Columbus, Georgia

MINUTES

COUNCIL OF COLUMBUS, GEORGIA

WORK SESSION

MARCH 26, 2002





The regular monthly Work Session of the Council of Columbus, Georgia was

called to order at 9:03 A.M., Tuesday, March 26, 2002, in the Council Chambers,

Government Center, Columbus, Georgia. Honorable Bobby G. Peters, Mayor,

presiding.



*** *** ***



PRESENT: Present other than Mayor Peters were Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers and

Councilors R. Gary Allen, Berry Henderson, Julius H. Hunter, Jr., Charles E.

McDaniel, Jr., Robert Poydasheff, Evelyn Turner Pugh, Richard Smith, Nathan

Suber and Evelyn Woodson (arrived at 9:04 a.m.). City Manager Carmen Cavezza,

City Attorney Clifton Fay, Clerk of Council Tiny B. Washington and Deputy Clerk

of Council Sandra Davis were also present.



*** *** ***



ABSENT: No one was absent.



*** *** ***



INVOCATION: Led by Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers.



*** *** ***



PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Led by Mayor Peters.



------------------------------------------------*** ***

***----------------------------------------------



CONSENT AGENDA:



THE FOLLOWING THREE ORDINANCES LISTED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WERE APPROVED

BY THE COUNCIL ON SECOND READING UPON A SINGLE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILOR

POYDASHEFF AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR MCDANIEL WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY

THOSE TEN MEMBERS PRESENT FOR THIS

MEETING:







An Ordinance (02-27) - Rezoning approximately 0.92 acres of property

located at 5069 Warm Springs Road from an R-1A District to an A-0 District

(7-CA-02-Woodruff)



An Ordinance (02-28) - Rezoning approximately 5.77 acres of property

located at 6001 River Road from an R-4 District to an A-0 District (8-CA-02-The

Jordan Co.)



An Ordinance (02-29) - Amending Section 4-11 of the Columbus Code so as to

authorize the City Manager to approve the operation of carnivals, circuses or

similar shows on property other than the City fairgrounds, subject to

compliance with all applicable business license regulations and zoning

regulations, including special exception use permits when required, by all

applicants for such events.



*** *** ***



NEW ZONING PETITIONS:



THE FOLLOWING THREE NEW ZONING PETITIONS WERE SUBMITTED AND AN ORDINANCE

WAS CALLED ON EACH BY COUNCILOR SMITH:



Petition submitted by The Jordan Company to rezone approximately 54.444

acres of property located at 6551 Green Island Drive from M-1, R-4 and R-1

Districts to an A-1 District. (Recommended for approval by both the Planning

Advisory Commission and the Planning Division.) (11-A-02-The Jordan Co.)



Petition submitted by Fickling & Company, Inc. to rezone approximately 2.2

total acres of properties located along the northern boundary of the A-O

section of Columbus Park Crossing from a C-3 District to an A-O District.

(Recommended for conditional approval by both the Planning Advisory Commission

and the Planning Division.) (12-CA-02-Fickling & Company, Inc.)



Petition submitted by Brian Grier, Inc. to rezone approximately 7.525

acres of property located at 7401 Whitesville Road from a R-1 District to a R-2

District. (Recommended for approval by the Planning Advisory Commission and

denial by the Planning Division.) (13-D-02-Brian Grier, Inc.)



------------------------------------------------*** ***

***----------------------------------------------



?PROCLAMATION?:



?COLUMBUS STATE UNIVERSITY DAY?:



With Ms. Meri Robinson and Ms. Sherry Wiley standing at the Council table,

Mayor Peters read his proclamation, proclaiming March 28, 2002 as ?Columbus

State University Day? in Columbus, Georgia.



