Following is a republished post from June 2016.  It provides additional insight into so-called “Conservation” Subdivisions.  The Lahkapani property referenced in The Milton Herald article was later purchased by the City using greenspace bond funds.  (I am re-posting some previous blog posts to help educate City Council candidates and citizens on issues facing the Milton community.)

***********************************************************************************************************

Milton Citizens:

There is a reason that 745 Ebenezer Road has not been developed.  The reason is that it is currently uneconomic to develop, as is true of much of the contiguous property in the area.  This was admitted in the Milton Herald by one of the nearby property owners who stated his land was considered “trash” by developers.  The property owner admitted he needed cluster housing to make his land economic to develop.

Click here for link to article:  Cluster Housing Needed to Profitably Develop Marginal Land in Milton

It was this article that got many of us energized about this issue.

The truth is that many of the larger tracts of profitable land in Milton have been developed or are being developed.  To keep the building boom going, developers are increasingly looking at more marginal land.  This is land with steep slopes, soils that do not support septic, lots of flood-able area, poor geometry, etc.  These are properties that cannot be profitably developed under AG-1.

So builders are pushing a scheme that has been used across the Atlanta metro area:  so-called “conservation” subdivisions.  Under this scheme, the builder clusters his homes in the most easily developed areas of the property.  The remainder of the land–much of it unbuildable or uneconomic to develop–is claimed as green space.  Most of it would have been conserved anyway.

So what do Milton citizens get from this cluster housing?  Milton citizens get higher density cluster homes that do not fit the rural aesthetic.  We get risky community septic.  Think about the wisdom of letting a small HOA operate and maintain a private sewer system.  We get even more development occurring at an even faster pace.  We get lowered property values.  We get more crowding on our roads, in our schools, and at our parks.  More pollution.  More stress on our infrastructure.  More strain on amenities.

You get our point.  Developers reap the profits and citizens pay the price.

The truth is that developers need the following three things to make their schemes work:

1. Higher density.  Builders want higher density than can be achieved under current zoning.  More houses, more money.  As part of the zoning process, developers must create a theoretical yield plan to show the number of homes that might be possible on the property under current zoning (i.e., AG-1).  Brightwater Homes developed such as yield plan.  The Milton Coalition’s experts evaluated the plan and found numerous flaws that grossly inflated the theoretical yield.  In the theoretical yield plan, which is still in Brightwater’s rezoning application, Brightwater sited numerous septic systems in soils that will not support septic.  Brightwater’s own soil maps show that 50% of the 50-acre western parcel will not support septic!  This resulted in Brightwater submitting a letter that essentially admitted the errors but stated that it could spend a lot of money to buy technology to fix all the septic issues.  Additionally, Brightwater is including a 14-acre parcel off a gravel road that geometry and Milton’s zoning (developments along gravel roads must have lots of 3+ acres) would only yield 3-4 homes.  But because BW can access this parcel through its assemblage of 2 other parcels on a paved road, it is claiming it could build at least 12 homes on this property.  We consider this an exploitation of a loophole/technicality.  It is a slimey tactic that belies the builder’s supposed conservation intentions.
2. Cluster homes.  Brightwater Homes benefits from clustering homes.  BW’s costs are lower with shorter utility runs, less roads to build, etc.  Eight of BW’s homes are on less than 1/4 acre.  Such clustering allows a builder to significantly lower its costs.
3. Private sewer.  AG-1 requires lots be >1 acre for individual septic systems.  Accordingly, for BW to get higher density and to cluster homes on lots of less than 1 acre, BW must install a private sewer system.  This is a sensitive subject for Council as every member has run on a platform of not extending private sewer.  A community septic system is private sewer.  Sewage is collected from multiple homes, put into a common pipe, and sent to a common treatment facility (in this case, a septic drain filed).  We are fundamentally opposed to deployment of this technology.  Quite a few local professional engineers and construction experts have questioned the maturity of these technologies.  Risk is also an issue.  Is it really prudent to trust an HOA to operate and maintain a private sewer system?  The City has already acknowledged that it would have to assume financial risk if a private sewer system failed and the HOA could not or would not repair it.  Additionally, community septic “puts all our eggs in one basket.”   That is, risk is concentrated vs. the risk diversification that occurs with individual septic systems.  If a system for 50 homes (vs. a single home) fails, it could have disastrous results.  And do not believe the falsehoods about the regulation of these systems.  One of the reasons that the City so far has resisted community septic is that state/county regulation is inadequate.

