. 
          SORRY. 
          WELL, TECHNICALLY WE DON'T DO HIS REVIEW. 
          SO, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, MR. MAYOR, PZ-2026-1737, 2137 DOWDLE DRIVE. THIS IS, 2 VARIANCE REQUESTS, ONE OF THEM TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF A FENCE ALONG HOOD AVENUE FROM 4 FEET TO 6 FEET, AND A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A FENCE THAT IS LESS THAN 50% TRANSPARENT ALONG THE HOOD AVENUE STREET YARD. I'LL NOTE ON THESE VARIANCES THE FENCE HEIGHT IS A VARIANCE THAT STAFF IS ABLE TO REVIEW AND APPROVE ADMINISTRATIVELY. HOWEVER, BECAUSE THEY'RE WE'RE NOT ABLE 
          [00:30:02]
TO DO THE, 50% TRANSPARENCY VARIANCE, THE APPLICANT ELECTED TO SUBMIT BOTH OF THEM TO COUNCIL. JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THERE IF YOU WERE WONDERING WHY YOU SAW THAT WHEN YOU TYPICALLY DON'T SEE THOSE HEIGHT INCREASES. SO, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 0.21 ACRES AND IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF DOWDLE DRIVE AND HOOD AVENUE, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS PHOTOGRAPH. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE LOT IN QUESTION AND THE FENCE THAT WAS INSTALLED IN RED AT THE NORTH END OF THE PROPERTY. I WOULD NOTE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS THE SMALLEST LOT ALONG DOWDLE DRIVE, BOTH THE NORTH AND SOUTH PORTION, AND THAT THE LOT NARROWS CONSIDERABLY TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. BASED ON THESE FACTORS, STAFF WOULD FIND THAT THERE IS A HARDSHIP DUE TO THE FACT THAT A FENCE IN A COMPLIANT LOCATION WOULD GREATLY REDUCE THE USABLE AREA OF THE REAR YARD. 
          ADDITIONALLY, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE PHOTOGRAPHS OR MAYBE YOU CAN SEE THE GRADE OF THE REAR YARD IS LOWER THAN THAT OF THE ABUTTING SIDEWALK. THIS CONDITION WOULD MAKE THE UTILITY OF A 4-FOOT-TALL FENCE MUCH LESSENED. WHICH WOULD NOT TO THE POINT WHERE IT WOULD NOT PROVIDE THE PRIVACY TO THE OCCUPANTS THAT IT WOULD BE INTENDED TO PROVIDE. SO, BECAUSE OF THIS, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO BOTH VARIANTS 1 AND 2. AND AS A CONDITION, WE ARE PROPOSING COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTING A CONDITION THAT THE EXISTING CHAIN-LINK FENCE IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE WOODEN FENCE AND HOOD AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY BE REMOVED. 
          GOOD. ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? COME ON UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, HOW YOU'RE RELATED TO THE PROJECT. YOU CAN BE MORAL SUPPORT. 
          IT'S GOOD. NO, IT'S HIM. MY NAME IS LUCY MONTES. THIS IS MR. ROBERTO IN FACT, HE IS MY ACROSS-THE-STREET NEIGHBOR, AND HE HAS COME TO ME TO HELP HIM DO ALL THIS PAPERWORK. 
          OKAY. 
          I'VE SUBMITTED ALL FOR WITH HIS KNOWLEDGE, AND THE VARIANTS THERE ARE VERY NICE AND CLEAR. I AM HERE TO BE HIS INTERPRETER. 
          OKAY. DID HE WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? HE IS REQUESTING A FAVOR FROM ALL OF YOU THAT AFTER YOU REVIEW THE PROCESS, HE HAS A YOUNG CHILD AND AS WELL AS A GERMAN SHEPHERD, THAT THAT'S WHAT HE TEND TO DO WHAT HE DID BECAUSE THE DOG BARKED A LOT WHEN HE SEE PEOPLE. SO, THAT FENCE HAS HELPED HIM A LOT FOR THE LITTLE THE YOUNG GIRL TO GO OUTSIDE AND PLAY AND NOT BE AFRAID OF SO MUCH COMMOTION. AND THIS ALL HAPPENED JUST BECAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE APARTMENTS BEHIND HIS HOUSE. IT WASN'T A NEED BEFORE, BUT IT IS NOW BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF WALKING TRAFFIC. SO, HE'S JUST ASKING YOU TO PLEASE APPROVE THE PROJECT. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. 
          THAT'S ALL WE HAVE. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THAT OUT. WE'LL MOVE INTO COUNCIL DISCUSSION. 
          ANYTHING FROM COUNCIL THIS EVENING? COME BACK. CAN THEY COME BACK UP? CAN YOU COME BACK UP TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE? THAT'S OKAY. 
          NO, THAT'S OKAY. YOU DID IT THE RIGHT WAY. IT'S OKAY. IT CAN BE A LITTLE UP AND DOWN. ALL RIGHT, SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THE CONDITION TO REMOVE THE CHAIN-LINK FENCE WOULD AFFECT? I MEAN, IF WE APPROVE IT, THERE'S A CONDITION TO REMOVE THE CHAIN LINK FENCE. 
          IS THAT GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT HIS INTENTION OF WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO, OR IS THERE ANYTHING COMPROMISE? I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT. OKAY, SPEAK FOR HIM. NO PROBLEM. 
          THE PROBLEM WITH THE REMOVAL IS THAT THE CHAIN LINK. THIS FENCE GO FURTHER OUT TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IT IS ALL TOGETHER. 
          RIGHT. SO, IF THERE WAS A CONDITION TO REMOVE WHERE THERE'S 2 FENCES? YEAH. WELL, WE I GUESS WE COULD ASK HIM TO CUT IT TO THAT POINT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO KNOW. 
          THAT'S KIND OF LET ME EXPLAIN. 
          [00:35:02]
SURE. 
          IT'S OKAY. BUT THERE'S TWO. IT STOOD RIGHT THERE. RIGHT. THEN THERE'S ONE. YES, I UNDERSTAND. 
          SO, I GUESS I'M ASKING HIM IF HE COULD CUT IT TO THE POINT THAT THE OTHER ONE STARTS. 
          YEP. OKAY. 
          THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING IF HE CAN. YES, HE CAN. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. 
          SIR. ANYTHING ELSE FROM COUNCIL? ANYTHING? ALL RIGHT, GRACIAS. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS, 4997 BUFORD HIGHWAY. 
          THIS APPLICATION, IS PZ 2026-1738. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR 4 VARIANCES AND 17 WAIVERS, SO I'LL TRY TO GO THROUGH THESE QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FROM 2,189 SQUARE FEET TO 536 SQUARE FEET, TO REDUCE THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE MAXIMUM FROM 80% TO 97.7%. 
          THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN REDUCED TO 96% AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION. I'M JUST NOTING THE ORIGINAL, LANGUAGE THAT IT WAS ADVERTISED UNDER. 
          TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM PARKING FOR A RESTAURANT FROM 25 SPACES TO 24 SPACES. 
          TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING PARKING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE STREET, AND THEN THE WAIVER REQUESTS, WHICH WERE TO REDUCE THE LANDSCAPE ZONE FROM 10 FEET TO 3 FEET, TO REDUCE THE SIDEWALK CLEAR ZONE FROM 10 FEET TO 5 FEET 6 INCHES, TO REDUCE THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE FROM 10 FEET TO 0 FEET, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED 14-FOOT LANDSCAPE ZONE ON THE GDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY TO 3 FEET, TO NOT PLANT TREES IN THE LANDSCAPE ZONE, TO NOT LOCATE PEDESTRIAN LIGHTS IN THE LANDSCAPE ZONE, TO REDUCE THE FENESTRATION REQUIREMENT ON A FOUR. 
          STOREFRONT STREET FROM 60% TO 27.4%, TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM HEIGHT ON A BOULEVARD STREET FROM 24 FEET TO 17 FEET, TO REDUCE THE STOREFRONT MINIMUM FLOOR-TO-CEILING HEIGHT FROM 18 FEET TO 12 FEET, TO NOT PLANT TREES OR SHRUBS WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE ZONE, TO REDUCE THE PERIMETER PARKING LANDSCAPE STRIP FROM 5 FEET TO 6 INCHES, TO PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN TO NOT PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN PARKWAY WALKWAY CONNECTING THE SURFACE PARKING TO THIS PUBLIC SIDEWALK AND BUILDING ENTRANCE TO EXCEED THE DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE MAXIMUM OF 24 FEET TO 28 FEET, TO MAINTAIN A PARALLEL DRIVE AISLE BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE BUILDING, TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING ON A 35-MILE-PER-HOUR STREET FROM 244 FEET TO 150 FEET, TO NOT PROVIDE INTERPARCEL ACCESS, AND TO INCREASE THE EFIS MAXIMUM OF THE REAR ELEVATION FROM 49.9% TO 65.5%. SO, THE VALUE OF THE WORK THAT IS PROPOSED FOR THIS PROJECT TRIGGERS THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLD, AS THE WORK ITSELF IS VALUED AT 107% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE. I WOULD NOTE THAT IS DUE TO THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE BEING MUCH LESS THAN WHAT ONE WOULD EXPECT FOR THIS AREA, RATHER THAN THE WORK ITSELF BEING SO EXTENSIVE. 
          SO, THE VALUATION OF THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED WORK IS $223,000. WHICH IS JUST AT 107% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE SORRY, THE APPRAISED VALUE. I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION TO SATISFY OUR NEED TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH OF THE ORDINANCE COULD APPLY TO THIS, BECAUSE AT THE 71% THRESHOLD REQUIRES FULL COMPLIANCE WITH SITE AND BUILDING ARCHITECTURE REQUIREMENTS. IN THIS CASE, WE CANNOT REQUIRE THE ADDITIONAL WORK TO COST MORE THAN 125% OF THE VALUE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED WORK FOR QUOTE FOR THE WORK THAT THEY ARE WANTING TO DO, WHICH TOTALS 124%, WHICH IS JUST UNDER 50% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. 
          BUT I WOULD NOTE IT IS NOT FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. 
          SO, THE SUBJECT SITE CONSISTS OF A HALF-ACRE LOT LOCATED ALONG BEAUFORT HIGHWAY. IT IS EAST OF THE CITY FARMERS MARKET AND NORTHEAST OF THE ORIENT SHOPPING CENTER. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE STREETSCAPE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH CONSISTS OF A NARROW SIDEWALK AND A LANDSCAPE STRIP BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE PARKING LOT. THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOW THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING AND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING. AND HERE YOU CAN SEE PART OF THE PARKING LOT. AND WHILE IT APPEARS VISUALLY TO HAVE A GOOD DEAL 
          [00:40:01]
OF ONSITE PARKING, THE SPACE OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PARKING TO BE ADDED. AND I'D NOTE THAT SOME OF THIS PARKING IS EXISTING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE STREET, WHICH IS SEEN ON THE LEFTMOST PHOTOGRAPH. 
          SITE ALSO HAS INDICATIONS OF ITS FORMER USE AS A DRIVE-THROUGH ESTABLISHMENT, WHICH WOULD NOW BE PROHIBITED FOR PROPERTIES SUBJECT TO THE STOREFRONT STREET REQUIREMENTS. 
          AS THIS ONE IS. THE APPLICANT IS NOT PROPOSING TO USE THIS AS A DRIVE-THROUGH. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE OF THAT BECAUSE THERE IS THE DRIVE AISLE OVER ON THE OTHER SIDE. AS NOTED BEFORE, THE EXISTING SITE IS NONCOMPLIANT AS IT RELATES TO MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT THRESHOLDS HAVE TRIGGERED. THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT PORTIONS OF THE SITE CLOSER TO COMPLIANCE THROUGH THEIR DESIGNS ON THIS SITE PLAN. THIS INCLUDES THEIR ADDITION OF NEW OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING AND PARKING LOT STRIPING. 
          HOWEVER, THE SUM TOTAL OF THESE CHANGES ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT THIS LOT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO. 
          SIMILARLY, WHILE IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROPOSED TO THE ELEVATIONS, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION WOULD REQUIRE MORE CHANGES TO BE MADE, SUCH AS ADDING ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION MORE ARCHITECTURAL INTEREST ADDED THROUGH VARIOUS MEANS, ET CETERA. SO, BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, STAFF DID NOT FIND HARDSHIPS EXISTED AS THEY RELATED TO THE SIZE, SHAPE, OR TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE THAT WOULD PREVENT IT FROM COMING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE LOT COVERAGE AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS. PAVEMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED, BUT THAT IS THE ONLY IMPEDIMENT. SO, STAFF IS NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT VARIANCES 1 AND 2. 
          REGARDING VARIANCES 3 AND 4, STAFF FINDS THAT THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING ITSELF ON THE SITE WOULD PREVENT COMPLIANCE WITH THE PARKING AMOUNT AND LOCATION REQUIREMENTS, AND IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO COMPLY WITHOUT DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING BUILDING AND STARTING FROM NEW. SO, STAFF FINDS THAT THAT CONDITION CONSTITUTES A HARDSHIP AND THEREFORE SUPPORTS THE APPROVAL OF THOSE VARIANCE REQUESTS. 