------------------------------------------------*** ***

***----------------------------------------------



WORK SESSION AGENDA:



PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE:



Mayor Peters informed everyone at the beginning of the work session

regarding citizens that have asked to be heard, by outlining the rules in that

normally a work session is just that. He explained that the Council looks at

different issues that they are dealing with, but this is not a public hearing;

therefore, we don?t really open up the floor for discussion. He advised

citizens to contact their Councilors or submit something in writing to the

Clerk?s Office. He added that anything that is going to be adopted by the

Council, after their work session, would then be a public hearing set up on the

agenda; whereby, everyone could come to voice their opinions.



*** *** ***



UPDATE ON EVENTS AT THE CIVIC CENTER:



City Manager Cavezza reported on the following upcoming events to be held

at the Civic Center.



Riverdragons: On March 29, 2002, the Columbus Riverdragons would play

their first play-off game at the Civic Center.



Disney on Ice: April 3 - 7, 2002 is the Disney on Ice Show.



3rd Annual DUI Re-enactment: Sponsored by the West Central Health

District to be held on April 17, 2002.

Columbus Wardogs: Kick-off game for the Columbus Wardogs would be held on

April 20, 2002.



Mayor Peters added that on today at 12:30 p.m., we would be doing the

Whitney Keys Awards and all of the students from the schools would be at the

Trade Center. He invited the members of Council to also attend.



*** *** ***



PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE:



City Manager Cavezza reviewed the significant issues regarding the Tree

Ordinance and asked that the Council discuss this matter in general terms. He

first mentioned the tree density unit (TDU) that he felt was not a relative

point here, because it is a basic unit of measurement that is being used for

our proposed tree ordinance that is similar to what is being used in other

cities. He determined that we really did not need to get into that more

specifically, but if the Council desires to do so; then, we can address that

issue at another time.



*** *** ***



NBDL:



Councilor Hunter asked if the Globe Trotters event that occurred at the

Civic Center was considered an SFX event? City Manager Cavezza acknowledged

that it was. Councilor Hunter then expressed his concerns in that he believed

that the contract with SFX was that they would be bringing in new events and

not events that the City has been able to bring in on its own, because the City

has been able to bring the Globe Trotters previously. Councilor Hunter added

that one of the things that swayed him towards supporting this agreement was

that they would be bringing in twenty new events and not events that we have

had here before. He then asked City Manager Cavezza to check into this matter.



City Manager Cavezza pointed out that we are in the process of sending out

a letter to Clear Channel along with the other NBDL cities expressing our

disappointment in the fact that they have not brought those events here. He

explained that NBDL has stated that they are working on the packet.

------------------------------------------------*** ***

***----------------------------------------------



NOTE: See below the continued discussion on this matter.

------------------------------------------------*** ***

***----------------------------------------------



PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE:



Councilor Suber asked Mr. Greg Hudgison to assist him by bringing forth

three large aerial photographs that he had requested from Mr. Milton Jones,

Chairman of the Tree Ordinance Committee. He explained that the way these

photographs came about is that he had spoken to someone who was somewhat

opposed to the proposed tree ordinance. He then asked for an overview of what

has happened in the Veterans Parkway and J.R. Allen Parkway area and Mr. Jones

was able to produce these three aerial photographs. He briefly described the

tree density in that area using aerial photographs from 1984 which is before J.

R. Allen Parkway was constructed; 1995 after the completion of J. R. Allen

Parkway and a recent photograph. He pointed out that the trees are going away

daily and wanted to make that point before City Manager Cavezza gets into the

presentation.



Councilor Poydasheff expressed the importance of the aerial photographs

presented by Councilor Suber and asked if it was possible to get them on the

CCG-TV.



Councilor Poydasheff called attention to an article in the newspaper today

that he felt was flawed with a lot of fear and misstatements. He then asked

that City Manager Cavezza write an explanatory rebuttal to that article. He

said that the proposed tree ordinance is a reasonable proposal, but there

should be no fear on the part of private homeowners.



City Manager Cavezza said that the Council, at the last work session,

asked Mr. Milton Jones, Chairman of the Tree Committee, to address some of the

issues that had come up that the Council was concerned about. He stated that

the tree ordinance committee conducted one final meeting and what was

accomplished is listed below:



? Expansion of the Tree Board from seven members to eleven members to allow

four general public members to be added.