If approved, the Sweetapple rezoning would set a dangerous precedent for Milton.  We should expect a raft of similar applications for hundreds of acres of “trash” land in Milton.  This precedent will make it easier for Brightwater and other builders to develop marginal properties.  We even see this with AG-1.  Builders are increasingly coming hat-in-hand to Council to obtain variances for lots they knew (or should have known) were unbuildable.  In a recent DRB meeting, the City Architect acknowledged that the issue of marginal land is going to increasingly come up.  And BW’s Sweetapple rezoning is only the latest example.

It is said that in the realm of government affairs “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”  As one citizen said at last night’s boisterous Design Review Board meeting “Citizens are now watching.”  And those in our government that are pushing developers’ agendas need to take heed of our message:  A new day is dawning in Milton.  Citizens are engaged and they are showing up.  And they are going to continue to show up.  We are demanding a citizen’s (not a developers’) agenda for Milton.  Following is a photo taken on King Lake this morning that symbolizes our hopes for Milton.  And symbolizes what we want to preserve.  Thanks, citizens for your fine efforts on behalf of Milton.  You are making a positive difference.

Milton Citizens:

Once again, you are rising to the occasion!  In the last 12 hours, more than 160 citizens have signed our petition.  At last count, we were at 1344 signatures.

Once again, you are sending a strong message to our local government that we are fed up with reckless rezonings that are destroying Milton.  We are fed up with our government changing the rules to increase the profits of Special Interests.  We do not want cluster housing in rural areas of Milton.  We do not want higher density housing in un-sewered areas of Milton.  We do not want HOAs running private sewer systems.  We want the Council to close loopholes in our zoning laws.  We want the principle of LOCAL CONTROL to extend to rezonings.  We want Council to listen to our zoning experts, the Planning Commission, which voted 7-0 to recommend denial of the Ebenezer Road rezoning.  We want a fair, rigorous zoning process that considers the prerogatives of citizens.  We do not want rezonings that accelerate already overheated development in Milton.  We do not want rezonings that open up marginal land to development.  We want Council members to honor their campaign promises not to extend sewer.  We do not want any more rezonings that result in the abomination that we see across from Cambridge High School.

Citizens, please help us to get our petition to 2,000 signatures.  Please enlist your friends, neighbors, and family to support our cause:  sign the petition, e-mail Council, and speak at the June 20th City Council meeting against the 745 Ebenezer rezoning.  Citizens, it is your Milton, let’s put government back in our hands.  Thank you.  With deep civic pride,

Click here for our Citizen Action Guide:  What You Can Do To Stop Reckless Rezonings

The Milton Coalition – a non-partisan group of concerned citizens advocating for clean, competent, courageous, and citizen-centric government.

I am re-publishing a post from June 2016.  This post re-publishes a letter by Laura Bentley to The Milton Herald.  This letter emphasizes an important outcome of poor zoning decisions in Milton:  they can quickly metastasize across Milton.  The rapid replication of poor zoning choices is why citizens need to engage on issues that might seem faraway (and therefore irrelevant).  If citizens engage on issues only when a zoning decision is on their doorstep (i.e., it involves a neighboring property), then they are probably too late to do anything about the issue.  Once legal precedent is set, the die is cast.

Advocating For Citizen Engagement,

Tim

**********************************************************************************************************

Following is an excellent letter from Laura Bentley about rezonings in Milton.  It was published in the Milton Herald.  Unfortunately, the rezoning of the property across from Cambridge High School is Exhibit A for Reckless Rezoning in Milton.  In justifying his vote, one Council member bragged that he had saved 50% of the property’s green space.  Really? Unfortunately, a few misguided local “environmentalists” seem to think this development is a good compromise.  Really?

Click the following link to go to the Milton Herald article, or read below.   Rezoning . . . Coming to a Parcel Near You

Bethany Bend and Cogburn Road (across from Cambridge High School)

Milton Citizens:

You rock!  At 5:08 pm today, our petition hit the 1,000 signature milestone!  This is incredible given that we launched our petition less than 1 week ago.

Our new goal is 2,000 signatures.  Reaching this new milestone should send a clear and strong message to our City Council that citizens are adamantly against the currently proposed rezonings at 745 Ebenezer Road and Donegal Lane.  We do not want cluster homes on AG-1 land!  We do not want higher density housing!  We do not want private sewer!  Period!  Why are 2000 signatures important?  A petition with 2,000 signatories is more than all votes cast in Milton in last Tuesday’s election.