          THANK YOU. REGARDING THE WAIVERS, STAFF IS NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT WAIVERS 1, 2, 4, 05, 6, 10, 12, AND 14, LARGELY FOR THE REASONS I JUST SAID FOR THE VARIANCES WE CAN'T SUPPORT. 
          THESE REQUIREMENTS ALL PERTAIN TO REQUIRED PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH SITE CONSTRAINTS WOULD NOT IMPEDE. 
          THERE WOULD BE A NEED TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN, SUCH AS THE REMOVAL OF PAVING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE STREET. STREET AND OTHER AREAS, BUT THERE ARE NO OTHER PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS THAT WOULD MAKE COMPLIANCE NOT POSSIBLE. STAFF SUPPORTS THE REMAINDER OF THE WAIVERS REQUESTED AS THEY WOULD REQUIRE PHYSICAL CHANGES TO THE BUILDING TO INSTALL FENESTRATION AND RAISING THE OVERALL CEILING HEIGHT, WHICH WOULD INVOLVE REMOVING THE ENTIRE ROOF AND THEN RAISING IT, OR PROVIDING INTERPARCEL ACCESS TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. 
          THERE IS A SLIGHT GRADE CHANGE THAT MAKES CHALLENGING. AND OTHER CHANGES SUCH AS REDUCING THE DRIVEWAY SPACING AND INCREASING THE PERIMETER PARKING LANDSCAPE STRIP ARE NOT POSSIBLE DUE TO CONDITIONS FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING ON THE SITE. BECAUSE OF THIS, WE'RE SUPPORTING THE APPROVAL OF WAIVERS 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, AND 17. WE DO HAVE ONE CONDITION THAT WE ARE REQUESTING COUNCIL TO CONSIDER, BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE CONSIDERABLE CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN REQUIRED, SHOULD COUNCIL APPROVE AND DENY THE REQUEST AS WE ARE RECOMMENDING. THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF CHANGE THAT WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN TO THAT SITE PLAN. 
          SO, THEREFORE, WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT COUNCIL CONDITION THIS ON A SITE PLAN OR ANY OTHER SUCH DOCUMENT. BUT WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT EASEMENT BE PROVIDED FOR FUTURE INTERPARCEL ACCESS TO ONE OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH OR THE SOUTH. 
          THANKS, MATT. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL OPEN THIS UP TO ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM. COME ON UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND HOW YOU'RE RELATED TO THE PROJECT. 
          GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ROBERT FAUST. I AM A REGISTERED ARCHITECT THAT HAS BEEN RETAINED BY MY CLIENT, THE APPLICANT OF THIS MEASURE, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING. 
          FOR CLARITY, I ACTUALLY WAS BROUGHT INTO THE PROJECT AFTER AN ORIGINAL SUBMISSION WAS MADE TO THE CITY FOR BUILDING PERMIT, BEFORE THE PRIOR TEAM REALIZED THERE WAS A FAIRLY COMPLEX NUMBER OF EVENTS TO TAKE CARE OF REGARDING THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS WHY I'VE BEEN RETAINED AND AM HERE TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL TONIGHT. 
          OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS A COMPLEX APPLICATION WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF VARIANCES AND WAIVERS BEING REQUESTED FROM YOU ALL. I DID RECEIVE THE STAFF NOTES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON OF LAST WEEK. THAT CAME AFTER THE POINT IN TIME THAT MY PRESENTATION MATERIALS WOULD HAVE BEEN DUE FOR THIS EVENING, SO I DO NOT HAVE PRESENTATION MATERIALS TONIGHT THAT ARE GERMANE TO THE SPECIFIC POINTS THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE VERBALLY 
          [00:45:01]
TO YOU ALL THIS EVENING. 
          TO TRY TO NARROW DOWN, I THINK, THIS APPLICATION CAN BE DONE IN A REALLY VERY STRATEGIC WAY TO REALLY DISCUSS THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT AN EXISTING PROPERTY THAT CANDIDLY, TO COMPLY WITH THE UDO, IS IMPRACTICAL TO IMPOSSIBLE IN A NUMBER OF CASES. THE FUNDAMENTAL DRIVING POINT, IN MY OPINION, BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I RECEIVED ON FRIDAY, HAS REALLY TO DO WITH THE DIMENSION OF THE PROPERTY. THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY IS 99.5 FEET WIDE. I'VE GOT AN EXISTING DOUBLE-LOADED DRIVEWAY. AS YOU ALL KNOW, PER THE ORDINANCE AND REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU ALL REQUIRE, A DRIVEWAY IS A MINIMUM OF 24 FEET WITH 18-FOOT PARKING SPACE DEPTHS ON EITHER SIDE. THAT EQUALS 60 FEET. THAT LEAVES ME WITH 39 FEET OF ADDITIONAL SPACE THAT I MIGHT USE FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN A DRIVEWAY AND PARKING SPACES. THAT IS NOT AN ADEQUATE DIMENSION TO ACHIEVE THE RADIUSES NECESSARY FOR EVEN A PASSENGER VEHICLE. 
          NOW, A PASSENGER VEHICLE THAT PARKS IN ONE OF MY SPACES CAN OBVIOUSLY THEN BACK OUT AND PROCEED FORWARD BACK TO BEAUFORT HIGHWAY IN ORDER TO EXIT THE SITE. BUT ANY OTHER VEHICLE THAT IS NOT IN A PARKING SPACE THAT WOULD BE A FIRE TRUCK, THAT WOULD BE AN AMBULANCE, THAT WOULD BE MY DUMPSTER VEHICLE, THAT WOULD BE A FOOD SERVICE TRUCK THAT MIGHT BE PROVIDING SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS TO FOR MY CLIENT'S RESTAURANT. 
          THAT WOULD BE ANYTHING FROM A LARGE EXTENDED VAN OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, A SMALL BUS THAT YOU WOULD EXPERIENCE, SAY, WITH A CHURCH GROUP OR WITH A DAYCARE CENTER OR ANY OTHER KIND OF GROUP WITH A SCHOOL. 
          THOSE TYPES OF VEHICLES HAVE A TURNING RADIUS REQUIREMENT THAT CANNOT BE MET ON THIS SITE. 
          THAT IS THE REASON THAT THAT DRIVEWAY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FROM THE PARKING AREA IS BEING MAINTAINED. I COMPLETELY RECOGNIZE AND UNDERSTAND THAT THAT DRIVEWAY WAS USED FOR DRIVE-THROUGH. THAT IS NOT A GOAL OF MY CLIENT TO MAINTAIN. WE UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE UDO, AND SO THERE IS NO EXPECTATION OR DESIRE FOR DRIVE-THROUGH ON THIS PROPERTY. AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THE EXTENSION OF THAT, WHAT USED TO BE DRIVE-THROUGH DRIVEWAY, THAT RETURNS BACK TO THE MAIN DRIVEWAY AND THE CURB CUT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. 
          THAT'S REALLY THE CORE, IN MY OPINION, OF THE DILEMMA THAT I FACE AS THE DESIGNER OF THIS PROJECT. THAT EXISTING RETURN TO THE CURB CUT, IF IT IS REMOVED, CREATES THE RADIUS PROBLEM AT THE BACK OF THE SITE THAT I HAVE, WHERE I SIMPLY CAN'T GET THOSE VEHICLES TO TURN AROUND. THOSE LARGER VEHICLES OR ANY PASSENGER VEHICLE THAT CAN'T FIT IN A PARKING SPACE NEEDS THAT DRIVEWAY TO COME AROUND THE BUILDING, RETURN TO THE CURB CUT. YOU'LL NOTE IT IN THE APPLICATION. WE ARE ALREADY IN VIOLATION OF THE UDO WITH REGARD TO THE CURB CUT THAT SERVICES THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE NEIGHBORS. BUT MY OVERALL SITE IS TOO NARROW TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE ORDINANCES THAT THE STAFF DID PROCEED TO SUGGEST THAT IS OUTSIDE OF MY CONTROL. WE OBVIOUSLY CAN'T ADD A SECOND CURB CUT ON THIS. OR WE'D JUST EXACERBATE AN EXISTING PROBLEM. 
          AND SO, I DON'T SEE A PRACTICAL WAY TO ACCOMMODATE THE TURNAROUND OF THE VEHICLES THAT I NEED TO. 
          PARKING IS ALREADY AN ISSUE. 
          YOU SAW IN OUR APPLICATION WE WENT FROM A MINIMUM 25, WHICH IS REQUIRED IN YOUR UDO, TO 24. 
          THE REASON FOR THAT REDUCTION WAS TO INTRODUCE ONE SPACE THAT CAN BE CONVERTED INTO AN ISLAND AND PROVIDE SOME LANDSCAPE MIDWAY THROUGH A 22 2-SPACE RUN OF SPACES THAT EXIST TODAY WITHOUT ANY SUCH ISLAND. IT WAS MY OPINION, AND I BELIEVE I DON'T EVER INTEND TO SPEAK FOR YOUR STAFF BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS A GENERAL CONSENSUS THAT THAT ISLAND MIDWAY THROUGH A RUN OF PARKING SPACES TO ATTEMPT TO MAKE MORE BEAUTIFUL AND, AND, AND TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE OTHER GOALS OF THE UDO TOOK PRECEDENCE OVER THAT 25TH SPACE. I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT, AND I THINK IT MADE SENSE TO REDUCE. HOWEVER, I WILL POINT OUT THAT PER THE GOVERNING CODES AND STANDARDS THAT ARE HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THIS PROJECT, MY OCCUPANT LOAD FOR THIS PROPERTY IS 133 PEOPLE WITH 24 PARKING SPACES. I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT A REDUCTION LOWER THAN 24 IS IN MY BEST INTEREST, CERTAINLY, OR IN MY APPLICANT, MY CLIENT'S BEST INTEREST. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I ALSO THINK IT'S JUST FURTHER VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU ALL HAVE IN PLACE. I HAVE HAD OPPORTUNITY, JUST IN THE COUPLE OF DAYS SINCE I RECEIVED THE STAFF NOTIFICATIONS, TO DO A CAREFUL STUDY. I DON'T HAVE IT AS A PRESENTATION, BUT I CAN PROVIDE IT TO THE CLERK IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE IT. THAT INDICATES THE TURNING RADIUSES FOR ESSENTIALLY EVERY VEHICLE THAT RIDES ON THE ROADS, AS WELL AS TURNAROUND OPPORTUNITIES FOR LARGER VEHICLES LIKE EMS OR FIRE EQUIPMENT. 
          AND YOU'LL NOTE IN THESE DRAWINGS THAT THERE JUST SIMPLY IS NOT SPACE TO ACHIEVE IT ON A 
          [00:50:01]
99-FOOT-WIDE TRACK. I CERTAINLY RECOGNIZE, AS THE CITY OF CHAMBLEE GROWS OVER TIME, TRACKS THAT ARE THIS SMALL ARE GOING TO CEASE TO EXIST BECAUSE THEY SIMPLY CAN'T ACCOMMODATE THE OVERALL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE UDO. AND WE CERTAINLY SUPPORT AND RECOGNIZE THAT. 
          THE OTHER LARGE CATEGORY THAT I WANT TO ADDRESS IN MY REMAINING TIME IS THAT I DID WORK WITH, AND I WANT TO COMPLIMENT YOUR STAFF FOR BEING VERY ACCESSIBLE TO ME, VERY ACCOMMODATING, AND VERY HELPFUL. I'VE WORKED IN LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND I WANT TO COMPLIMENT YOUR TEAM FOR DOING THIS VERY, VERY WELL. 
          I'VE BEEN MUCH MORE FRUSTRATED WITH OTHER PEOPLE THAN I'VE EVER BEEN WITH ANYBODY IN YOUR ORGANIZATION AND IN YOUR CITY, SO THANK YOU ALL FOR THAT VERY MUCH. GDOT HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE FRONT NUMBER OF FEET OF OUR PROPERTY. AND SO, THEY'RE GOING TO RULE SUPREME ULTIMATELY ABOUT WHAT CAN BE IN THEIR RIGHT-OF-WAY RELATIVE TO BENCHES AND LIGHTS AND PLANTS AND TREES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE VERY MUCH ARE OPEN TO RESPECTING GDOT'S WISHES AND DOING WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY TELL US TO DO. MY CIVIL ENGINEER AND LAND PLANNER HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK, INCLUDING IN THE CITY OF CHAMBLEE, AND HIS RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS WHAT RESULTED IN THE SITE PLAN THAT'S SUBMITTED TO YOU, IS THAT GDOT IS GOING TO HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH SOME OF THE TREES AND SOME OF THE STREETLIGHTS LOCATED IN THE SPACE THAT I HAVE AVAILABLE, WHICH OF COURSE IS NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE UDO, BUT IT LANDS SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS IN THE GDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND HIS EXPECTATION AND RECOMMENDATION TO ME, THEREFORE MY RECOMMENDATION TO YOU IS THAT THEY'RE LIKELY TO BE DISAPPROVED IN THAT LOCATION. BUT AGAIN, THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE IS TO TRY TO GROW THAT BUFFER SPACE, THAT LANDSCAPE SPACE THAT IS THE GOAL OF THE UDO, ULTIMATELY CAUSES ME TO REMOVE THAT DRIVEWAY. AND I JUST DON'T SEE A PRACTICAL REALITY IN ANY WAY THAT I CAN REMOVE THAT DRIVEWAY AND PROVIDE VEHICULAR EXIT, EGRESS FROM MY SITE. WE ARE OPEN TO THE CONVERSATION OF THE REQUIREMENT THAT WAS LAST SPOKEN OF ABOUT THE INTERPARCEL ACCESS EASEMENT. OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S COMPLICATED AND A LEGAL MATTER. I AM NOT A LAWYER, AND SO I HAVE NO ABILITY TO SPEAK TO IT. MY CLIENT IS OPEN TO UNDERSTANDING THE DETAILS AND THE SPECIFICS OF THE GOAL. I WOULD ILLUSTRATE TO YOU ALL AGAIN THAT THAT EASEMENT, IF AND WHEN IT COMES TO EXISTENCE IS GOING TO EXACERBATE THE PARKING CONDITION OF THE EXISTING SITE. IT WILL ELIMINATE A MINIMUM OF 3, A MAXIMUM OF 5, DEPENDING UPON HOW THE TURNING RADIUSES AND SUCH ARE DESIGNED IN THAT EASEMENT. 