? Section 6 regarding zoning was out of place, because it is addressed

separately in zoning ordinances; therefore, it was deleted.



? Additions and Expansions - If the piece of property is two acres or less and

the construction is greater than 5,000 square feet; then, that particular piece

of property is subject to the ordinance. If it is more than two acres and the

expansion is greater than 10,000 square feet; then, it would be subject to the

ordinance. There would be no specific placement of trees in this area, but

they would just have to meet the TDU requirement for the new impervious area.



? Nuisance trees come to the City Manager for hearings to assess whether or not

to remove those trees.



? Effective date of this ordinance would be 120 days after the Council approves

it.



? Parking lots that are less than one and a half acres would not be required to

have the parking lot islands, but 70% of the tree requirement would have to be

on the front or the side yards along the roadway for those particular lots.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers asked about not requiring parking lot islands on one

and a half acres; whereas, the norm has been two acres throughout the rest of

the ordinance. City Manager Cavezza said that he could not respond to that

question, but would get the necessary information.



Using an overhead projector, City Manager Cavezza gave an overview of the

remaining issues that were significant and needed to be addressed. At this

time, Councilor McDaniel asked about the proposed additional personnel for the

arborist with City Manager Cavezza responding by saying that we are looking at

adding one additional person to assist the arborist in approving the plans, to

go out and inspect and to address concerns and issues. Responding to another

question of Councilor McDaniel, City Manager Cavezza replied that we would be

looking at a Grade 10 level with the salary of $36,000.00 and that does not

include the benefits that would be added. Councilor McDaniel suggested

transferring personnel from another department to the Arborist; instead of,

hiring new personnel. Councilor Turner Pugh maintained that she does not see

how, with all of the budget restraints, that we could hire additional personnel

during this upcoming budget session. City Manager Cavezza commented that we

are going to have to look at adding 19 more correctional officers in the jail

to meet the Justice Department requirements.



Councilor Allen made a suggestion to consider using the Inspections & Code

Enforcement Officers to be trained to work with the Arborist to assist in the

implementation of the tree ordinance; since, they already have the vehicles.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers reiterating a comment made by City Manager Cavezza

in that the Arborist would be tied up approving plans. He suggested that we

consider making the approval of plans as a part of the permitting process;

instead of having the arborist approving the plans.



Councilor Henderson requested to be provided with a cost itemization based

on the anticipated needs, as the ordinance reads now, to include vehicles, etc.



Councilor Poydasheff suggested that we consider networking or working

closely with Tree Columbus, Inc. to provide assistance with the implementation

of the tree ordinance.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers requested that the Council consider one more level

of authority before any job is shut down, and the reason for that, is because

he wants to eliminate the possibility of a development being shut down, because

of a tree incident.



City Manager Cavezza said that our current parking requirements are

probably excessive. He said that the people who would be talking to us next as

we develop this Unified Development Plan are looking at that, and he expects

those parking requirements would be reduced. He said that would be favorable

towards implementation of any kind of plan that affects the parking lots.



He explained that one of the major concerns is the parking lots that are

basically display areas, for example: motor vehicles, boats, mobile home sales

storage or display lots. He recalled that Savannah exempts those in their tree

ordinance, but the tree committee revisited this issue and decided not to

change it. He said that it is now back to the Council for consideration.

Councilor Suber advised that there are some members of Council that want to

offer that amendment to exclude those sales display lots that have been

mentioned by City Manager Cavezza to not require them to have the islands, but

to satisfy the TDU requirement. City Manager Cavezza agreed that this would be

an item that would be brought back to Council for a vote at a later date.



City Manager Cavezza, continuing with his presentation, stated that the

30ft buffer along paved public roads is a requirement, or provide a planting

plan that is approved, which would be the alternative. He said that the

current ordinance states that it would be planted along the right-of-way and

along all paved roads immediately or during the next planting season. He then

provided an explanation in further details. He added that no Certificate of

Occupancy or final building inspection would be granted prior to the required

planting being installed.