Citizens, thanks for your ongoing efforts to preserve the Milton we love.  We have 1 more request for you.  Every citizen that signed the petition needs to get just one more person to sign.  It might be someone else in your household . . . or a good friend . . . or your next door neighbor.  Just one person.  Thanks citizens.

(Note:  Today, our blog also surpassed 600 page views.)

Dear concerned citizen:

Join the over 1600 citizens and that have signed our petition since last Monday!

STOP CLUSTER HOUSING IN RURAL MILTON!  We need your help in stopping developers and other Special Interests from abusing Milton’s zoning laws to maximize their profits by cramming homes into rural areas of Milton, leaving Milton citizens to pay the price:  lower property values, overcrowded schools, congested roads, stressed amenities, and strained infrastructure.

We have created a blog with information and a petition you can sign.  We also recommend that citizens write to City Council to express their opposition; instructions are provided below.

• Sign our petition at Milton Coalition Petition Against Cluster Housing or paste the following link into your browser: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/i-oppose-permitting-less-than-1-acre-lots-in Please have each household member sign separately and include a comment.

• If you want more information, go to the Milton Coalition blog. Click on this link Milton Coalition Stop Cluster Housing Website or paste the following URL into your browser:  https://miltoncoalition.wordpress.com/

***********************************************************************

Failing to get the Conservation Subdivision Ordinance (CSO) passed, developers are using rezoning and variances to achieve the goals of the CSO on land currently zoned AG-1 by Milton’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan, including:

• Cluster homes on ¼ acre lots
• Higher density of homes
• 50% lot coverage of homes (a variance is needed to permit this vs. 20% lot coverage allowed under current zoning)
• Community septic

A new cluster housing subdivision has been proposed on Ebenezer Road.  It seems not to matter that over 800 citizens signed a petition against “conservation” cluster housing.  And even though staff and the Planning Commission (in a 7-0 vote) have recommended denial of this rezoning, a majority of City Council members have voted to approve the Ebenezer Road rezoning allowing cluster housing at the end of a remote rural road in Milton.  Fortunately, the Mayor vetoed the approval (which was upheld by Council in a 3-2 vote) and the rezoning is set for another vote on June 20^th.

Approval of such cluster housing will accelerate already overheated development in Milton.  This means more strain on overcrowded schools, congested roads, and overstressed infrastructure.  Approving cluster housing through rezoning and variances is actually worse than the CSO because the protections and restrictions of a CSO are absent.  Such rezonings are an abuse of our zoning laws, representing an end-run around our zoning code.

The truth is that developers are proposing cluster home developments to make unattractive land profitable to develop.  A developer crams homes on the most hospitable areas of the property, claiming the remaining areas as “greenspace”–much of it unbuildable or uneconomic to develop.  Environmentalism is used as a cynical ruse to achieve rezoning and variances.  In a sad irony, approval of such “green” cluster home subdivisions actually accelerates loss of “greenspace” and is the antithesis of conservation.

Approval of the Ebenezer application would set a very dangerous precedent in Milton.  If approved, Milton citizens should expect a flood of similar applications as builders rush to develop land in Milton that is currently unprofitable to develop.  The developers cash in and the citizens of Milton pay the price.  A new proposal to rezone another property (Donegal Lane) to allow cluster housing was submitted last week.

Unfortunately, developers have many advantages:  time, money, connections, zoning expertise, and paid attorneys.  So once again we have to mobilize citizens in opposition.  We need for citizens to again speak out against cluster housing in un-sewered areas of Milton.  We ask that you take the following actions:

1. Sign our petition at Milton Coalition Petition Against Cluster Housing or paste the following link into your browser: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/i-oppose-permitting-less-than-1-acre-lots-in Please leave a comment to let council know your thoughts.  Please have each member of your household sign separately.
2. Write to City Council and the City Manager to express your opposition. Their addresses are provided below.
3. Express your opposition at the June 20^th City Council meeting (6 pm at Council Chambers) when the Ebenezer application is going to be considered.
4. Please forward this e-mail to family, friends, HOAs, etc. in Milton, so they can also express their opposition.
5. Contact us at miltoncoalition@outlook.com if you would like to receive occasional updates on this issue or if you have questions/comments.
6. Post our blog and petition to your social media.