          BUT MY CLIENT IS OPEN TO HEARING THE SPECIFIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. HE'S NOT, OF COURSE, PREPARED TO COMMIT TO THAT UNTIL THAT'S MORE UNDERSTOOD. 
          BUT HE HAS SIGNALED TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE PROPER TO BE RECEPTIVE TO THE GOAL OF A LONGER-TERM PLAN WHERE I KNOW ULTIMATELY BEAUFORT HIGHWAY WOULD HAVE LESS CURB CUTS BECAUSE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES WOULD BE CONNECTED WITH INTERPARCEL EASEMENTS. I KNOW THAT TO BE THE GOAL, AND IT'S CERTAINLY ONE WE'D BE HAPPY TO COOPERATE IN. FOR CLARITY, IN MY LAST 56 SECONDS, MY CLIENT, THE APPLICANT, IS ACTUALLY PROPOSING TO BE THE TENANT OF THIS BUILDING. I DO NOT REPRESENT THE OWNER OF THE BUILDING. 
          BUT I AM IN CLOSE CONSULTATION WITH HIM, AS OBVIOUSLY A NUMBER OF YOUR JUDGMENTS AND DECISIONS WILL IMPACT HIM AS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. THE ORIGINAL PROJECT, AS SUBMITTED TO YOU ALL SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, WAS JUST AN INTERIOR RENOVATION OF WHAT WAS A CLOSED-DOWN MASSAGE PARLOR TO TURN INTO A RESTAURANT. IT IS A VERY SPECIFIC ETHNICALLY FOCUSED BAKERY THAT TARGETS A HIGH LEVEL OF THE POPULATION THAT LIVES IN THAT AREA OF CHAMBLEE, AND SO I KNOW IT TO BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A NICE BENEFIT TO THE OVERALL COMMUNITY. MY CLIENT IS CERTAINLY COMMITTED TO BEING A DEDICATED MEMBER OF THE BUSINESS MARKETPLACE IN CHAMBLEE, AND WE'RE CERTAINLY HOPEFUL FOR A FAVORABLE JUDGMENT FROM YOU ALL. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, IF ANYONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR, YOU'VE GOT 1 SECOND. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THAT ITEM OUT, AND I'LL OPEN IT UP TO COUNCIL FOR DELIBERATION. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR FOR STAFF ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? MATT, CAN YOU PULL THIS SITE PLAN BACK UP AGAIN. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE THE EXISTING OR THE PROPOSED? PROPOSED SO, I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, OTHER THAN, 
          [00:55:02]
YOU KNOW, THE MAYOR, ONE OF HIS FAVORITE SAYINGS, WE HEAR IT ALL THE DON'T TELL US WHAT YOU CAN'T DO. TELL US WHAT YOU CAN DO. SO, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF THE WAIVERS AND VARIANCES THAT YOU CAN TICK OFF BY COMING UP WITH A COMPROMISE SOLUTION, EVEN IF IT DOESN'T MAYBE IT MEETS THE SPIRIT OF THE THING. THIS RENDERING THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, OR THE DRAWING, IT'S VERY MECHANICAL. 
          SOMETIMES THERE'S A LITTLE MORE DETAIL, A LITTLE MORE COLOR, A LITTLE MORE EXPLANATION, EVEN IF IT'S JUST VISUAL EXAMPLES, OTHER PICTURES THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. THIS IS GOING TO BE HERE AND SHOW A PICTURE OF THE WALL OR WHATEVER IT IS. 
          AND THEN LASTLY, WE DO INTERPARCEL ACCESS EASEMENTS ALL THE TIME. SO, OUR STAFF CAN DEFINITELY HELP YOU WITH THAT. AND HOW THAT WORKS. 
          AND THEY TYPICALLY THE FIRST PERSON IN THE DOOR GETS TO KIND OF DETERMINE WHERE THAT MIGHT HAPPEN MOST FAVORABLY TO THEIR OPERATIONS. SO, THE NEXT PERSON DOESN'T MAYBE IT'S NOT EXACT, BUT MAYBE IT'S A GENERAL AREA. 
          SO, IT'S AND MATT CAN WORK WITH YOU OR TELL HIS STAFF CAN TELL YOU HOW. BUT WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME. 
          SO, IT'S WE KIND OF THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE SITUATION AS FAR AS THAT GOES. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE. 
          QUESTIONS FROM ANYONE ELSE? UM, THE GREEN SPACE, THE WHAT YOU'RE CALLING IT, OPEN SPACE, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE OUT BY THE STREET, HOW MANY SQUARE FEET WOULD YOU SAY THAT IS? SORRY, MA'AM? HOW MANY SQUARE FEET WOULD YOU SAY THAT IS? OKAY. 
          YOU HAVE TO ZOOM WAY IN TO SEE THAT. 
          NOBODY CAN SEE THIS. 
          WELL, I ZOOMED. 
          SO, AND IS THIS GOING TO HAVE ANY SEATING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BENCHES? MA'AM, PLEASE FORGIVE ME. MY HAIR AND MY HEARING DEPARTED MY BODY AT THE SAME TIME. 
          I'M NOT SPEAKING INTO MY MICROPHONE VERY WELL EITHER. 
          I'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF THAT. 
          SO, IS THERE SEATING AND STUFF IN THERE, BENCHES? THERE IS PROPOSED BENCH SEATING, YES, MA'AM. 
          OH, OKAY. BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY INTENDED AS RESTAURANT USE. 
          THAT'S INTENDED FOR SIDEWALK WALKERS. 
          YES, MA'AM, THAT IS CORRECT. 
          RESPITE. BUT SO, THE CHURCH DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING, ANY PUBLIC SPACE CONNECTED TO IT, DOES IT? NOT THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH, NO, MA'AM. 
          SO, IT'S A FREESTANDING. 
          OKAY. 
          CORRECT. 
          ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO KNOW. 
          ANYTHING ELSE? WELL, WE'VE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD BEFORE WITH, WITH OTHER PROPERTIES ON BUFORD HIGHWAY AS FAR AS THE STREETSCAPE AND WIDENING OF THE SIDEWALKS AND THAT KIND OF STUFF. AND, YOU KNOW, JUST MY OPINION FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, THE SIDEWALK'S IN PRETTY DECENT SHAPE. 
          THERE'S LIGHTING ALREADY THERE. 
          THE, THE LIGHT FIXTURES ARE ALREADY THERE. THE TREES ARE ALREADY THERE. IT LOOKS PRETTY DECENT. AND I'VE SEEN SOME WHERE WE'VE ACTUALLY REQUIRED THAT TO BE REMOVED AND WIDENED FOR THE STREETSCAPE, AND IT DIDN'T TURN OUT LOOKING THAT GREAT AND DON'T LOOK THAT GREAT TODAY. SO, TO THE COUNCILMAN'S POINT, TELL US HOW WE CAN DRESS THIS UP AND MAKE IT LOOK BETTER. YES, SIR. 
          IT IS A ROUGH-LOOKING SITE. 
          I'VE BEEN OVER THERE. IT WAS LIKE YOU SAID, IT WAS A MASSAGE PARLOR. 
          THERE'S NOTHING GLAMOROUS ABOUT IT. SO, WE IT NEEDS TO LOOK GOOD. AND, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT IN MIND, SEE HOW MANY OF THESE WAIVERS AND THINGS THAT YOU CAN TICK OFF, BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET SOME OF THESE OFF. 
          AGAIN, JUST MY OPINION. I ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF. I DON'T SPEAK FOR COUNCIL. YES, SIR. OKAY. I DO HAVE ONE. 
          I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S HARD FOR ME TO SEE THE SPACE THAT IS AROUND YOUR PATIO SEATING NOT THE PUBLIC SPACE, BUT THE RESTAURANT SEATING. 
          YES, MA'AM. IS THERE IS THAT A PLANTING AREA OUTSIDE OF THE FENCE? IT IS NOT A PLANTING AREA. 
          IT'S AN EXISTING. HARDSCAPE, MA'AM, THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO JUST FENCE IN WITH A GATE THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO PUT EXTERIOR SEATING WITH TABLES AND CHAIRS, BUT THE ACTUAL PAVEMENT IS IN EXISTENCE. 
          BECAUSE THERE'S A DOTTED LINE THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE FENCE LINE THAT YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD. 
          SO, THERE'S I COULDN'T TELL YOU WHAT THE DIMENSIONS ARE, BUT THERE'S A DOTTED LINE I THINK THAT'S ALSO RAISED MA'AM, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION CORRECTLY, THERE IS SPACE BETWEEN WHAT IS EXISTING TO BE DEFINED AS A DRIVEWAY AND THE FENCE THAT I AM PROPOSING. 
          SO, THAT LITTLE STRIP OF GROUND 
          [01:00:02]
CERTAINLY COULD BE MADE GREEN. 
          THAT WOULD BE FANTASTIC. EVEN IF YOU DID PLANTS IN POTS OR WHATEVER, I THINK THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD GLAM UP THE SITE QUITE A BIT. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT SUGGESTION. THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. 
          I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR. I WOULD JUST SAY ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO PUT BEFORE THIS BODY, TRY TO GET IT BACK TO MATT BY MONDAY AND GET IT BACK TO STAFF SO THAT WE CAN HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT. UNDERSTOOD. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. 
          OH, SORRY. DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING? SORRY. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS 5295 NEW PEACHTREE ROAD. 
          THIS IS VARIANCE, PZ-2026-1741, 5295 PEACHTREE NEW PEACHTREE ROAD. THIS IS, 3 VARIANCES. ONE TO ALLOW OH, THIS IS THE WRONG OH, THIS IS THE RIGHT ONE. I APOLOGIZE. SO, THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 240-7 TO ALLOW A DUMPSTER AND ITS ENCLOSURE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD WHERE OTHERWISE PROHIBITED. SO, THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS AT THE CORNER OF NEW PEACHTREE ROAD AND WATKINS AVENUE, JUST SOUTH OF THE CHAMBLEE MARTA STATION. 
          IT WAS SUBJECT TO A PREVIOUS DCI APPLICATION BEFORE COUNCIL RAISED THE THRESHOLD FOR WHAT CONSTITUTES A DCI. 
          AT THE TIME, IT WAS 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF A NEW BUILDING ADDED. IT WAS RAISED THEN TO 50,000 SQUARE FEET. THE LDP HAS PROCEEDED SUCH THAT IT HAS EXPIRED WITHOUT THE BUILDING BEING COMPLETED AND IS THEREFORE SUBJECT TO THE NEW REQUIREMENTS, WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE DCI FOR THIS PROJECT. THERE WAS A VARIANCE TIED UP IN THAT DCI RELATED TO THIS DUMPSTER, AND OUR LEGAL COUNSEL HAS TOLD US THAT THAT IS NO LONGER VESTED BECAUSE THE PERMIT WAS NEVER COMPLETED. 
          AND IT WAS TIED TO THAT DCI. SO, WE'RE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. SO, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SITE PLAN, THERE ARE NO LOCATIONS ON THE PROPERTY WHICH WOULD COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDO TO PROVIDE SORRY THAT WOULD PROVIDE THE NECESSARY MANEUVERABILITY REQUIRED TO SERVICE THE DUMPSTER. THERE IS A REAR YARD; HOWEVER, IT IS INACCESSIBLE TO VEHICLES. IT WOULD REQUIRE EXTENDING A PARKING LOT INTO AN AREA WHERE IT IS NOT INTENDED TO GO. THE DUMPSTER AT ITS CLOSEST POINT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 14 FEET FROM THE STREETSIDE YARD AND 11.5 INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. 4 FEET, 11.5 INCHES. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING DUMPSTER LOCATION. 
          WHICH THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO KEEP WITH THE ADDITION OF A COMPLIANT DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, WHICH IS SHOWN HERE. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A CMU ENCLOSURE FOR THE DUMPSTER. 
          WHILE CERTAIN MASONRY PRODUCTS ARE PERMITTED, UNFINISHED CMU IS NOT ONE OF THE PERMITTED MATERIALS. 