There was continued discussion on this matter with various Councilors

expressing their views and City Manager Cavezza responding to questions. Mayor

Pro Tem Rodgers asked if this applied to commercial or residential, at which

time, City Manager Cavezza said it would apply to both. Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers

asked several questions regarding the planting on or along public

right-of-way. Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers then asked that in the unlikely event that

there is no natural vegetation there, what are we going to do for 60ft.? City

Manager Cavezza, after conferring with Ms. Rachelle Buice the City?s Arborist,

replied that we would do nothing. Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers then determined that a

developer would not be required to border that property, which means that, if

the property does not have trees on it before it was set for development; then,

this ordinance would not have any affect at all. City Manager Cavezza agreed

with this comment, but added that if it is a new development; then, it would be

required to have so many trees on that development, and that planting plan

would have to be in place before they received a certificate of occupancy.

Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers went on to say that let?s suppose for the 60ft that we

are trying to protect, there is nothing, but in the interior of the seven or

eight acres, there are trees. He pointed out that they could go in there and

work within that sixty feet and we could still have a bare piece of property,

at which time, City Manager Cavezza agreed once again and continued the point

by saying that once the developer finishes, the planting requirement must be in

place.



Councilor Allen expressed concerns with the length of time it takes a

developer either residential or commercial to put together the plan. He said

that right now the ordinance says within the first planting season. He then

suggested that we give consideration to adding language that would allow them

within the second planting season or some time up to the second planting

season, because if you plant trees during certain times, they would not survive.



Councilor Suber stated that he believes that for the Council to get a

clear understanding of this proposed ordinance that we need to have Mr. Milton

Jones, Chairman of the Tree Ordinance Committee, come forward to respond to

questions regarding the thoughts of the committee.



There were continued discussions on this matter with City Manager Cavezza

continuing to respond to various questions. City Manager Cavezza informed the

Council that the committee has done their job, and we have released the

committee. He explained that this is why he has been trying to present it with

a somewhat neutral viewpoint.



Councilor Suber suggested that we have the staff to present pictures as

part of the discussion of the proposed tree ordinance to provide a better

explanation of the matter.



After receiving a note from the Arborist, Ms. Rachelle Bryce, City Manager

Cavezza read from it ?The 30ft buffer is on private property; until a tree

planting plan is approved. They can take out the 30ft buffer at the time of

development, but they would have to implement their planting plan before they

receive their certificate of occupancy.? Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers then expressed

his concerns in that with this proposed tree ordnance, it would have

affectively required trees the entire width of the backyards of those homes in

Hunters Point that border Moon Road. City Manager Cavezza agreed that if they

border public road frontages; then, that is correct. Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers

said that is a little strong and requested that we rethink that portion.



Councilor Turner Pugh suggested that City Manager Cavezza go out and take

some actual pictures of some actual properties that exist; then, show what they

would look like if, using a computer, trees are scanned in; therefore, we can

see some reality.



Councilor Suber made a motion that Mr. Milton Jones, The Chairman of the

Tree Ordinance Committee, be allowed to respond to questions from the Council.

Seconded by Councilor Woodson.



There was some brief discussion on the motion, Councilor Suber clarified

his motion by stating that Mr. Milton Jones be allowed to be heard regarding

specifically the questions from the Council, which carried by a vote of seven

to three, with Councilors Allen, Henderson and Rodgers voting no and all others

present voting yes. Councilor Henderson then asked that after Mr. Jones has

completed explaining this to the Council that he reduces it to writing for his

own edification.