Following are the e-mail addresses of City Council members and the City Manager:

Interim City Manager:  Steven Krokoff, steven.Krokoff@cityofmiltonga.us, 678-242-2570

Mayor and City Council members: joe.lockwood@cityofmiltonga.us,karen.thurman@cityofmiltonga.us,matt.kunz@cityofmiltonga.us,bill.lusk@cityofmiltonga.us,burt.hewitt@cityofmiltonga.us,joe.longoria@cityofmiltonga.us,rick.mohrig@cityofmiltonga.us

If you want more information, go to the Milton Coalition blog.  It is your one-stop shop for all information on current re-zonings.  Click on this link Milton Coalition Stop Cluster Housing Website or paste the following URL into your browser:  https://miltoncoalition.wordpress.com/  You can also contact us at miltoncoalition@outlook.com

The Milton Coalition’s longer term aim is to work with City Council to find land-use solutions (e.g., tightening our current zoning laws) that citizens can unite behind (and there are many of them) as opposed to developer-submitted solutions that are divisive and that citizens do not want.

Thank you for your efforts on behalf of Milton.  They are appreciated.

With deep civic pride,

The Milton Coalition

A non-partisan group of concerned citizens advocating for clean, competent, courageous, and citizen-centric government.

miltoncoalition@outlook.com

Seen the latest AJC article on Milton?  Milton is the fastest-growing city in Milton.  Of course, you knew that already based on all the traffic congestion around the city.  And the overcrowded schools.  And the crumbling infrastructure.  Click here to read the article.  “Growth Friendly” Milton

In this AJC article, Milton is described as a “growth-friendly” city.  Of course, “growth-friendly” is just a euphemism for “developer-friendly.”  So it begs the the following questions:

• Why are we considering rezonings that allow higher density and cluster homes in rural Milton?  Do we really need to cram more people into Milton?
• Why are we even considering rezoning for properties that are uneconomic to develop under current zoning laws?  Do we really need to put even more money into developers’ pockets?
• Why would we consider any scheme that would accelerate already out-of-control development?
• Why have we wasted so much time on “conservation” cluster home subdivisions?
• Why haven’t we toughened our existing zoning (e.g., AG-1) laws?  Or our tree ordinance?
• Why isn’t anyone looking to reform our current rezoning process to make it less developer-friendly?  Why do Council members continue to argue with citizens about this issue despite the obvious and mounting evidence of a broken rezoning process?

Milton needs to be erecting some sensible speed bumps to development.  The reality is that sensible solutions have been held hostage to a singular focus on one solution:  “conservation” cluster homes, which ironically accelerate development.  For more than 18 months, AG-1 zoning enhancements have languished while our City government obsessed over the CSO (“Conservation” Subdivision Ordinance) and now the 745 Ebenezer Road rezoning.  The CSO was voted down 7-0 by Council in December 2015, but immediately metastasized into rezonings that are an end-run around current zoning to accomplish the goals of the CSO.

Why has this occurred?  Well, blame 2 City Council members, special interests, and a few misguided “environmentalists.”  The City Council members are Mr. Lusk and Mr. Kunz.  You might recall that Mr. Lusk wanted to put the CSO back on Council’s agenda the very night it was voted down.  Mr. Lusk is notorious for the soft-ball questions he asks of developers before Council.  And Mr. Kunz is a full-throated advocate of cluster homes.  He has even argued for density bonuses for developers building cluster home subdivisions (see November 30, 2015 letter he wrote in the Milton Herald Kunz Promotes Density Bonus for Developers).  He has brazenly negotiated for developers in Council meetings.

The Special Interests are developers, some owners of large tracts of marginal land, and septic system vendors.  They show up at every meeting to support “conservation” cluster home ordinances and rezonings.  It is the same old story at every City Council meeting on this issue:  Special Interests on one side and citizens on the other side.

And then there is the small cadre of misguided “environmentalists,” who do not speak for the environmental community, much less the broader cross-section of Milton citizens.  Their motives for vigorously pushing developer-promoted conservation solutions to the exclusion of all other solutions are unclear.

Mister Lusk/Kunz, the Special Interests, and the misguided “environmentalists” have done little or nothing to promote AG-1 zoning enhancements that might have retarded/stopped the rampant development in Milton.  Why?  AG-1 is their whipping boy.  Improvements to AG-1 would dilute their number 1 argument for “conservation” cluster housing.