          SO, THEREFORE, WHILE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT COUNCIL CONSIDER ADDING A CONDITION THAT THE FINISHED ENCLOSURE BE COVERED WITH STUCCO OR ANOTHER MATERIAL THAT COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDO. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM, COME ON UP. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, HOW YOU'RE RELATED TO THE PROJECT. 
          HELLO, GOOD EVENING TO EVERYONE HERE. MAY GOD BLESS EVERYONE HERE PRESENT. MY NAME IS CARLOS VEGA. I'M THE CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISOR ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH, AND THE POINT HERE IS WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW BUILDING. WE WERE UNKNOWN OF THE SITUATION OF THE DUMPSTER. WE WERE NOT TRYING TO IGNORE THAT IT HAD TO BE DONE, BUT THE PREVIOUS GC THAT WAS CONTRACTED DIDN'T REALLY FOLLOW UP WITH THE STEP-BY-STEP ON THE CONSTRUCTION. SO, WE ARE HERE JUST TO COMPLY WITH THE CODES SO WE CAN MOVE WITH THIS PROJECT FORWARD QUITE WILLINGLY FIRST. AND IF ANYTHING NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED OR NEEDS TO BE DONE A DIFFERENT WAY, WE ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO TRY TO DO THE BEST WE CAN. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. 
          ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK 
          [01:05:01]
IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THIS ITEM OUT AND I'LL OPEN IT UP TO COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS FROM COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? JUST FOR STAFF. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MATT. MATT? YEAH, HE'S FINE. SO, THERE'S TOO MUCH TO READ. TELL ME EXACTLY WHAT IS PROPOSED AS FAR AS THE MATERIALS GO FOR THIS. 
          YES, SO YOU CAN SEE HERE IT WOULD BE CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS AS THE WALLS, AND THEN THE GATE WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED OF WOOD WITH, I ASSUME, METAL, BOTH OF WHICH ARE SORRY, THE GATE WOULD BE COMPLIANT, THE MATERIAL FOR THE WALLS WOULD NOT. SO, IN THIS CASE, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE COVERED WITH STUCCO, WHICH IS ONE OF THE ALLOWABLE MATERIALS BASED ON THE UDO. 
          AND CHURCH IS CLAD WITH WAS THAT STUCCO AS WELL? I AM NOT SURE. THAT WAS NOT PART OF OUR ANALYSIS. 
          WELL, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE ASK FOR HOW WE CLAD THE DUMPSTERS, IS THAT IT BE SIMILAR TO WHAT THE MASONRY OR MATERIALS ARE ON THE BUILDING THAT IT'S INTENDED FOR. YOU WANT TO COME ON UP? SO, YOUR BUILDING, YOUR BUILDING IS, IS THAT STUCCO? THE BUILDING ITSELF? THE BUILDING ITSELF. WHAT'S THE OUTSIDE? IT'S STUCCO. ITS CONCRETE WALLS BUILT AND THE WAY IT'S FINISHED IS JUST LIKE RAW MATERIAL, JUST PAINTED OVER, BUT IT'S SOLID BECAUSE THAT STRUCTURE HAS BEEN, I THINK, FROM AROUND SO WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO CLAD THIS ENCLOSURE THE SAME WAY? YES, WE CAN DO THE CENTER BLOCKS, THE THREE WALLS, AND THEN WE CAN COVER THEM UP WITH STUCCO. LIKE STUCCO. 
          OKAY. LIKE STUCCO TO MATCH THE BUILDING. SOUNDS GOOD. GRACIAS. 
          ANY OTHER CONCERNS FROM COUNCIL? SO, ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS, A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. I BELIEVE IT WAS THE INTERACTIVE COLLEGE. THEY REACHED OUT AND SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T LOVE THE LOCATION OF THE DUMPSTER, AND THEY WERE JUST I GUESS THIS WOULD BE FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          COME ON UP. YES, HE'S GETTING A WORKOUT. AND THEY JUST SAID THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO EXPLORING MAYBE SOME OTHER LOCATIONS ON THE PROPERTY THAT MIGHT EVEN HAVE ACCESS THROUGH THEIR PROPERTIES BECAUSE THAT'S A PRETTY LARGE PROPERTY AND THAT WOULD MAKE IT LESS VISIBLE FROM THE ROAD. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU KNEW THAT THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO AT LEAST TALKING TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, AN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION. 
          SO, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT IT IS, WHERE I'M AT ON THAT. 
          WE ARE OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS, BUT AS FAR AS THE INTERACTIVE COLLEGE, I MIGHT HAVE I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF IT. THAT WAS WHAT? I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY WERE THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED IT. 
          YEAH. 
          COULD YOU REACH OUT TO THEM PRIOR TO TUESDAY AND LET US KNOW WHAT FEEDBACK YOU GET FROM THEM? JUST SO I'M CLEAR, THE COLLEGE IS OFFERING TO HOUSE THE DUMPSTER? I DON'T KNOW THE SITE. THE COMPLAINT MIGHT BE JUST HAVE THE ACCESS WHERE IT COMES IN, LIKE AN INTERPARCEL ACCESS WOULD WORK. WE'VE DONE THAT A NUMBER OF TIMES. I DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS. IT WAS A VERY LAST-MINUTE THING. BUT YES, I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S SOME AND THEY MAY HAVE AN UNREASONABLE ASK, SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW, IS THIS SINCE THEY ASKED, I'M ASKING YOU TO MAYBE EXPLORE IT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT APPEALS TO YOU ABOUT THAT. 
          THE ONLY LOCATION THAT I CAN THINK OF WOULD BE HONESTLY PUTTING IT CLOSE TO THEIR DUMPSTER BECAUSE THEIR DUMPSTER IS ON THE SIDE OF HOOD AVENUE, NOT IN FRONT OF THE COLLEGE. LIKE COUNCIL SAID, IF THEY'RE WILLING TO LET US PUT OUR DUMPSTERS THERE, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANY FUTURE PROBLEMS EITHER. 
          WELL, WE COULD TAKE CARE OF THAT WITH THIS INTERPARCEL ACCESS OR SOME I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY. LIKE I SAID, I JUST TO START THE DISCUSSION. THERE COULD BE SOME OTHER CHALLENGES WHY WE CAN'T DO IT. AND ITS VERY LAST MINUTE, I UNDERSTAND. BUT IF IT MAKES THE PROJECT BETTER FOR ALL OF US, WELL, WE CERTAINLY WANT TO LOOK AT IT. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. 
          PART WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR DUMPSTER? I, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS. IT WAS VERY, IT WAS VERY LAST MINUTE. SO, AGAIN, I JUST THEY DIDN'T GIVE ME A SPECIFIC LOCATION OR HOW 
          [01:10:01]
THAT WOULD WORK OR ANYTHING. 
          SO, I'M HAPPY TO FACILITATE THAT, THAT MEETING. I DON'T REALLY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN IT, BUT I WILL PUT THE 2 PARTIES TOGETHER. 
          YEAH, RIGHT. OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR. ANYTHING ELSE FROM COUNCIL? THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ALL RIGHT, THAT TAKES US TO OUR LAST ITEM UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS, WHICH IS 6000 PEACHTREE ROAD. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS, PZ 2026-1742 FOR 6000 PEACHTREE ROAD. THERE ARE 3 WAIVERS THAT ARE REQUESTED: ONE, TO REDUCE THE SIDEWALK CLEAR ZONE FROM 10 FEET TO 9.5 FEET; TO REDUCE THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE FROM 10 FEET TO 0 FEET; AND TO INSTALL AN ALTERNATIVE PEDESTRIAN STREETLIGHT FIXTURE. 
          YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING SITE HERE, WHICH CONSISTS OF A 2.15-ACRE LOT ALONG PEACHTREE ROAD. IT IS LOCATED EAST OF THE JIM ELLIS VOLKSWAGEN OF CHAMBLEE DEALERSHIP. AND WEST OF THE ASSEMBLY YARDS DEVELOPMENT IN DORAVILLE. THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOW THE EXISTING STREETSCAPE, WHICH INCLUDES NONE OF THE FEATURES WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED BY THE UDO EXCEPT FOR A RATHER GENEROUS LANDSCAPE ZONE. ADDITIONALLY, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE PARKING LOT, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE THE SIDEWALK WOULD GO, IS SEVERAL FEET LOWER THAN THE GRADE OF THAT POTENTIAL SIDEWALK. 
          THIS IMPACTS THE REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE AND ALSO CAUSES SOME CONCERNS FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY THERE THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS IN LANDSCAPE AREAS, BUT DUE TO THE CONSTRAINTS THEY MADE OR MENTIONED EARLIER, THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO FULLY COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS. STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS TO THE SIDEWALK ZONE AND ELIMINATION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL ZONE ARE APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE. 
          HOWEVER, STAFF IS NOT ABLE TO FIND HOW THESE CONSTRAINTS WOULD PREVENT THE ABILITY TO COMPLY WITH THE STREETLIGHT REQUIREMENTS. SO, FOR THIS REASON, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT IT AND FEEL THAT DOING SO WOULD RUN COUNTER TO THE GOALS OF THE UDO FOR CREATING A COHESIVE PUBLIC REALM. SO, TO THAT END, WE ARE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF WAIVER 3 TO INSTALL THE ALTERNATIVE PEDESTRIAN STREETLIGHT FIXTURE, BUT WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF WAIVERS 1 AND 2. 
          IN THIS SITUATION, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT A CONDITION THAT THE DEVELOPMENT BE CONSTRUCTED IN GENERAL CONFORMITY WITH THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RECEIVED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ON JUNE 19TH, 2026, AS REVISED TO REFLECT THE DENIED VARIANCES AND WAIVERS, AND SUBJECT TO ANY ADDITIONAL REVISIONS REQUIRED BY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDO. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM SHOULD COME ON UP. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND HOW YOU'RE RELATED TO THE PROJECT. 
          DAVID HERMAN. 1280 PEACHTREE STREET, NORTHEAST ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309. I ALSO HAVE THIS WITH ME, JAMESON SEACREST. HE WAS THE DESIGNER OF THE SIDEWALK PLAN. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING OF THE ROBERT W. WOODRUFF ARTS CENTER. WE'RE THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, AND, WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU TODAY TO DISCUSS THE SIDEWALK PLAN FOR 6000 PEACHTREE ROAD. LET ME JUST GET MY BEARINGS HERE. 
          PAGE DOWN. THERE WE GO. I REALLY JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THE 3RD WAIVER SINCE STAFF HAS GRACIOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF WAIVERS 1 AND 2 FOR THE CLEAR ZONE AND THE WIDTH OF THE SIDEWALK. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVE FIXTURE TYPE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING AND WHY WE'RE DOING THAT. WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS TO INSTALL SOLAR-POWERED PEDESTRIAN STREETLIGHTS IN PLACE OF THE HARDWIRED FIXTURES ALONG THE NEW SIDEWALK. THEY OFFER THE SAME FUNCTION. WE WON'T WE DON'T HAVE TO RUN NEW CONDUIT. THEY HAVE A COMPARABLE APPEARANCE, AND IT'S A SUSTAINABLE PROJECT. 
          THERE'S BECAUSE THERE'S THIS IS AN UNDEVELOPED STREETSCAPE, THERE'S NO ELECTRICAL POWER ALONG THE STREETSCAPE. SO, WE WOULD HAVE TO RUN CONDUIT FROM THE BUILDING UNDER THE PARKING LOT THROUGH THE RETAINING WALL UP TO POWER THESE 3 LIGHT FIXTURES. IT BASICALLY WOULD ACCOUNT FOR ADDING AN ADDITIONAL 1/3 
          [01:15:01]
TO THE PROJECT. SIGNIFICANT COST TO INSTALL THIS LIGHTING. 
          WE'VE OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT HAS RECOMMENDED THIS LIGHT FIXTURE YOU CAN SEE. IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE LANTERN TOP FIXTURES, BUT THEY ARE SIMILAR TO A TRADITIONAL FIXTURE AND OFFER A VINTAGE-INSPIRED FIXTURE DESIGNED TO FOR HISTORIC AND CIVIC STREETSCAPE. 
          I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT WHEN WE, WE BUILD THIS STREETSCAPE, WE'RE GOING TO BE AN ISLAND. 
          IF YOU, IF YOU DRIVE ALONG THAT SECTION OF NORTH PEACH OF PEACHTREE ROAD, THERE'S NO STREETSCAPE THERE. 
          ACROSS THE STREET IS THE CITY OF DORAVILLE. THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT THERE HAS LIGHT FIXTURES THAT LOOK TOTALLY DIFFERENT. AND WE THESE WOULD HAVE THE SAME LUMINESCENCE AS WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. SO, THE SECTION 300-8 GIVES CERTAIN CRITERIA FOR WAIVERS. ONE IS CRITERIA 1 IS THAT THE CONDITIONS ARE OUTSIDE THE OWNER'S CONTROL. SO, THE SAME WALL, RETAINING WALL, THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ACCEPTED FOR WAIVERS 1 AND 2 IS THE SAME HARDSHIP WE ENCOUNTER FOR WAIVER 3. THE WALL EXISTS. 