Mr. Milton Jones, came forward to respond to the members of Council, but

first asked that Mr. Ken Spano also be allowed to be heard, at which time,

Mayor Peters advised that Mr. Jones was only given permission to speak before

the Council at this work session to respond to specific questions from the

Council. City Manager Cavezza respectfully requested that Mr. Jones only be

allowed to respond to specific questions from the Council. Mayor Peters

immediately asked for the intent of the tree ordinance committee regarding the

30ft buffer. Mr. Jones briefly explained that the committee first started off

with a desire to address the problem of clear cutting timberlands. He said

that the last paragraph was added to try to address the issue of speculative

grading. He explained that the concern was that the developer goes in and

clears the land and does his grading, and it sits there prior to it being sold

and developed; this was what we tried to address. He pointed out that it first

started out at 50ft, which was consistent with the top two paragraphs dealing

with clear cutting; then, it was compromised down to 30ft. Mayor Peters

clarifying the statements said that the intent of the committee was that it be

30ft wide and shall be maintained adjacent to all paved public road frontages,

should really read, ?adjacent to all right-of-ways?.



City Manager Cavezza continuing with his presentation advised that we have

already discussed the authority of the Arborist in which we foresee the

Arborist being the key player in this system, because of the involvement in the

total process. He reported that the one other thing we added in there is that

the Arborist needs to work closely with the Department Director and get that

director involved in the process as well. He contended that this would address

the concern that there be another layer in there for the Arborist to report to

before a project is shut down. He reiterated that the Arborist does have the

authority in this proposed ordinance to grant variances up to 20% of the

minimum or maximum standards.



Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers maintained that he wants a note made of his purpose

in that it does not extract that authority directly from the arborist. He said

that it does not delete the singular authority that the Arborist has in this

decision making process and he needs to have that concurred with or approved by

the department head. City Manager Cavezza pointed out that a lot of the things

that the Arborist would be involved in is on the spot corrections, and the

Arborist needs the authority to make sure that on the spot corrections are

done, at which time, Mayor Pro Tem Rodgers maintained that the Arborist could

have the authority to make on the spot corrections, but the ultimate authority

to shut down a project, he believes needs to go higher.



Upon the conclusion of the presentation on the proposed tree ordinance,

Councilor Smith requested that the staff come up with some incentives that

could work to encourage new development or expansions that would comply with

the new tree ordinance. Councilor Turner Pugh also asked that the staff come

up with the dollars associated with these incentives.



Councilor Turner Pugh then requested that we look at some of the other

cities that have a tree ordinance in place to look at their required parking

space per square feet to be used in comparison to ours and to use some type of

chart to do an analysis in comparison.



Councilor Woodson asked that before we develop an incentive plan, we need

to check to see what type of incentive plans have been offered to developers in

other communities.



*** *** ***



NBDL:



While the staff was preparing for the next presentation, City Manager

Cavezza reported that earlier Councilor Hunter had asked about recurring shows

at the Civic Center. He recalled that in the contract with NBDL, we negotiated

two events that would be hands-off for them; Disney on Ice and the Fair.

Councilor Henderson maintained that it is going to be interesting to evaluate,

once this calendar year is up, to see if any of those big names have shown up.

Councilor Hunter reiterated some of his previous comments regarding this matter.



City Manager Cavezza highlighted the advantages of not suffering the

financial loss to the City when events do not do well, because the City would

get $6,000. for each event; regardless, of the profit and Clear Channel would

eat the lost on those events. He maintained that the City would get $6,000.

for twenty events regardless of rather NBDL brings in all twenty events or not.



There was continued discussion on this matter with various Councilors

expressing their views.

------------------------------------------------*** ***

***-------------------------------------------



UPDATE ON UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PLAN:



Mr. Rick Jones, Director of Community and Economic Development, came

forward to report that the zoning and subdivision ordinances have not been

updated since 1982. He said that we have a continuous struggle in making sure

that they meet the actual development needs out there on a day-to-day basis.

He pointed out that there were several well qualified firms when we did this

process last summer, but we chose Duncan & Associates. He then introduced Mr.

Marty Hopkins, representative from Duncan & Associates, and asked that he give

an overview of what they have found and some recommendations. He advised that

they would come back at a later date with an ordinance.



