November 7, 2008

LOCAL

We had a council meeting November 5 and one of the topics was on the rezoning of 4.17 acres on the corner of Lake Sterling Boulavard and Spout Springs Road, which is in Sterling on the Lake subdivision.  As I stated in the meeting for the record, I live in Sterling on the Lake. The reason I say this is, this rezoning is the first I have encountered pertaining to commercial development that I have the ability to ensure it is done in such a way that all involved win, but the concern is it is in the neighborhood I live in and some would think I am protecting my own.  Well, I am not.

 

I support the development, and there are many who do not, but as I heard from a number of residents of Sterling on the Lake.  They would like to ensure the enterance is as grand after the commercial development as is now, and so would I.

 

During the council meeting I introduced a change to double the amount of landscaped frontage along Spout Spring Road and a portion of Lake Sterling Boulavard for two reasons.  First, the widening of Spout Spring Road will happen some day and I would hate for the road to shift in a direction that would destroy a large portion of the landscaping of a development and second, those who bought in the development say and would like to keep a grand enterance.  For the record, I would do this for all developments.

 

The other reason I introduced this change is Newland aleady has the right given to them from the council in 2001 to tear down all those trees, less the buffer near the stream, and build houses.  The developer also has the right, unless given specific binding rules, to build the commercial development with pre-established neighborhood commercial development rules to put in minimal landscaping that would not keep the grand enterance in the neignborhood that is there today.

 

The question is. Does the developer tear down the trees established trees, less the buffer area, and then all that is seen when turning in the front entrance is the back of homes, or do we work with the developer and keep almost all the established trees to ensure the commercial portion is designed in such a way the entrance remains grand?

 

October 16, 2008

LOCAL

Yesterdays council meeting was a bit more exciting than most.  If you read the articles, here and here, they do not express all that was said – especially what I had to say about the city’s largest water and sewer user coming before the council to ask for a decrease in their rates.

 

As reported in the news, Tree Top Apartments was requesting a lower rate on their water and sewer rates because they had not expected an increase as high as they received.  There are several points I brought up that you all need to know.

 

First.  The increase to the water and sewer was increased by 20% and that was per the bond agreement between the financial institution and the city.

 

Second. What does it cost the city, in total costs, variable and fixed, per thousand gallons to provide water and sewer to each customer?

 

Here are some numbers:

·        Flowery Branch’s fixed and variable costs to provide 1000 gallons of water to a customer are $7.36.

·        Flowery Branch’s fixed and variable costs to treat 1000 gallons of sewer for a customer is $9.11.

·        Flowery Branch receives $5.53 for every 1000 gallons of water used from it’s inside commercial, outside commercial, new outside residential, and new inside residential customers, and receives $4.42 for every 1000 gallons of water used from it’s inside residential customers because they have lived inside the city limits prior to June of 2000.

·        Flowery Branch receives $6.64 for every 1000 gallons of water used from it’s inside commercial, $8.85 for every 1000 gallons of water used from it’s outside commercial, $6.64 for every 1000 gallons of water used from it’s new inside residential customers, and receives $4.98 for every 1000 gallons of water used from it’s inside residential customers because they have lived inside the city limits prior to June of 2000.

• Once you get into the tier rates, it gets even more complicated.

 

Third.  Was there not a time Tree Park apartment’s water meter was broken and their bill was significantly lower than it should have been? The answer is yes and I have the figures.  The amount the city lost is quit significant.

 

Forth. What is in this new resolution to prevent another master meter user or any user from coming before this council and asking for a change to fit their needs?  I was told no one could, but anyone can ask or do anything they want if they also feel the rates are discriminatory or unfair.

 

Fifth.  Why are there different rates, even for mater meters, because of a June 2000 time?  That means neighbors, based on the purchase date of their properties, pay different water and sewer rates.  Here are Gainesville’s water and sewer rates.  They seem much fairer.

 

As I stated in the June 18, 2008 minutes, I feel that it is unfair to have inconsistent rates and that residents are being discriminated against depending on their length of residency in the city, and I stand behind that statement.

 

I asked why are we here today lowering the rates of one customer when we should be evening out the rates of all the customers who are equivalent to each other based on their location either inside or outside the city limits based on geography – not the time when they bought their property.  Could that fix the problem and allow the city to put money into a contingency fund to repair our aging pipes in the ground?

 

I am not upset at Tree Park Apartments.  They made a business decision for their business.  I am disappointed in the members of the council who voted to approve the lower rates for Tree Park Apartments.  We should have set the rate even for all who work and live inside the city limits and that would have brought the rates for Tree Park Apartments down.

July 16, 2008

LOCAL

First I would like to congratulate all those who won their respective races yesterday and wish the best of luck to those who have a run-off.  I do know how hard one must work to win a campaign.

 

Now onto Flowery Branch business.  I have been quiet on how I was going to vote on Ordinance 376, which will create a new historic district in Flowery Branch.  I already knew how I was going to vote based on my own personal beliefs on the matter.  I am a firm believer in individual property rights and I believe that, through the years since the creation of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, governments have translated a well-intentioned act to fit their needs.  Here is the article in the Gainesville Times.

 

I am having trouble with the link, but here is my comments I read today at the meeting.

 

I think most actions by a legislative body, such as the creation of ordinances, resolutions, codes, bills and acts, that become law, which people must follow, start of with the best intentions and through time become translated and twisted to fit the needs of government.

 

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 states;

 

“ . . .the historical and cultural foundations of the Nation should be preserved as a living part of our community life and development in order to give a sense of orientation to the American people”. 

 

 And the Georgia Historic Preservation Act of 1980 states;

 

“The General Assembly finds that the historical, cultural, and aesthetic heritage of this state is among its most valued and important assets and that the preservation of this heritage is essential to the promotion of the health, prosperity, and general welfare of the people.”