          WE WOULD INCUR SIGNIFICANT COST TO GO UNDER IT. AND WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO INSTALL FIXTURES. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER SOLUTION THAT WORKS, LOOKS NICE, GIVES THE SAME LUMINESCENCE, PROVIDES THE SAME AMOUNT OF SAFETY, AND IS SUSTAINABLE. NO DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC. 
          AGAIN, WE'RE PROVIDING THE SAME ILLUMINATION, SAME RELIABILITY, SAME SAFETY OUTCOME. SO, THE STAFF'S OBJECTION IS A DISJOINTED PUBLIC REALM FROM INCONSISTENT STREET FURNITURE. 
          THAT IS AN AESTHETIC CONSISTENCY CONCERN, NOT A DETRIMENT TO HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE. AND THERE IS NO EXISTING PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING ON THIS FRONTAGE OR THE ADJACENT INDUSTRIAL PARCELS FOR THE FIXTURE TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH. NOW, I GET I'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 
          AND I APPRECIATE THAT RIGHT NOW WE'RE AN ISLAND, BUT IN 5 OR 10 YEARS WE WON'T BE AN ISLAND, THAT THERE'LL BE OTHER DEVELOPMENT. BUT I DO MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPROMISE AND ALTERNATIVE FIXTURES. WE CAN BE A PIONEER BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES ALONG THIS STRETCH WILL INCUR THE SAME SIMILAR SIGNIFICANT COSTS TO THIS. AND AS I SAID, I DON'T WANT TO HARBOR TOO MUCH ON THE COST, BUT IT IS, I THINK, RELEVANT. IT ADDS A SIGNIFICANT COST TO THE PROJECT TO PUT IN THIS TRENCH FOR THIS CONDUIT. AGAIN, WE OFFER GENUINE ALTERNATIVE CONFIGURATION WITH THESE SOLAR POWERED FIXTURES. AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST APPROVAL OF WAIVER 3 ALONGSIDE WAIVERS 1 AND 2. 
          SIR, ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT, I'LL CLOSE THAT ONE OUT AND WE WILL OPEN THAT UP FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION. 
          THOSE, THOSE LIGHT FIXTURES, THEY'RE WHAT, 23 WATTS A PIECE? THERE'S 3 OF THEM AND THE BATTERY'S 600 OR SO WATT-HOURS. THAT'S LIKE 9 HOURS OF WITH THE BATTERIES AT FULL POWER AND FULL LIFE, THAT'S LIKE 9 HOURS. THAT DOESN'T GET US THROUGH THE NIGHT IN THE WINTER FOR SURE. 
          YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR THAT. OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, WE, AS PART OF THE INFORMATION WE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE SUBMITTED A WHOLE PACKAGE FROM THE MANUFACTURER, AND THEY CLAIM THAT THEIR FIXTURES ARE ABLE TO GET THEM THROUGH THE NIGHT. SO, I CAN DO A LITTLE MORE RESEARCH AND PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION BACK TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BEFORE YOU ALL YEAH, THAT'S FINE. THE NUMBERS JUST DON'T JIVE RIGHT NOW, BUT I KNOW WHAT THE SALES WOULD BE. 
          TO BE CLEAR, HE'S AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEER. 
          OH, RIGHT. I'M SORRY. 
          [01:20:02]
SORRY TO NERD. I'M SORRY. NO, IT'S OKAY. I'M A MECHANICAL ENGINEER AND THERE'S A CIVIL ENGINEER. 
          ENGINEER. SO, PLUS, PLUS THEY WILL GET, LESS SOLAR, LESS DAYLIGHT IN THE WINTERTIME WHEN THEY NEED MORE. AND THEY ALSO THE COLD DOES AFFECT THE BATTERIES TOO. AND THEY PRODUCE LOOK AT JOHN COMING IN THERE. 
          I KNOW, I DO SOME NERDING OUT ON THAT STUFF TOO. 
          THAT'S IT. AND ALSO, WHEN THESE LIGHTS ARE IN, THE CITY MAINTAINS THEM? THIS IS MORE A QUESTION FOR YOU. 
          WE, WE MAINTAIN THESE LIGHTS. 
          SO, THEN WE WOULD NEED TO WOW. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. THE CITY WOULD MAINTAIN THEM THROUGH AN EASEMENT AFTER THEY ARE INSTALLED. 
          THERE WOULD BE A MAINTENANCE BOND THAT WOULD BE ISSUED AFTER BEFORE THE CLOSEOUT OF THE PROJECT THAT WOULD COVER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS TO COVER THINGS LIKE ISSUES WITH INSTALLATION. BUT AFTER THAT, THE CITY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THEM. 
          I'M DONE. THANK YOU. THAT WOULD THAT WOULD WE'D PROBABLY NEED TO FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION FOR THAT TOO, BECAUSE THAT, THAT WAS ACTUALLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK. I WAS GOING TO ASK TODD, BUT TODD, NOT PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT BEING SUCH A DIFFERENT, PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY, THAT WOULD BE VERY CHALLENGING TO HAVE A NEW PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT WOULD BE IN OUR UNDER OUR RESPONSIBILITY. AND SO THERE MAY HAVE TO BE SOME SORT OF AGAIN, ITS VERY NEW GROUND, SO I DON'T KNOW. 
          IT IS NEW GROUND, BUT THIS IS WHAT I'LL SAY. WE WANT TO BE A GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN. 
          SURE, SURE. 
          WE MAINTAIN OUR FACILITY, AND WE HAVE A MAINTENANCE CREW, AND WE WOULD BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN THE MAINTENANCE OF THESE STREETS. 
          AND SEE, I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO BE A GOOD STEWARD OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND PUT IN SOLAR AND LED. AND I JUST FIND OUT IT'S JUST TO SAVE MONEY ON YOUR PROJECT. SO, I'M JUST GIVING YOU A LITTLE BUSTING YOUR CHOPS A LITTLE BIT. 
          BUT YEAH, I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER OFF JUST SAYING WE'RE BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF THE ENVIRONMENT, BUT THAT'S OKAY TOO. BUT ANY AND THEN THE REALITY IS THE FIXTURES HAVE TO BE MAINTAINED. 
          EITHER THE CITY DOES IT OR SOMEONE ELSE DOES IT. 
          CORRECT. 
          DIFFERENCE OF THE APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER OR THE DENIAL OF THE WAIVER, AND WE WOULD ENTERTAIN AND BE OPEN TO MAINTAINING THOSE 3 FIXTURES FOR THE DURATION OF OUR OWNERSHIP. 
          AND THEN THE LAST, BEFORE I GET OFF MY SOAPBOX, IF I CAN TELL YOU WHEN I STARTED DOING THIS 12 YEARS AGO HOW MANY TIMES I HEARD ON THE PROJECTS GOING UP AND DOWN PEACHTREE BOULEVARD ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WELL, THERE'S NO SIDEWALK THERE, AND I THINK WE'RE SNEAKING UP ON LESS THAN A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET OF HAVING SIDEWALK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD ALL THE WAY DOWN PEACHTREE BOULEVARD THROUGH THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE CITY. SO, YES, YOU'LL BE THE PIONEER, BUT WE HAVE BIG PLANS AND YOU WON'T BE THE ONLY ISLAND OF SIDEWALK IN THE CITY. I GUARANTEE YOU THAT, AND PROBABLY IN LESS THAN A YEAR. SO, ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST KIND OF MY OTHER THAT'S GREAT. 
          SOAPBOX THAT I WAS ON. 
          I DO WANT TO THANK THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THEY WERE VERY INSTRUCTIVE AND VERY HELPFUL AND GUIDED US DOWN A PATH, I THINK, THAT HAS GOTTEN TO US THIS POINT WHERE WE HAVE SECURED RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF 2 WAIVERS. AND WE HAVE THIS ONE WAIVER ABOUT THE FIXTURES. AND WE'LL JUST DONE. 
          JUST BE CAREFUL. HE'S SUPPOSED TO ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS. 
          YOU'RE NOT REALLY, HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO GIVE US A LOT OF FEEDBACK. 
          WE JUST ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED, OKAY? ARE YOU DONE? YES, IT'S ALL YOURS. NOW YOU'RE 10 MINUTES. 
          I'M GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO DEAL WITH. 
          YEAH, SURE. 
          I'M SORRY. SO, I LOVE THE IDEA OF SOLAR. I THINK THAT THE MORE I CAN GET SOLAR OUT OF ANYBODY AND ANYTHING, THE BETTER I LIKE IT. I KNOW IT'S STILL IN THE INFANCY STAGES, IF YOU WILL, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF, YOU KNOW, LONGEVITY OF BATTERIES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, BUT I STILL LIKE THAT. SO, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT TO YOU. 
          WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? I MEAN, DID YOU IS THIS IS THIS BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING SOME REMODELING OR YOU WANTED TO DO THE SIDEWALKS? WE APPLIED FOR A PERMIT TO PUT A NEW ROOF ON THE BUILDING, AND IT'S TRUE, BECAUSE OF THE AGE OF THE BUILDING FROM 1972, IT TRIGGERED THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT. 
          OKAY. AND SO, THE OTHER PART OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS ACTUALLY PUTTING IN ADA-COMPLIANT SIDEWALK AS WELL, ADA MEANING THE ACCESSIBILITY TO YOUR BUILDING AS WELL AS ALONG THE ROAD. SO, AND THEN IT'S NOT ON OUR PLAN, 
          [01:25:04]
SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU, LANDSCAPING MATERIALS THAT ALSO REQUIRED, OR YES, EVERYTHING THAT THE UDO REQUIRES IS INCLUDED. THERE IS A LANDSCAPE THE ONLY POINT OF CONFLICT WELL, THERE WERE 3 POINTS OF CONFLICT. I'M HOPING WE'RE DOWN TO ONE, AND MAYBE YOU WILL YOU ALL WILL FIND IT SEE FIT TO APPROVE THE WAIVER FOR THAT. 
          YOU DEFINITELY ARE GOING TO BE A PIONEER, BUT NOT FOR VERY LONG ALONG THAT STRETCH OF ROAD, BECAUSE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF INTEREST AND STUFF GOING ON CHAMBLEE, BUT ALSO AT ASSEMBLY. 
          SO, WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          SO, YOU'RE NOT BUT I WANT TO CORRECT YOU ON ONE MINOR LITTLE ISSUE. I THINK YOU SAID NORTH PEACHTREE MEANING THE NORTHERN END OF PEACHTREE, BUT IT'S NOT. NO, YOU DIDN'T. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GOOD. I'M GLAD THAT YOU DID BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A LOT OF MIS CONFUSION. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. 
          I KNOW I YOU'RE NOT DONE YET. 
          HAVE YOU LOOKED AT DIRECTIONAL BORING FOR INSTALLATION IN ALL THIS? DIRECTIONAL BORING RATHER THAN TRADITIONAL TRENCHING METHODS. 
          HAVE YOU LOOKED AT DOING DIRECTIONAL DRILLING TO RUN THE POWER? I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU HAVE YOU LOOK INTO THAT AND SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. THAT'S DONE QUITE FREQUENTLY. IT'S BEING DONE UP AND DOWN BUFORD HIGHWAY RIGHT NOW, CLAREMONT ROAD, ON RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS FREQUENTLY. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THAT WOULD RESOLVE YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT COST INSTEAD OF DOING ALL THAT TRENCHING. 
          GREAT SUGGESTION. I'LL TALK TO OUR GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 
          BECAUSE IT IN GENERAL, FOR A LOT OF THE REASONS CITED, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE ANOTHER SET OF STREETLIGHTS BEING INSTALLED THAT ARE YOU KNOW, THREE ORPHANS TO THE REST OF OUR CITY. SO, IT'S I KNOW IT SEEMS LIKE A SMALL THING, BUT IT'S A REALLY HARD SELL FOR ME TO SWITCH OUT THESE THREE LIGHTS JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THE UNDERGROUND POWER. 
          I WILL JUST NOTE THAT OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DEPUTY EXCUSE ME EARL, I NEVER GET IT CORRECT, BUT THEY'RE VIGOROUSLY SHAKING THEIR HEAD BACK THERE. 
          DIRECTIONAL BORING. 
          DIRECTIONAL BORING. 
          EVERYBODY ELSE KNOWS. I DON'T KNOW. ALL RIGHT, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? NO. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE YOU FOR YOUR TIME. ALL RIGHT, 
          [6. Old Business]
THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING. 
          WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES. I HAVE FOUR SETS OF. MINUTES. 
          DID ANYBODY SEE ANYTHING THAT NEEDED TO BE CHANGED ON THOSE ITEMS? ALL RIGHT, 
          [8.  New Business]
SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON DOWN TO NEW BUSINESS. UNDER NEW BUSINESS THIS EVENING, WE HAVE THE PIERCE DRIVE PARKING MAINTENANCE AND USE AGREEMENT. 
          THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS CAME UP AS THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT I'M TRYING TO GET THE 3453 PIERCE DRIVE HAS RECENTLY SOLD. 
          TO A NEW OWNER. THAT OWNER IS GOES BY CAM PIERCE PROPERTIES LLC. THEY REACHED OUT ABOUT FORMALIZING A PARKING MAINTENANCE AND USE AGREEMENT, A NON-EXCLUSIONARY PARKING MAINTENANCE AND USE AGREEMENT. 
