Monday, October 31, 2011

The Milton Peoples Forum...Online: Question 3 / District 2.

Courtesy & The Milton Herald

As referenced this past week on, the Milton Herald and are continuing the Milton Peoples Forum online. The focus
is to ask questions that time did not allow us to address at this past week's event.

In order to insure equal visibility for both districts, District 2 candidates answers will be posted on Tuesday and Thursday evenings while District 6 candidates answers will be listed on Wednesdays and Fridays.

Candidates are limited to a maximum of 200 words per answer and are listed alphabetically.

Milton business owners are complaining that the city's current sign ordinances are too restrictive. Would you change it and if so, in what way?


"Are our current sign ordinances too restrictive? I intend to give Milton's sign ordinances careful thought, just as I will other issues, if I am honored to be elected city council member.

The aesthetic concerns of 34,000 residents, and especially our homeowners, take first priority with me. They have invested heavily in Milton by purchasing homes here and entrusting their families’ well-being to our community.

As well, our Milton families rely on the neighborhood dry cleaners, restaurants, auto repair shops and all other types of small businesses to complement their quality of life. These small businesses rely on appropriate signage and fair treatment to make a living. One does not preclude the other.
Will my input or vote ever allow signage that would hurt or damage our rural character? Certainly not.

We must bring fairness and balance that benefits our citizens in these decisions. My personal goal is to insure that my role on the council is to provide a loud, strong voice to keep personal taxes low and increase property values. The only time I will be louder is if I sense there is a push that may in any way pierce our rural culture."


"Our sign ordinance was created based on Fulton County’s ordinance with some staff customizations based on Milton’s specific needs. With several years of experience, we have learned that some of the signage rules require adjustment.

I previously voted to allow modifications to the sign ordinance in certain areas for the allowance of a small neon sign. I remain open to re-addressing the sign ordinance. In fact, it is currently under review by the Planning Commission and will come back before Mayor and Council in November. We are evaluating % of window space for certain sign types, movable sandwich boards, flag signs for community branding, and more.

The sign ordinance is intended to protect and bring balance to our community. We must strike the right balance between appropriate business identification signage while ensuring that the development standards supported by citizens – including the look and feel of our commercial spaces – are not sacrificed. We should look to communities with strict sign codes that also flourish economically while maintaining their unique sense of place, including Charleston, Hilton Head and others. Milton citizens do not want to become Sandy Springs or Johns Creek. I am confident that we can strike the right balance. "


Anonymous said...

It is amazing how Julie starts talking about "balance" during election time? Anyone who has seen her in action knows there is no "balance" coming from her!

Anonymous said...

That is a silly comment, 11:35. She is the balance. She balances against the folks that are relentless in their push to waive the plans and ordinances of Milton so that they can take shortcuts. Have you taken a drive down Holcomb Bridge Rd? Alpharetta Highway through Roswell? Peachtree Industrial? Mansell? Those are all the result of no balance from a city council that defends the community.

Contrast those streets with areas that have strong ordinances like Peachtree City, Dunwoody or Hilton Head.

If you don't have a diligent City Council that protects the community, then you end up with urban rot. Note that you also need a community that doesn't abandon the Council (like you, for instance). As a city, we decided that we wanted an oasis from the chaos that is so pervasive in Atlanta. We decided that we wanted to protect our property values from the inevitable decline associated with unchecked growth.

I can show you a perfect example of why you have to be constantly vigilant in defending the city against those who have funded your candidate's campaign. Take a look at these two pictures:

Walmart in Conyers

Walmart in Hilton Head

We all want a vibrant city, but we want a well-planned city that is built on our terms. The developers will only do what you force them to do. If you have candidates like Kunz and Large that are bought and paid-for by developers living outside the city, then there will naturally be absolutely no control on density, aesthetics, green space, etc.

Anonymous said...

2:44, that is a perfect example...Walmart and Publix co-existing with all that tree coverage, it looks awesome

Anonymous said...

Still trying to figure out why everyone is in such a rush to kill the goose that laid the golden egg in Milton. I lived off South Cobb Drive once and won't do it again. I'm willing to pay a little more in taxes if necessary to control rampant commercialism and excessive signage. So much of Atlanta has already been ruined and some are willing to sell off the rest.

Anonymous said...

Its obvious - this is the last unspoiled area in North Metro-Atlanta. there is easy money to be made if rules can be bent. Plus, its convenient since some of the large developers actually live here.

Keep it unspoiled and rural. We will all make out well with protected property values. This housing market may never "recover." there will be a lot of competition for housing in other areas. As we become more commercial, our home values will reduce to other area levels as we will not generate the demand.

Anonymous said...

"unspoiled" are nothing but! You can't have the services "you" moved here for without paying for it. With so many empty houses and lots in this city, you might as well give up the tree hugging crap, realize this is 2011 and not 1911. Progression is here and you can't stop it. "If you build it, they will come." Great we built big houses and 1 walmart for them to shop in....but what about the cooks, maids, gardners, painters, security guards people.....they need a place too....wait "SOUTH COBB DRIVE" right?

Anonymous said...

Huh? What a ridiculous comment. Come back after you've been sober for a few days.

Anonymous said...

She is not the "balance", she is the extreme on one side. She provides the position on one side so that others can be the "balance" on council.

Anonymous said...

So, remove Julie and then everything will be smooth? That's right. Unanimity. Think of the time that they will save just voting yes to everything. It will be like old home week since Matt is on first name basis with all the developers who will be asking for zoning variances.

Without Julie, it would be payday for everyone that is funding Kunz and Large, and the existing developers on Council.

This is completely obvious to everyone paying attention, and especially to the small number of deep pocket developers that hope to increase their fortunes at Milton's expense.