Fortunately, the Milton Coalition and others are putting forth sensible solutions that the community can unite behind.  For example, we recently suggested changes to toughen Milton’s tree ordinance, after comparing it to Alpharetta’s tree ordinance.  The reality is that the current penalties for tree cutting are so lame that developers can pay the fines just based on the profits from the trees harvested.

And finally, a robust set of AG-1 enhancements has been formulated and will soon be considered by Council.  CSO proponents will no longer have AG-1 to kick around any more.

Being the fastest growing city in Fulton County is clearly a dubious honor for our city. The AJC article is correct in its assessment that Milton citizens are engaged.  And you have been vigorously engaging on this issue of cluster housing in rural Milton.  Please continue to engage.  Citizens, with your help, we can put our fine city back on the right path of sensible conservation solutions that unite the community.  A first step is to sign our petition.  Click on the following link:  Milton Coalition Petition Against Cluster Housing  And see our Action Guide for more actions you can take.  Click here:  Citizen Action Guide  Many thanks!

Conservation subdivisions are again being considered in Milton.  Not even 6 months have passed since City Council voted unanimously to deny the Conservation Subdivision Ordinance (CSO) due to overwhelming public opposition.  You might recall that over 800 citizens signed a petition.  The CSO’s demise was sealed when over 100 citizens packed City Council chambers to passionately express their opposition.

So why is the CSO back?  Blame Special Interests and their City Council allies.  Developers in particular have been working overtime to bend and break the rules.  They have the time, money, knowledge, connections, and paid attorneys to pursue their agenda.  This time, developers are using rezoning and variances to achieve the CSO’s goals.  This is a flagrant abuse of Milton’s laws.

So why are developers so passionate about “conservation” subdivisions?  Well, as with so many issues, one need only “follow the money.”  The reality is that large buildable tracts in Milton are disappearing.  Increasingly developers are eyeing unprofitable tracts and schemes for profitably developing these tracts.  “Conservation” subdivisions are one strategy they have successfully used in other localities.  With a “conservation” subdivision, a builder crams homes onto the most hospitable area of a tract.  This increases revenues and lowers costs, thereby making a “conservation” subdivision profitable.  The remaining land—much of it unbuildable or uneconomic to develop—is claimed as “green space.”  Environmentalism is cynically used as a public relations ruse.

If the rezoning and variances needed for a “conservation” subdivision are approved, citizens can expect a raft of similar rezoning applications—a land and development rush in an already overheated housing market.  The result will be higher land prices, traffic congestion, pollution, overcrowded schools, and stressed infrastructure.  It is a sad irony that “conservation” subdivisions are actually the antithesis of conservation.

Once and for all, City Council needs to definitively reject “conservation” subdivisions.  Nobody likes a rigged game.  And citizens are tired of being jerked around on this issue.  City Council is going to again consider this matter on June 20^th at Council Chambers on Deerfield Parkway.  It is critical that citizens attend this meeting to express their opposition to the Special Interests and their schemes to subvert Milton’s zoning code to maximize their profits.  Citizens, the time is now to show up, stand up, and speak up for clean, competent, and courageous government in Milton.

Following is a letter to City Council written by Tim Becker expressing opposition to the Brightwater Homes’ rezoning of 745 Ebenezer Road.

Council Members, Mayor, and City Manager:

In advance of the First Hearing on the proposed Ebenezer Road subdivision, I am writing to express my opposition to Brightwater’s rezoning application.  I would like this letter to be entered into the public record.

The proposed Ebenezer subdivision is merely a legacy of the CSO.  Charlie Bostwick of Brightwater Homes and our community planners have referred to the proposed development as a “conservation subdivision.”  And Mr. Bostwick has stated that he hoped to build the proposed subdivision under the CSO.

Having failed to get a CSO approved, developers are now seeking to use (abuse/misuse, in my opinion) rezoning and variances to achieve their goal of building cluster homes in un-sewered areas of Milton.  Community Development has described the CUP zoning as a “Burger King” zoning law—that is, “have it your way” with the personal pronoun referring to the developer.  Well, I do not want it the developer’s way in Milton.  Rather it should be the Citizen’s way.