Mr. Marty Hopkins, with Duncan & Associates came forward and first

introduced another team member, Mr. Bill Ross, from the Georgia Zoning

Institute. He also named Mr. Jim Duncan, who was not present. He then named

the following individuals who would also be involved with the reviewing

process: Mr. Fred Jenkins, State Zoning & Land Use Lawyer, Mr. Eric Kelley,

National Expert in several areas.



Mr. Hopkins highlighted the two topics for discussion that the firm would

be providing a briefing on and are listed as follows:



~ Procedural Issues

~ Substances Issues



Mr. Hopkins reported that a couple of things that we are doing on the

procedural basis is providing language for the City to hire technical

consultants for zoning issues; the Council has the authority to do that now,

but this provides for very specific authority to hire technical consultants on

things that are out of the common knowledge of the City?s zoning staff and the

applicant is responsible for paying them.



He advised that we are also looking to update the review process. He

mentioned that some of the items that we are looking at are maybe consider a

limit on the number of applications that are processed.



In response to a question of Mayor Peters, Mr. Bill Ross, came forward to

explain that someone may be authorized on behalf of the owner to submit an

application, but you would always make sure that the owner knows that his

property is in for rezoning; therefore, any cost involved would ultimately be

cast back on the owner. He said that usually the owner has an agreement with

the applicant for the applicant to handle all of the cost.



Councilor Poydasheff suggested that City Attorney Fay review the

recommendations of the consultant with that of legal requirements and the

starting point would be with Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Hopkins pointed out that Mr.

Jenkins is on the team, and he would be reviewing all language before it comes

back to the Council.



Mr. Hopkins reported that we are also looking at having major and minor

zoning cases to allow concentration on major issues. He said for the minor

zoning cases, they are looking at having some sort of easier process for those

applications.



Mr. Bill Ross, came forward to advise that one of the things they would be

proposing is some type of very limited administrative variances, where the

staff could grant a minor kind of variance, and this would also help the tree

protection ordinance that has been discussed.



He pointed out that when a staff recommendation comes to the Council on a

zoning application for denial, and an applicant does not appeal; then, there

needs to be some finality to that case; we need to recognize that the case has

been withdrawn as opposed to never being called for an ordinance. Mayor Peters

recalled that his understanding was that if the applicant does not show up

within seven days; then, the application dies. Mr. Ross concurred that we

could make it that way, but the City Code of Ordinance does not read that way.



After responding to questions from the members of Council, Mr. Hopkins

continued by referring back to the issue regarding major and minor zoning

applications by saying that we could possibly have a consent agenda to allow

for multiple uncontested applications to be approved at one time.



Mr. Hopkins also made comments regarding a ?consistency doctrine?. He

explained that the consistency doctrine means that the City has adopted a

Comprehensive Plan for Columbus and that the zoning code should be consistent

with the requirements of that Comprehensive Plan, but today it is not, because

the Council could zone something that is really inconsistent with the

comprehensive land use plan. Mayor Peters pointed out that the Council has the

discretion not to follow the staff?s recommendation; therefore, are the

comments being made that it should be tied together where the Council should

not have that flexibility, at which time, Mr. Hopkins agreed, but now with Mr.

Ross coming forward to briefly explain that if the rezoning application is

inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan; then, the petition has to be denied,

but if it is alleged to be consistent with the City?s plan; then, the Council

still would have the interpretation ability to determine if it is appropriate

for that location.



After some additional questions regarding a statement that was made, Mr.

Ross attempting to clarify the matter stated that if a petitioner proposes

something that is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Council

determines it to be an appropriate use; then, the Council can approve it, but

would need to modify the plan as well, because if it was inconsistent; then,

change the plan.



There were continued discussions on this matter with several members of

Council expressing their views.



------------------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------



NOTE: Councilor McDaniel left this meeting at approximately 11:30 a.m.

------------------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------



Mr. Hopkins pointed out that we are also looking at what should come to

Council and what could be handled by the staff on a day-to-day basis. For

example, he called attention to the Board of Zoning Appeals addressing the home

occupations. He suggested that if the Council established proper standards and

the type of uses that could go into residential zoning districts; then

certainly that should be handled on a staff day-to-day basis.