          THERE IS IN THE PRESENTATION, AS YOU CAN SEE, SEVERAL PARKING SPOTS THAT ARE OFF-STREET PARKING THAT ARE ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE CITY. THESE ARE PUBLIC. 
          ACCESSIBLE, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPOTS, BUT, HAVE BEEN USED BY THE, THE PROPERTY FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, AND, AND HAS ALSO BEEN MAINTAINED BY THE PROPERTY FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, AND THERE'S BEEN NO FORMAL AGREEMENT IN PLACE. AND SO, WE ARE PROPOSING A PARKING AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR THOSE PARKING SPOTS FOR NON-EXCLUSIONARY USE OF THOSE PARKING SPOTS. 
          OKAY, QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? HOW LONG IS THE CONTRACT FOR? IT'S 10 YEARS. THANK YOU. 
          AND TO BE CLEAR, THOUGH, THAT WOULD STILL REMAIN PUBLIC PARKING. THAT IS CORRECT. 
          OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. 
          MOVING DOWN TO THE NEXT ITEM, WE'RE AT THE WOOD ACRES NATURE PRESERVE NOTICE OF AWARD. 
          THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I APOLOGIZE. THIS ONE KIND OF SQUEAKED IN AT THE LAST MINUTE. THIS WAS ADDED A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO, BUT WE RECEIVED THE BIDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF WOOD ACRES NATURE PRESERVE, WHICH IS VERY EXCITING. AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE AWARD GO TO SURFACES GROUP LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR A COST NOT TO EXCEED $800,000. THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OVER THE ORIGINAL BUDGET THAT WAS PROPOSED, AND WE DO HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOME VALUE ENGINEERING AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, BUT IT IS ABOUT $150,000 
          [01:30:01]
$100,000 OVER THE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED BUDGET, BUT WE HAVE SOME MONEY TO COVER THAT COST. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THAT ITEM? HOW SOON DO WE START? AS SOON AS WE CAN. 
          TOMORROW? ALL RIGHT. THE DIRECTION IS TO START TOMORROW. STAFF ACTION ITEMS THIS EVENING. WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF GRANT FUNDING FOR THE MURAL CONCEPT. THE ARTIST SELECTION FOR 3460 CHAMBLEE DUNWOODY WAY. 
          HELLO, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          TANISHA JONES, PUBLIC ARTS MANAGER. WE HAVE A MURAL APPLICATION AS WELL AS A MURAL GRANT APPLICATION FROM WILD ASTER BOOKS, SEEN HERE. THAT'S THE CURRENT COLOR OF THE BUILDING. I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A COLOR KEY COMING UP. 
          WILD ASTER BOOKS HAS COMPLETED EVERYTHING THAT THEY NEED TO COMPLETE FOR THIS. THEY WENT IN FRONT OF PAC. THEY SUBMITTED THEIR APPLICATIONS. THEY HAVE NO OPEN ISSUES WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT, NO OPEN ISSUES WITH ANYONE. 
          AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A $5,000 MATCHED GRANT. THEY ARE NOT IN A ZONE IN WHICH IT WOULD BE UNMATCHED, SO THEY ARE MATCHING THAT GRANT. AND THEY HAVE PROPOSED THE ARTIST NAMED DUSTY KRAMER, WHO DID THE INTERIOR MURAL INSIDE OF WILD ASTER. IF YOU HAVE BEEN IN THERE, IT'S A LOVELY MURAL. SO, THIS SLIDE SHOWS HIS STYLE, AND IF YOU GUYS COULD TAKE A REALLY GOOD LOOK AT THIS, BECAUSE THE SKETCH ON THE NEXT PAGE MIGHT BE A LITTLE LESS EASY TO KIND WRAP YOUR BRAIN AROUND. 
          SO, THIS IS HIS STYLE. IT'S VERY STORYBOOK ILLUSTRATIVE STYLE. WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING IS STICKING WITH THE STORYBOOK FANTASY THEME, BUT NOT LEANING TOO HARD INTO THE FACT THAT THEY'RE A BOOKSTORE. IT IS FANTASY CHARACTERS IN HIS STYLE, AND THAT HAS THE SMALL COLOR KEY IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT. THE PAC DID APPROVE THIS AND SPEAK TO THE, THE BUSINESS OWNER, AND THEY DID ALSO PROVIDE A BUILDING OWNER AFFIDAVIT APPROVING THIS. SO, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT COUNCIL APPROVES THE GRANT APPLICATION AS WELL AS THE MURAL APPLICATION, AND THAT'S IT. 
          TANISHA, QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? IS THE TRAVELING RAT GUY HOVERING OVER THE WROUGHT IRON RAILING ON THE I THINK, I THINK THAT IS MAYBE SHOWING THAT HE'S KIND OF IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE HE'S SORT OF RUNNING INTO THE BUILDING, LIKE HE'S BEHIND THE OKAY, OKAY. 
          YEAH, IT'S JUST DRAWN ON TOP, BUT HE'S I THINK HE'S KIND OF SNEAKING INTO THE DOOR. 
          OKAY, SO IT'S ON THE, IT'S ON THE SURFACE OF THE BUILDING, NOT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO REDO THAT AND HAVE LIKE A HARD YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. THIS WILL ALL THESE SKETCHES WILL ALL BE PAINTED ON THE BUILDING. AND THEN THERE'S 2 KIND OF FUNKY LITTLE DOORS IN THE FRONT. I THINK THAT'LL, THAT'LL BE PAINTED ON THAT STOOP AREA THERE. 
          THE BIRD LOOKS LIKE A BIRD, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          WELL, I DON'T JUDGE ART. 
          THAT'S WHAT IT IS. 
          WE HAVE A PAC FOR THAT. 
          ALL RIGHT. THAT WILL TAKE US DOWN TO THE NEXT ITEM. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO FILL A VACANT SEAT ON THE PAC. 
          HI. I SENT A MEMO OVER TO YOU GUYS EARLY THIS WEEK THAT HAD A STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPLICATIONS THAT WE RECEIVED. 
          JUST SO THAT YOU GUYS ARE AWARE, BECAUSE IT IS MID-YEAR, WE ALSO LOOKED BACK AT THE APPLICATIONS THAT WE HAD GOTTEN EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND THE ONLY ONE THAT WAS STILL VALID ACTUALLY HAS MOVED OUT OF STATE. SO, THE 2 NEW ONES ARE THE 2 NEW THAT WE RECEIVED. 
          AND I GAVE MY RECOMMENDATION, AND WE ASK THAT YOU APPROVE IT. 
          THANK YOU, TANISHA. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THAT ITEM? ALL 
          [9.Mayor and Council Items ]
RIGHT, SEEING NONE, THANK YOU. THAT TAKES US DOWN TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS, AND COUNCILMAN FIRST HAS A MICROMOBILITY SAFETY DISCUSSION. 
          THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M BRINGING FORWARD THE ISSUE OF MICROMOBILITY SAFETY BECAUSE THE TECHNOLOGY ON OUR STREETS AND TRAILS HAS CHANGED FASTER THAN OUR CITY CODE. I'M HERE TONIGHT TO WRITE THE ORDINANCE FROM THE DAIS. MY GOAL IS TO RAISE A POLICY ISSUE, ASK WHETHER COUNCIL AGREES IT'S SOMETHING, SOMETHING WE NEED 
          [01:35:01]
TO ADDRESS. THEN WE RELY ON OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF TO TELL US WHAT'S LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, EXCUSE ME, WHAT IS ENFORCEABLE, AND WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR CHAMBLEE. MICRO-MOBILITY CAN BE A VERY GOOD THING FOR CHAMBLEE. IT GIVES PEOPLE MORE WAYS TO GET AROUND, SUPPORTS THE KIND OF CONNECTED COMMUNITY WE'RE BUILDING, BUT THE TECHNOLOGY HAS EVOLVED. 
          TODAY, DEVICES ARE BEING SOLD AND OPERATED THAT MAY LOOK LIKE TRADITIONAL BICYCLES BUT CAN TRAVEL AT MUCH HIGHER SPEEDS AND HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE POWER. WHEN I WAS A KID, ALL I HAD WAS 2 LEGS. I DIDN'T HAVE HORSEPOWER OR TORQUE ON MY BIKES. THAT RAISES A SIMPLE POLICY QUESTION. DO OUR CURRENT RULES STILL MATCH THE TECHNOLOGY BEING USED IN PUBLIC SPACES? I THINK WE NEED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. 
          FOR ME, THE CENTRAL ISSUE IS SAFETY. 
          OUR TRAILS, PARKS, SIDEWALKS, AND PUBLIC SPACES ARE SHARED BY PEDESTRIANS, FAMILIES, RUNNERS, CYCLISTS, AND INCREASINGLY ELECTRIC DEVICES CAPABLE OF MOVING MUCH FASTER THAN PEOPLE AROUND THEM. THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF RIDERS ARE RESPONSIBLE. 
          THIS IS NOT ABOUT TREATING E-BIKE RIDERS AS THE PROBLEM. 
          IT'S ABOUT MAKING SURE WE CAN ADDRESS UNSAFE BEHAVIOR AND RECOGNIZE WHEN A DEVICE PRESENTS RISKS THAT OUR EXISTING RULES WERE NEVER DESIGNED TO HANDLE. I WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE THIS CONVERSATION NOW THAN AFTER SOMEBODY'S SERIOUSLY INJURED. 
          WE'RE INVESTING HEAVILY IN TRAILS, PARKS, SIDEWALKS, AND PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          AS THOSE SPACES BECOME MORE HEAVILY USED, WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE OUR RULES KEEP PACE. 
          WE'RE ONE SERIOUS INCIDENT AWAY FROM HAVING THIS CONVERSATION UNDER VERY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES. DOING NOTHING IS ALSO A POLICY DECISION, AND I DON'T THINK WAITING FOR AN ACCIDENT IS A RESPONSIBLE APPROACH. I KNOW ENFORCEMENT'S ALWAYS BEEN RAISED AS ALREADY BEEN RAISED AS A CONCERN, AND I AGREE THAT WHENEVER WE ADOPT SOMETHING, IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING OUR POLICE CAN ACTUALLY ENFORCE. THE OBJECTIVE IS NOT SIMPLY TO WRITE TICKETS. THE OBJECTIVE IS SAFE BEHAVIOR. EDUCATION AND CLEAR COMMUNICATION SHOULD BE PART OF THE APPROACH, AND OUR OFFICERS SHOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE DISCRETION. 
          BUT THERE ALSO NEEDS TO BE A CLEAR LEGAL FRAMEWORK SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT AUTHORITY THEY HAVE WHEN SOMEONE IS CREATING AN UNSAFE CONDITION. THAT IS WHY I WANT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY INTERNALLY EVOLVED BEFORE WE DECIDE WHAT THE FINAL ORDINANCE SHOULD SAY. THE POLICY QUESTION IS STRAIGHTFORWARD. DO OUR ORDINANCES ADEQUATELY ADDRESS MODERN MICRO MOBILITY DEVICES AND UNSAFE BEHAVIOR IN CITY-OWNED PUBLIC SPACES? IF THEY DON'T, WHAT LEGAL ENFORCEABLE FRAMEWORK SHOULD WE PUT IN PLACE? THOSE ARE QUESTIONS I WANT OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND STAFF TO HELP ANSWER. I'M INTENTIONALLY NOT PRESCRIBING THE EXACT LANGUAGE TONIGHT. I WANT LEGAL TO TELL US WHAT'S IN BOUNDS AND OUR ADMINISTRATION TO TELL US WHAT IS PRACTICAL. 
          THEN COUNCIL CAN MAKE THE POLICY DECISION. I WANT TO EMPATHIZE EMPHASIZE AGAIN; THIS IS NOT AN ANTI-E-BIKE PROPOSAL. 
          I WANT CHAMBLEE TO EMBRACE MICROMOBILITY WHILE WE'RE ALSO MAKING SURE OUR PUBLIC SPACES REMAIN SAFE FOR EVERYONE TO USE THEM. AND, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE'RE NOT STARTING FROM SCRATCH. WE HAVE A BLUEPRINT. WE CAN LEARN FROM WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE DONE AND ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND STAFF TO BRING US APPROACHES LEGALLY SOUND, ENFORCEABLE, AND APPROPRIATE FOR OUR CITY. WE SHOULD ADDRESS THIS THOUGHTFULLY NOW RATHER THAN REACT AFTER SOMEBODY GETS HURT. THAT IS WHY I'M BRINGING THIS FORWARD, AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR COUNCIL'S CONSENT TONIGHT TO GO FORTH AND HAVE STAFF DO THIS WORK. 
          DISCUSSION FROM COUNCIL? YEAH, I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THIS, LOOKING INTO THIS, BECAUSE WHEN I DRIVE AROUND, I SEE BICYCLES THAT ARE AND SCOOTERS THAT ARE CAPABLE OF TRAFFIC SPEEDS. WHEN I LAST TIME I WENT TO PERIMETER MALL, A GUY WENT THROUGH THE DIVERGING DIAMOND INTERSECTION IN TRAVEL LANE ON AN E-BIKE. 