 

As I read the entire National Historic Preservation Act and the Georgia Historic Preservation Act, I read about the preservation of historic property with “few remaining examples of past architectural style”, or

“the preservation of this irreplaceable heritage is in the public interest”.

 

But nowhere could I find where it stated where a government should create a historic district, allow people to tear down the buildings, and have something built back that has a historic feel.  All I found was how we are supposed to “preserve” historic property.  Yet in Chapter 8, Historic Preservation in the Flowery Branch Comprehensive Plan states, “Flowery Branch should prepare a comprehensive master plan for the redevelopment of Old Town that includes the existing historic resources in downtown as a foundation of the planning process”. I never read the word redevelopment in either the National Historic Preservation Act or the Georgia Historic Preservation Act.

 

We already have an extensive zoning code, Ordinance 378, which has already had a number of amendments, which shows our ability to work with citizens, businesses, and developers to build aesthetically beautiful buildings.  Look at the Stonebridge Village, and the new homes at 5506 and 5510 Chestnut Street, as well as the remodeling at 5502 Chestnut Street.  All these were built or remodeled in the past year under the guidance of our zoning code and planning department and they are not in any kind of historic district and they all are aesthetically beautiful.

 

Flowery Branch already has the Flowery Branch Commercial Historic District, which was added in 1985 and consists of 20 acres and 12 building on Main Street and Railroad Avenue with a registration number 85001932.  Looking at these buildings one could say – yes, they look and feel historic and need to be preserved.

 

Ordinance 376 is a clear case of government gone wild. The National Historic Preservation and Georgia Historic Preservation Acts started with good intensions and, through the years, have become property rights issues. 

 

And as every other community in this great nation, they all have a great history, but not everything is historic.

July 10, 2008

LOCAL

Tonight we had our second public hearing on Ordinance 376 that, as expected, was a full house full of emotion.  There were great points given from both sides, and that is what makes this a difficult decision.

 

From one point, there is a developer spending upwards to 15 million dollars who will bring added value to the area and possibly increase land values. 

 

On the other hand, who is the government to change the rules on people’s property after they bought it?

 

Please come to the July 16, 2008 meeting, and I am sorry that it is still at 9:30 AM and not in the evening as Craig Lutz and I proposed on the January 2, 2008, and listen to my first public comments on this touchy subject.

 

I promise to express why I vote the way I do and not just vote without an explanation.

 

STATE

Other than the fact we are getting some rain, I would love to see more over the Lake Lanier Basin.

 

FEDERAL

Can Jessie Jackson step in it or what? Here is what one truly feels when they think they are not being listened to, and then tries to apologize.  There are those who think Jessie Jackson’s remarks will help Obama – what!

 

I guess we need to change Lee Greenwoods song to God help the USA, if Obama wins.

June 12, 2008

Tonight we had a public hearing, on Ordinance 376, which will designate the local historic boundaries within the City of Flowery Branch.  These will be new boundaries, which will change the old boundaries.

Here is a link to the Access North Ga. artlicle.

I would like to thank all the property owners who came and spoke their minds about the issue.

 

I would like to state that I am torn on this issue because I believe in what our forefathers wrote “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”; sometimes “the pursuit of happiness” is referred to as “property”.  How can someone tell others what to do with their personal property?  In the same breath, creating historic boundaries may increase the “property” values of those in and around the historic district, but a historic district may deter other potential buyers from buying because of the “strict” guidelines on renovations, modifications, or demolition and rebuilding within the historic district of a property.

 

I know how I must vote.  I would love to hear your response.  Please call me at 678-677-5759, email me at chrisffb@bellsouth.net, or respond to this blog.

 

 

 

 

 

June 5, 2008

What is Ordinance 348-7 (Amendment to Zoning Code – Article 24 “Signs”), and what is the big deal?  Well there are some who would call it a “democratic” move thinking the government is regulating too much, and others would say it is not safe enough for drivers because LED signs are a distraction for drivers.

 

My opinion is, if there is a buyer and a seller – we have capitalism. 

 

The government is supposed to regulate what it believes is for the public safety.  That is why we have speed limits, seat belt laws, drinking and driving laws, and even laws pertaining to driving while using cell phones. 

 

I would like to commend your Council Member, Craig Lutz, for all his hard efforts finding information to inform all the members of your council to see the need to use a rational speed and site distance formula to ensure we have safe travel through our city.  This includes the major roads, such as Spouts Springs, as well as I-985 because we all know nobody breaks the speed limit on I-985.

 

Congratulations Craig and the rest of the Flowery Branch City Council for creating a fair and safe ordinance.

June 4, 2008

It has been a bit since my last blog.  We have been in several meetings trying to finalize the FY09 budget and it appears we are done.  There are a few things about our water, sewer, and solid waste funds that I am not particularly totally happy with, but at least each of them will finally be balanced without taking any money from the general fund and put it into any of the enterprise funds.

 

I have also been doing what all other parents do when the school kids are in summer break – going to the pool, fishing, taking walks and mowing the lawn; actually I enjoy mowing the lawn.

 

At today’s council meeting, we approved the FY09 budget, appointed the members of our historic preservation committee along with one of, I believe, of three new ordinances governing their duties, established a capitalization schedule, and passed Ordinance 348-7 (Amendment to Zoning Code – Article 24 “Signs”).

 

Over the next few days I will comment my opinions on each.

 

I would also like to thank the staff for a quick response on changing our meeting area from City Hall to the depot due to an air conditioning problem.  I would also like to thank our City Clerk, Melissa McCain, who ensured the Diet Cokes and cookies were available.