Mr. Ross outlined the concept of the ?Conservation Subdivision?, which is

to set aside valuable natural resources; flood plains, stream corridors,

wetlands, endangered species habitats, etc., while at the same time, allowing

the property owner to achieve at least as many lots on the property as they

could have gotten under conventional subdivisions. He continued to explain the

concept in more precise details.



At this point, Mr. Ross responded to several questions from the Mayor and

the members of Council.



Mr. Hopkins mentioned that they would also be looking into adult uses, for

example; adult book stores, etc. He said what we would need to do, as part of

the review is to bring the Council up-to-date on the recent legal decisions

that would affect adult uses, but of course, the Council does not have to take

advantage of the recommendations submitted.



He also briefly commented on the following items that would be reviewed as

part of the Unified Development Plan:



? Houses of Worship

? Manufactured Housing Statues and Laws

? Parking Regulations

? Planned Unit Development (PUD)

? Sign Regulations

? Subdivisions



Mr. Ross advised that we would be looking at the City?s whole subdivision

process as far as what is exempt under State Law. He said that there is only

one kind of land sell that is exempt under State Law for subdivision

regulations, and that is when a farmer sells property to another farmer for

noncommercial, non-development land sales. He recalled that one issue has come

up and that is in regards to minimum roadways width. He also pointed out that

they would be addressing the issue regarding sidewalks.



In addressing the concerns of Councilor Allen, Mr. Hopkins advised that

they would be addressing larger lot zoning types of issues to provide for some

type of transition. He explained that they would also be looking at virtually

all zoning districts for the elimination of many intensive Agricultural uses.



The following items are a continuation of those items to be reviewed:



? Tree Protection

? Water and Sewer hookups

? Zoning Districts

? Personal Care Homes



There was some discussion regarding the use of the Planned Unit

Development (PUD) with Mr. Hopkins responding to various questions.



Councilor Smith asked about Item #8 (Manufactured Housing) which reads

that ?Manufactured houses to be permitted in all single-family zoning

districts?. Mr. Ross replied that we made the caveat that if it meets the

State and local building code requirements, but mobile homes do not meet

building code requirements and manufactured homes normally do.



There was then some brief discussion regarding mobile homes versus

manufactured homes. Councilor Woodson requested that the staff provide the

state law regarding the definition or differences between manufactured homes

and mobile homes. Mr. Ross pointed out that those types of structures still

have to comply with any of the requirements that the City has through zonings,

but the City is preempted from not allowing them at all; therefore,

manufactured and mobiles homes cannot be band entirely from the City, but the

Council could be more restrictive as to where they are allowed and where they

are not allowed.



At the conclusion of the presentation, City Manager Cavezza said that

perhaps now people would pay more attention to the Comprehensive Plan, but the

strengthening of the Comprehensive Plan would most likely get more public

interaction, and that is really what we need, before we get into the individual

zoning cases.



*** *** ***



HB 1382 (RAILROAD CROSSINGS) AND HB 1128 (SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY):



Councilor Suber made reference to HB 1382, which is the provision for the

maintenance and the elimination of railroad crossings, in that ACCG is saying

that we need to be calling our State Representatives, at which time, City

Manager Cavezza assured the Council that they have been working with them.



City Manager Cavezza announced that HB 1128 on sovereign immunity has

passed the House and the Senate and would be implemented into law if the

governor signs it. He said that he believes it would likely go into effect in

2005, but he does not have all of the specifics at this time.



*** *** ***



With there being no other business to come before the Council, this

meeting was adjourned, upon the adoption of a motion made by Mayor Pro Tem

Rodgers. Seconded by Councilor Poydasheff, which carried unanimously by those

nine members of Council present for this meeting with Councilor McDaniel having

already left the meeting, with the time being 12:03 p.m.



*** *** ***







Sandra T. Davis

Deputy Clerk of Council

The Council of Columbus, Georgia