          AS FAST AS I WAS GOING, SO AND I DON'T. I'M UNAWARE OF ANYTHING GOING ON AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT SO I DO NOT FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO WAIT FOR THE STATE OR THE COUNTY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN DEFINITELY GET INVOLVED IN NOW, AND THEN IF THE STATE COMES DOWN WITH SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN WE MODIFY. BUT YOUR POINT ABOUT AN EDUCATION ASPECT IS EXCELLENT BECAUSE I THINK PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU KNOW JUST, WE COULD DO SOME. EDUCATION ON THIS. AND ALSO, I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE LIKE YOU SAID, I DON'T WANT TO BE WRITING TICKETS AND PULLING KIDS OVER OR PULLING PEOPLE. 
          BUT WHEN YOU'RE GOING DOWN OUR TRAILS AND AGAIN, THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE ARE COOL. 
          BUT IF SOMEBODY GOES ZIPPING BY AND THEY HIT SOMEBODY, THERE CAN BE SOME SERIOUS INJURY. 
          SO, I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THIS. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT, PAUL. AND I WILL POINT OUT THIS IS RESIDENT-DRIVEN. I'VE HEARD FROM MANY RESIDENTS ON THIS, 
          [01:40:01]
AS THEY'RE WALKING DOWN THE TRAIL SYSTEM, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN FRIGHTENED BY BIKES GOING WAY BEYOND THE ACTUAL SPEED LIMIT THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, AND ALSO NEAR OUR SOCCER FIELDS SPECIFICALLY. 
          OVER AT KESWICK PARK, I KNOW WE HAVE A LITTLE LOOP THERE, AND WE HAVE SOME E-BIKE RIDERS THAT WILL GO THROUGH KESWICK FOREST, WHICH THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO, WHICH IS PROBLEMATIC, AND IT'S SCARED THE PARENTS, AND THEY'VE REACHED OUT TO ME TO FIND A SOLUTION. TO HELP MAKE THIS MORE ENFORCEABLE, MR. MASON. 
          I THINK GO AHEAD. YOU GO AHEAD. 
          I'M MR. MASON. BY THE WAY, YOU GO AHEAD. I SAID MAYOR, AND I WAS TRYING TO, BUT YOU GO AHEAD. I AGREE. 
          I THINK THAT IT'S HIGH TIME THAT WE DO THIS. AS WITH ANYTHING THAT'S NEW, PEOPLE HAVE TO LEARN HOW TO ADJUST AND DEAL WITH THE NEWNESS, AND WITH ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE MADE TO THEIR LIVES. I, FOR ONE, HAVE COME CLOSE TO HITTING A FEW PEOPLE ON POWERED BIKES, SHALL WE SAY, JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT, THEY DIDN'T THINK THAT TRAFFIC RULES APPLIED TO THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT A 4-WHEEL CAR. AND AS WELL, I THINK THAT THE HELMET PROBLEM IS ALSO VERY VISIBLE. NOT WEARING HELMETS IS VERY VISIBLE. SO, I'M COMPLETELY IN AGREEMENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WITH THIS. I THINK IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW WE CAN ENFORCE THIS ACROSS OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE THAT COME THROUGH OUR CITY. SO, I THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE TOUCHY, BUT IT HAS TO BE DONE. 
          AS I ALWAYS SAY, WE CONTROL WHAT WE CAN CONTROL, AND FOR US, THAT'S 7.9 SQUARE MILES. 
          I AGREE. 
          AND THE THING ABOUT IT IS OUR DRIVERS NEED PROTECTION TOO. I MEAN, IF I WERE TO HIT SOMEBODY AND INJURE THEM OR WORSE, I DON'T KNOW HOW I DON'T KNOW HOW I WOULD GO ON. I REALLY DON'T. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT THE DRIVERS NEED TO BE PROTECTED FROM CONSEQUENCES LIKE THAT AS WELL. 
          MISS ROBSON. 
          OH YES. 
          THAT'S NOT RIGHT. MISS. 
          MR. MASON WANNABE. 
          NO, I'M NOT THE MAYOR WANNABE FOR SURE, 100% ON THAT. I BROUGHT THIS UP 10 YEARS AGO AT LEAST, PROBABLY WHEN THE BELTLINE WAS STARTED, BECAUSE WHAT I NOTICED THAT YOU HAD THE TOUR DE FRANCE WANNABES FLYING DOWN THE BELTLINE, AND THERE WAS LESS OF IT, BUT IT WAS SOME OF IT HAPPENING IN CHAMBLEE TOO. SO, AND AT THAT TIME, DIFFERENT STAFF, DIFFERENT POLICE DEPARTMENT, DIFFERENT THING TOLD ME IT WAS NOT ENFORCEABLE, THAT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS. AND AS TECHNOLOGY HAS IMPROVED OR EXPANDED WITH THE E-MOBILITY, I MAYBE THERE'S SOME TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENTS HOW THIS CAN BE ENFORCED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BUT I'VE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF POLICIES THAT WE'VE PASSED OVER THE YEARS AND THAT WERE NOT ENFORCEABLE THAT I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO, BUT THERE'S A COUPLE OF THEM. 
          AND SO THAT WOULD BE DEFINITELY SOMETHING I WANT TO SEE. AND I ACTUALLY DON'T EVEN WANT IT LIMITED TO THE ELECTRONIC SPEED DEVICES, BUT THE GUYS WHO DO, THEY'RE OUT THERE. IT'S NOT AS COMMON AS THE E-MOBILITY GUYS, BUT THEY'RE THE GUYS THAT DECIDE THEY WANT TO RIDE THEIR 10-SPEED AS FAST AS THEY CAN DOWN OUR SIDEWALKS. AND THEY'RE JUST AS DANGEROUS. YOU DON'T HEAR THEM. THEY'RE ON YOU. AND IT'S A PROBLEM. AND SO, I DON'T WANT THIS I WANT IT TO BE THE BEHAVIOR ON THE TRAILS AND SIDEWALK TO BE THE PROBLEM AS PART OF IT. IF WE ALSO HAVE PROBLEMS ON THE ROADS, THAT COULD BE ANOTHER PART OF IT. THERE MAY HAVE TO BE A COUPLE A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I THINK THAT ANYWAY, I JUST I WAS JUST TOLD 8 TO 10 YEARS AGO WHENEVER THE BELTLINE OPENED UP THAT IT WASN'T OR AT LEAST THAT'S WHEN I STARTED USING IT WAS JUST NOT ENFORCEABLE TO DO. SO, THAT'S GOING TO BE A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GO TO THESE SAME RESIDENTS AND SAY, WELL, WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE BUT WE CAN'T ENFORCE IT. SO, IT JUST MAKES YOU LOOK SILLY. 
          SO, THAT'S WHERE I AM ON THIS. I'M NOT AGAINST IMPROVING. 
          LIKE I SAID, I TRIED TO DO THIS A WHILE BACK AND I WAS TOLD IT COULDN'T BE DONE. SO, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. 
          YEAH, THERE'S MANY SHADES OF THIS, RIGHT? RIGHT. I WOULD SAY WOODSTOCK THEY RECENTLY PASSED ONE WHERE IT OUTLAWS ALL BIKES UNDER THE AGE OF 18. 
          SO, THOSE ARE CONSIDERATIONS WE CAN MAKE. I DON'T WANT TO PEDAL-POWERED BIKES TOO? NO, NO, NO, JUST ANYTHING THAT GOES OVER 20 MILES AN HOUR TURNS IT TO ANOTHER STAGE OF CLASSIFICATION, AND THAT'S 
          [01:45:01]
WHERE YOU START GETTING INTO STATE LAW. BUT WE CAN ALWAYS TIGHTEN THE SCREWS ON THAT. BUT I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THOUGH, I JUST MADE WOODSTOCK AN EXAMPLE. I DO NOT WANT TO BE THAT DRACONIAN WHEN IT COMES TO THIS, RIGHT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE COMMON SENSE FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO BE SAFE AND TO PROTECT THE CITY FROM ANY LIABILITY IN CASE THERE IS AN ACCIDENT IN THE FUTURE. JUST I SAW KIDS GOING DOWN. WHAT WAS IT? DONALDSON. IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR, DONALDSON HAS A VERY STEEP GRADE TO IT. BLEW RIGHT THROUGH THE STOP SIGN IN COLD SPRINGS BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO GO AS FAST AS THEY CAN. 
          DIDN'T EVEN PAY ATTENTION TO THE STOP SIGN. STOP SIGN, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A TRAGIC EVENT IF A CAR PULLED OUT IN FRONT OF THEM. TRAGIC. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID HERE. 
          WELL, AND THE OTHER PART OF IT IS THAT YOU SAID LIABILITY, AND IT'S NOT JUST CITY LIABILITY, BUT IF A CIVILIAN WERE TO HAVE AN ACCIDENT, BE INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WITH AN UNSAFE RIDER THAT, YOU KNOW, THE RULES EXIST AND THEY WEREN'T FOLLOWING THERE'S LIABILITY THERE AS WELL. SO, I THINK THAT YOU KNOW THAT WE GOT TO START SOMEWHERE. 
          FANTASTIC. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS, ELMER? NO, AND I BELIEVE I ASKED THE CHIEF TO JUST BE PREPARED FOR THIS CONVERSATION. IF HE HAS ANYTHING THAT HE WANTS TO ADD, JUST FOR ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I WOULD ASK HIM TO COME TO THE PODIUM. 
          HEARING COUNSEL? SORRY. 
          JUST TO ADD A LITTLE BIT TO, THE CONVERSATION AND TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, FROM COUNCILMAN MESA, NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE AS FAR AS ENFORCEMENT. DIFFICULT, PROBABLY, BECAUSE SOME OF THE TOOLS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO SOME OF THE ENFORCEMENT IN THE AREAS WE WANT TO ENFORCE MAY NOT BE EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE AT THIS TIME, BUT NOT DEFINITELY NOT EQUIPMENT THAT WE COULDN'T GET IF WE NEEDED IT. LOOKING AT THE CITY OF WOODSTOCK AND THEIR RECENT ORDINANCES, CITY OF PEACHTREE CORNERS JUST DID SOME, AND GEORGIA DOES HAVE CODE SECTIONS THAT REGULATE E-BIKES ALREADY. 
          BUT THE, THE THING ABOUT IT IS, WHERE WOULD WE WANT TO DO THE REGULATING IF IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE TRAILS? AGAIN, WE'RE NOT DRIVING OUR VEHICLES ON THE TRAILS. WE CURRENTLY ONLY HAVE FOOT-PEDALED BICYCLES THAT WE RIDE ON THE TRAILS. 
          SO, THOSE ARE NOT ALWAYS CAPABLE OF DOING THE SPEED SOME OF THESE E-BIKES ARE. SO, AGAIN, IT WOULD BE ONCE THE SPECIFIC LEGISLATION IS SET UP WITH OUR INPUT, WE WOULD FIND OUT WHAT IS ENFORCEABLE AND WE'D MAKE SURE THAT WE WRITE SOMETHING, OR WE WOULD ENCOURAGE SOMETHING THAT WE WROTE THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ENFORCE AND TAKE MEANINGFUL ACTION ON IT, NOT JUST HAVE THE GENERAL CODE OF THE STATE, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS VERY SPECIFIC TO ALL THE CITIES THAT HAVE TRAILS AND BIKE PATHS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          WHEN I LOOKED INTO THIS VERY MANY YEARS AGO, I UNPROFESSIONALLY CONCLUDED THAT 15 MILES AN HOUR ON A SIDEWALK WITH PEDESTRIANS AND BIKES OR WHATEVER, I DON'T AGAIN, I DON'T EVEN CARE WHAT IT IS. 
          THAT'S WHERE WHEN IT STARTS GETTING WEIRD, WHEN PEOPLE ARE GOING 20, 25, 30 MILES AN HOUR ON THESE WALKING PATHS, THAT GETS WEIRD FROM A PEDESTRIAN POINT OF VIEW. THE ROAD, I THINK THE STATE PROBABLY HAS A LOT OF REGULATION AND STUFF THAT'S BEEN LOOKED AT, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT AT LEAST AGAIN THAT I LOOKED AT WHERE THERE'S THE MIXTURE SPECIFICALLY LIKE THE BELTLINE EXAMPLE. BUT AS WE DO ON OUR TRAIL WHERE WE HAVE BOTH PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL BIKES, BICYCLES, OR ANY OF THESE OTHER SKATE YOU KNOW, ELECTRIC SKATEBOARDS, SCOOTERS, ANY OF THOSE THINGS, WHEN THEY GO ZIPPING BY AT YOU, BECAUSE THEY'RE SOMETIMES THEY'RE ON YOU AND BY YOU BEFORE YOU EVEN REALIZE THEY'RE COMING. SO, AGAIN, THAT'S IF THIS IS GOING TO BE TALKED ABOUT, THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, AND I WANT TO KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE ENFORCED. THE ROAD STUFF, I THINK, IS PRETTY WELL DOCUMENTED AND HOW, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK JIMMY'S GOT A PRETTY GOOD GRASP ON WHAT HE WANTS TO DO IN THOSE AREAS. BUT AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, I JUST, I WANT TO KNOW WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE MIXING SO THAT ANYWAY, THAT'S, I'VE TALKED ENOUGH ABOUT IT. 
          NO, IT'S A FAIR ASK AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. 
          COUNCILMEMBER VEITH. 
          I'M GOING TO PULL BACK FROM WHAT I WAS ORIGINALLY THINKING. 
