- City of Dunwoody Quarterly Financial Statements for Period Ended June 30, 2010.
- Fire Services Discussion.
- Residential Parking Requirements Discussion.
- FIRST READ – Proposed Text Amendments to Chapter 27, Zoning, Section 27-809-810, Retail, Service and Restaurant Uses in the O-I Zoning District.
- FIRST READ – Proposed Text Amendments to Chapter 27, Zoning, Section 27-1, “Definitions,” to Address the Definition of “Paved” and “Pervious Surface.”
- FIRST READ – Proposed Text Amendments to Chapter 27, Zoning, Section 27-1576, Scheduling Requirements for Public Hearings Related to Zoning Actions.
- FIRST READ – Proposed Text Amendments to Chapter 27, Zoning, Section 27-1575, Withdrawal Requirements for the Zoning Board of Appeals.
- Impact Fees Discussion.
- Master Plan Public Involvement – Dunwoody Village and Georgetown.
- Master Transportation Plan Public Involvement.
- Update on Stormwater Inventory.
- Emergency Notification Sirens Update.
- Discussion of Amendment to Chapter 26, Streets, Sidewalks, and Other Public Places, Section 26-265 Definitions of Special Events.
- Discussion of Amendment to Chapter 4, Alcohol, for Modifying the Requirements Relating to Package Sale Distances from Private Dwellings.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Agenda for Monday, August 9th - Dunwoody City Council Work Session
Work Session Agenda
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
John , who was behind the new Parking Code?
No one seems to know or remember.
When I asked at City hall I was told it was at the retreat
I did an open records request and those minutes should nothing other than it was discussed.
Was it Counciil, a specific Councilman or was this a City Manager idea?
God I wish I could type? "SHOWED nothing"
Or I could spell check or better yet proff read.....nah
Bob, the retreat was back in January and as you know it is the yearly planning session where the council and staff set legislative goals for the upcoming year. Council was asked to provide discussion items for the retreat and if you look at the list, I believe most were provided by council members. The only one I remember that might have been presented by the City Manager was the domestic partner benefit item since Doraville had just passed their ordinance on the subject. Other run of the mill items may have also been suggested by Warren to start the list but I do not believe that this parking item was presented by staff.
I found the minutes from retreat, check out the list starting on page 5. I remember each council member voting on the items (ranking them by importance and/or the order requested to discuss each one) and I believe we then discussed them in the order listed in the minutes. As you see the residential parking discussion was discussed much later in the day since most council members believed there were much more important items to discuss.
I have limited memory of the actual discussion but I know myself and several members were against this item from the very start, yet as shown in the minutes it was scheduled to be drawn up and discussed further which is what is now happening on Monday.
A point that needs to be brought up is that we as a group try to respect the individual views of other council members. Each member was elected by the citizens of Dunwoody and I want to hear their ideas for changes that will positively shape the future of Dunwoody, even if I may not immediately approve of the idea. Work sessions are places to raise ideas for public discussion and that is what was happening here. Was this proposed ordinance going to become law, no I think it was going to be discussed and then go away once it was obvious that it didn't have wide support.
It takes four members of the City Council to pass an ordinance and I think our history to date speaks for itself that we are deliberative in our actions, working to do what is best for all the citizens living in our city. Have we gotten everything right? No elected body ever does, but I believe that we all attempt to properly represent the people we serve.
Sorry I don't have more information for you at this time and sorry I didn't record the retreat session (it was quite long and would have taken hours of processing time on the back end) but I will see what else I can find.
Great information - thx John!
Thanks John,
But some one knows who came up with this.
Wareen knows who asked him to do it or the council member who pushed it.
While I applaud you openess, other are not so forth coming.
I read the minutes again and the suggestion was that a resident put ion this committee. What happened to that?
Bob, I don't understand the comment. What minutes?
Since I can’t come to the meeting, I want to say that I hope the Impact Fee idea will be implemented. I’m not sure if this discussion will be WHETHER to do it, or HOW to do it. If it’s HOW, then I’m more than happy to leave it in your capable hands. If it’s WHETHER, then I’d like to urge adoption of the idea – it’s a commonly held understanding in macro-econ that the drivers behind society-wide costs such as pollution, gridlock, school crowding, etc. result from the failure to link the true COSTS of development, industry, etc., to the producers of the development, industry, etc.
I see no reason why, on our micro scale in Dunwoody, we shouldn’t be mindful of this and try to be as accurate as possible in assigning costs where they appropriately fall. If there is an argument against – such as that this will inevitably raise the cost of doing business here – then we should be remembering that failing to correctly assign the costs doesn’t mean they aren’t PAID. They’re just paid by people other than the producers -- increased incidence of asthma from pollution, increased time in traffic from gridlock, kids in trailers at school, etc.
You can take the example of GPC -- in the final analysis, it's no real skin off the school's nose that the surrounding area is completely impossible to navigate at certain periods; the expansion in student body without some consideration of how all those students were going to GET there and whether the roads could tolerate that was irresponsible and shows a very sort-sighted approach to growth. (I know this wasn't something the City of Dunwoody had any control over.) How long, now, will we be trying to figure out a solution to that particular issue?
In the GPC case, or any other "unassigned cost in macro-econ" case, the lag time is years or sometimes decades before a balance can be found, and in the meantime, we all bear the brunt of the cost. If at least some part of the imbalance can be addressed by identifying costs and assigning them ahead of time, this seems a very common-sense approach to me.
I am looking for a citizen to volunteer to serve on the Transportation Plan Advisory Committee. I would prefer to nominate someone who will fight specifically for ADA improvements and removing transportation barriers since I see this as a specific need on the committee not currently addressed. If you are interested or know someone who is, please contact me at John.Heneghan@Dunwoodyga.gov
Advisory Committee Composition
The advisory committee will provide feedback at key milestones throughout the development of the plan. The group will review information and provide comment into the process prior to each public workshop and will be asked to assist in promoting public input sessions. The recommended composition of the committee is as follows:
One representative each from:
1. Perimeter Community Improvement District
2. Dunwoody Chamber of Commerce
3. Perimeter Transportation Coalition
10 citizens:
4. Bob Dallas-Transportation Safety
5. Joe Seconder-Cycling
6. Tom Lambert-Safe Routes to School/Pedestrian
7-13. One appointment each for mayor and council members
John: Mark, the scooter rider who always writes the most insightful, intelligent comments, specifically about transportation. He knows the transportation challenges of Dunwoody inside and out!
Post a Comment