          I YES, WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. NO, IT'S NOT NEW. 
          JOHN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BELTLINE 8, 10 YEARS AGO. I WAS THAT THIS WAS WHAT THE SILVER COMET WAS 25 YEARS AGO. I USED TO RIDE THAT EVERY DAY AFTER WORK, AND I WAS ONE OF THE REASONABLE ONES AND STILL AVERAGED 20 MILES AN HOUR ON A PEDAL BIKE. MIX THAT IN WITH STROLLERS AND PEOPLE WITH THEIR DOGS ON EXTENDO LEASHES, AND IT GETS REAL EXCITING. 
          AND YOU'RE RIGHT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T MAKE ANY NOISE, 
          [01:50:01]
COMING ALONG ON THEM, OR PEOPLE ARE WEARING THEIR HEADPHONES. I THINK OUR CHALLENGE HERE IS WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THIS? I THINK THIS IS AN ELEPHANT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EAT IN SEVERAL BITES. ARE WE GOING TO FOCUS ON YOUTH USING E-BIKES? ARE WE GOING TO FOCUS ON WHAT'S ON OUR TRAILS? DO WE NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE SPEED LIMITS ON OUR TRAILS NOW. 
          REGARDLESS, TO THE CHIEF'S POINT, WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE HOW WE POLICE IT. 
          AND YOUR OFFICERS ARE GOING TO GET MORE OF A WORKOUT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. I MEAN, HONESTLY, YOU KNOW, A STICK IN THE SPOKES IS REALLY ALL YOU NEED TO STOP A PEDAL BIKE. 
          BUT IT'S BIG DADDY. 
          YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO TAKE ON THAT. 
          OBSCURE TECHNOLOGY, RIGHT? STICK. 
          BINARY. BUT I THINK THERE'S THERE IS SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS TO DEAL WITH ON THIS THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT IN PHASES. AND THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE EDUCATION PORTION OF IT AS WELL. 
          YEAH, I THINK THE EDUCATION PIECE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT, RIGHT? WE ASK OUR 6-YEAR-OLD CHILDREN TO GO THROUGH EXTENSIVE TRAINING ON CARS, AND THESE E-BIKES NOW CAN GO 60 MILES AN HOUR, AND YOU COULD BE 12 AND RIDING THIS RIDING THESE. I KNOW I WOULD HURT MYSELF AT 12. I WASN'T VERY RESPONSIBLE AT 12, AND IF I HAD A VEHICLE THAT WENT THAT FAST, IT'D BE PROBLEMATIC. SO, I'D LOVE TO SEE AN EDUCATION COMPONENT OF THIS, POTENTIALLY A REGISTRATION COMPONENT OF THIS THAT FORCES YOU TO HAVE EDUCATION BEFORE YOU'RE ABLE TO REGISTER ONE OF THESE BIKES, TO UNDERSTAND THE RULES OF THE ROAD AND THE PARKS. I'M JUST SPITBALLING HERE. 
          NO, I KNOW. 
          AND THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION TO HAVE ABOUT IT. 
          NO, IT'S AN INTERESTING THING. 
          YOU ALL KNOW I HAVE A BACKGROUND WITH MOTORCYCLES. 
          YOU CAN GO TO THE LORETTA LYNN, WHICH IS AN OFF-ROAD RACING THING UP IN KENTUCKY, AND YOU HAVE 5 AND 6-YEAR-OLDS OUT THERE ON 50CC BIKES RACING FULL TILT, AND THEY'RE AMAZING. IF, YOU KNOW, THEIR PARENTS LET THEM FIRE THAT UP IN THE CUL-DE-SAC AND TAKE IT AROUND THE BLOCK, THERE'S GOING TO BE A PHONE CALL TO HIM IN SECONDS. 
          BUT THE ELECTRIC VERSION OF THAT CAN GO JUST AS FAST, CAN BE BOUGHT AT THE HARDWARE STORE, AND NOBODY BLINKS. OH, IT'S JUST A TOY. THEY'RE NOT. AND THAT'S, AGAIN, WE GO BACK TO THE EDUCATIONAL SIDE OF THIS. THEY'RE FUN. THERE'S NO QUESTION OF THAT. I WAS RIDING MY MOTORCYCLE YESTERDAY AND CHIEF THOUGHT I WAS CRAZY. 
          AND I AM IN FULL BODY ARMOR AND TRAINED AND LICENSED AND EVERYTHING ELSE. IT IS IT'S A MINDSET THING. BECAUSE THEY CAN BUY IT AT WALMART OR TARGET, THEY THINK IT'S JUST FINE AND IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS IN THE BIKE AISLE WHEN THEY WERE KIDS. I THINK THAT REASON IS WHY WOODSTOCK TOOK THE DRACONIAN APPROACH. SHOCK VALUE. RESET THE CLOCK BECAUSE THE GENIE WAS OUT OF THE BOTTLE. NOW THAT'S THEIR ANSWER TO SHOVE IT BACK IN. 
          JIMMY WOULD HURT HIMSELF TODAY, MUCH LESS WHEN HE WAS 6 YEARS OLD ON THESE BIKES. 
          BUT THAT'S, THAT'S ANOTHER STORY. 
          THAT'S REALLY AND YOU KNOW WHAT, COMING FROM ME BECAUSE I I DO HAVE A RECENT FALL MYSELF, BUT ELMER BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT, AND THAT'S ALL I'LL SAY ON IT, IS THESE THOSE EARBUDS. THESE THAT'S ANOTHER VARIABLE TO THIS, BECAUSE I SEE THESE GUYS, PEOPLE WALKING DOWN THE ROAD, AND THEY'RE JUST MOVING BACK AND FORTH, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO LIKE, CAN I GO THIS WAY, OR CAN I GO THAT WAY? AND THEY'RE JUST THEY'RE JUST WEAVING, BUT THEY'RE OR MAYBE NOT EVEN WEAVING, BUT THEY DON'T HEAR ANYTHING. 
          SO, WHAT AND YOU HAVE LIKE, HEY, HEY, HEY, AND THEY FINALLY, LIKE, MOVE OUT OF YOUR WAY. 
          BUT THAT'S ANOTHER VARIABLE TO THIS WHOLE MIX TOO. 
          IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE RULES FOR THE PEACHTREE ROAD RACE, EARPHONES ARE NOT ALLOWED ON THE COURSE. EVERYONE'S WEARING THEM. 
          BUT EVEN JUST THAT ONE, IT'S JUST A FOOT RACE WITH, WHAT, 50,000 OF YOUR CLOSEST FRIENDS? YES. 
          YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE EARBUDS IN. 
          YEAH, WELL, THERE'S EMERGENCIES AT PEACHTREE ROAD RACE. YOU NEED TO EVACUATE. THAT'S WHY THEY CAN'T HEAR IT, RIGHT? AND AS TECHNOLOGY GETS MORE ADVANCED, THE SOUNDPROOF THE SOUND CANCELING GETS MORE EXTREME. 
          COUNCILMEMBER, DID YOU WISH TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO THE TUESDAY AGENDA? IF I CAN HAVE CONSENT OF I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO MOVE IT FORWARD ON TUESDAY. I THINK WE CAN CONSENT TODAY TO HAVE STAFF TO RESEARCH IT, THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. 
          [10. Public Comments ]
ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. THIS EVENING, THE MAYOR IS THE PRESIDING OFFICER. ALL REMARKS SHALL BE ADDRESSED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS A BODY, NOT TO INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS. 
          ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK SHALL COME TO THE MICROPHONE, GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS TO THE CITY CLERK, LIMIT REMARKS TO 3 MINUTES UNLESS FURTHER TIME IS GRANTED BY COUNCIL, NOT SPEAK A SECOND TIME UNTIL EVERYONE WISHING TO SPEAK HAS SPOKEN ONCE, AND NO ONE CAN SPEAK MORE THAN TWICE. PLEASE DO NOT SPEAK UNLESS YOU HAVE THE MICROPHONE AND HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED. 
          ANYONE HERE WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANY MATTER THIS EVENING? YOU GOT 3 MINUTES. COME ON UP. 
          I WANT TO HIT THIS BUTTON AND MAKE A NOISE. 
          COME ON UP. 
          ANYBODY? YOU CAN COME UP AND TELL US ABOUT IT. 
          YOU CAN SING A SONG IF YOU WANT. 
          GIVE JIMMY SOMETHING TO DO. 
          [01:55:03]
ALL RIGHT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          PEER PRESSURE DOES WORK APPARENTLY. 
          PEER PRESSURE, YEAH. 
          MY NAME IS KALEN YATES. I LIVE AT 2286 CAPE HART CIRCLE. MY WIFE AND I JUST MOVED INTO CHAMBLEE IN DECEMBER, SO EXCITED TO BE HERE. I ACTUALLY WENT TO CHAMBLEE HIGH SCHOOL, SO IT'S COMING BACK FOR ME. I DO WANT TO ADDRESS 2 THINGS. I THINK THE DISCUSSION ABOUT MICROMOBILITY IS VERY IMPORTANT. I THINK HAVING THAT DISCUSSION EARLY, AS YOU SAID, IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR SAFETY. MYSELF, I'M A RUNNER, BUT RECENTLY I PICKED UP AN INJURY, SO I'VE BEEN BIKING MORE. AND SO DOING THAT AROUND CHAMBLEE HAS BEEN INTERESTING, TO SAY THE LEAST, ESPECIALLY LIVING OVER IN THE WOODACRES AREA. IT CAN BE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TOTALLY FINE. 
          IT CAN BE SKETCHY LEAVING THAT AREA. I DO HAVE TO CROSS OVER BUFORD HIGHWAY. SO, I THINK A BIG PART OF KIND OF MICRO-MOBILITY IN CHAMBLEE. ONE ASPECT SHOULD BE EDUCATION. HOW DO YOU KIND OF ENFORCE WHAT PEOPLE ARE RIDING? BUT I THINK ALSO A PART LARGE PART OF THAT IS WHERE CAN PEOPLE RIDE SAFELY AND KIND OF LIKE WHAT DO THEY HAVE ACCESS TO? DO THEY HAVE TO CROSS OVER BUFORD HIGHWAY? DO THEY HAVE TO CROSS OVER PEACHTREE INDUSTRIAL? I THINK THAT CAN BE A BIG ASPECT TO THAT DISCUSSION AS WELL. 
          AND KIND OF MAYBE JUST EDUCATION ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE CAN RIDE THE BIKES OR E-BIKES. SO, I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. ANOTHER TOPIC I HAD WAS ABOUT FLOCK CAMERAS USE IN CHAMBLEE. I THINK THAT'S A BIG DISCUSSION ACROSS THE U.S. 
          CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW. I THINK IT'S VERY HARD DRIVING AROUND CHAMBLEE. YOU SEE FLOCK CAMERAS IN A LOT OF LOCATIONS. I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION TO HAVE. I THINK YOU CAN HAVE OPINIONS ON WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THEY ARE NECESSARY OR UNNECESSARY, WHETHER YOU LIKE THAT SORT OF SURVEILLANCE OR NOT. 
          BUT I ALSO, FOR ME PERSONALLY, I THINK A BIG QUESTION IS THE OVERSIGHT OF THE USE OF THAT TECHNOLOGY. 
          I THINK CURRENTLY, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL LOOKING INTO KIND OF CHAMBLEE'S USE OF THAT TECHNOLOGY, IT IS VERY HARD TO FIND HOW CHAMBLEE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTS AND USES THAT TECHNOLOGY, AND IT DOESN'T SEEM AS IF THERE IS ANY SORT OF OVERSIGHT BEYOND OUR POLICE. I THINK EVERYONE, INCLUDING THE POLICE, WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT CHAMBLEE POLICE ARE USING THE TECHNOLOGY IN THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE WITHIN AND HAVING RESTRAINT OF HOW THAT TECHNOLOGY IS USED, BUT OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, IT'S BEEN SHOWN THAT EVEN IN THE STATE OF GEORGIA, IN DEKALB COUNTY AND OTHER COUNTIES, THAT THAT TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN MISUSED BY OFFICERS FOR PERSONAL REASONS. AND SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE A DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS OF HOW THE CITY USES THAT TECHNOLOGY, HOW THAT TECHNOLOGY WHAT OVERSIGHT THAT TECHNOLOGY HAS IN CHAMBLEE AND HOW WHO HAS ACCESS TO THAT TECHNOLOGY, WHETHER THAT'S JUST CHAMBLEE, WHETHER IT'S FLOCK AND WHETHER THAT'S THE STATE OF GEORGIA, WHETHER THAT'S OTHER STATES, AND WHAT THE LIMITS OF THAT TECHNOLOGY IS. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. 
          THANK YOU. HEY, STOP THAT! OH GOSH, WE'RE GOING TO GET A NEW PERSON ON THE BUZZER. 
          I REALLY WASN'T TRYING TO BE THAT AGGRESSIVE WITH IT. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW WHY HE DID THAT. APOLOGIZE. BRAND NEW. 
          WE DIDN'T TRAIN HIM. 
          ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL THIS EVENING? FIFTEEN SECONDS. 
          ALL RIGHT. WELL, WELCOME HOME. 
          GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE NO EXECUTIVE SESSION, SO WE ARE OUT.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.