That leads me to the first reason to reject the Ebenezer Road subdivision:  A vast majority of citizens do not want these sorts of cluster home subdivisions.  Over less than 3 weeks, more than 800 citizens signed a petition against the CSO.  More than 100 showed up at City Hall in opposition, with 35 actually stepping up to the microphone to speak against the CSO.  In doing so, citizens were expressing opposition to the ends of the CSO:  homes on less than 1 acre in AG-1 areas, higher density, community septic, accelerated development, and little/no actual conservation of buildable land.  Citizens oppose these ends regardless of the means:  CSO or rezoning/variances—it makes no difference to them.

And the notion floated by one Council member that the citizens have been duped by misinformation and therefore their opinions can be “discounted” is a view that I hope is not shared by other Council members.  This position shows a stunning contempt for the intelligence (or I guess, lack thereof) of Milton’s citizens.  I urge other Council members to flatly and publicly renounce this disrespect toward citizens.

While the vast majority of citizens do not want Ebenezer-style subdivisions, it is equally true that Special Interests, particularly developers, do want these cluster home subdivisions.  These Special Interests were out in full force on December 7^th, where they comprised a majority of the speakers that spoke in favor of the CSO.  Having morphed the CSO from a green ordinance into developer-friendly ordinance (similar to ordinances in Woodstock and Gwinnett that have facilitated rampant development), these Special Interests lined up at the microphone to support the CSO.  And they are similarly supportive of rezoning and variances to achieve the CSO’s goals.

The logic of their support is simple.  In Milton, the most attractive larger tracts of land have been picked over.  Many of the remaining large tracts are currently uneconomic to develop.  A cluster home subdivision allows a builder to find the “sweet spot” on a tract where the land is most hospitable for building.  This area is developed.  The remaining land—much of it unbuildable or else uneconomic to develop—is claimed as “green space.”  This “green space” often includes septic leaching fields, community amenities, etc.  “Green space” is nothing more than a cynical marketing ploy.

The worst part of these “conservation” cluster home subdivisions is that they are the antithesis of conservation.  Approval of such applications will actually accelerate the development of land, as marginal tracts are suddenly made attractive for development.  There is a reason that Lahkapani and 745 Ebenezer have not been developed . . . they are currently uneconomic to develop.  And there is a reason that Brightwater’s purchase of 745 Ebenezer is contingent on the granting of rezoning and a variance . . . it is uneconomic to otherwise develop.  Don’t you think that if BW could develop a profitable AG-1 subdivision, BW would have bought the land outright?  These sorts of rezoning contingencies should be a huge red flag to Council.

And further “goosing” the developer’s economics is the fact that a developer is able to achieve implicit density bonuses with a “conservation” subdivision.  In this case, BW staked out 50 AG-1 perced lots.  However, at the Planning Commission meeting, a Planning Commission member demonstrated that that only 41 lots were allowable, because part of the land would have to be accessed from a gravel road, requiring homes on >3 acre lots.  I doubt that 745 Ebenezer would support even 41 homes, as theoretical yield plans seldom yield the same number of homes as economic/marketable yield plans—hence nearly every one of these sorts of subdivisions will involve a significant density bonus.

The fact that BW is seeking approval for a 50-home subdivision when only a 41-home subdivision is possible under AG-1 would seem to explicitly violate our zoning laws and compel Council to reject outright the Ebenezer application.  And it would be patently unfair to allow BW to submit a revised application that staff and the PC have not evaluated.

There are many other reasons to reject the Ebenezer subdivision that I will not describe in this letter.  Some of these reasons for denial are included in staff’s evaluation of the Ebenezer application and in the Planning Commission’s recommendation for denial.  I encourage you to watch the PC’s March 23^rd meeting video.  I also encourage you to visit a real “conservation” subdivision in Woodstock called Wood View.  Rather than relying on artist’s renderings of such developments, you owe it to the citizens of Milton to visit a real “conservation” subdivision.  I am confident such a visit will open up your eyes to the reality (vs. the propaganda) of “conservation” subdivisions.

In closing, I urge you to strongly and unequivocally deny the Ebenezer Road application for rezoning and a variance.  I urge you to send a clear message to developers that they need to operate within Milton’s current zoning rules.  Please let them know that Milton is not a Burger King:  they are not going to get it their way.  And in so doing, Council should also send a message to it citizens:  We are here to represent your interests and only your interests.

Thank you for considering my perspectives on this issue.  Please do not hesitate to individually contact me with questions or comments.

Thank you for your service,

Tim Becker

Milton Coalition

A non-partisan group of concerned citizens advocating for clean, competent, and courageous government

Citizens of Milton:

On Monday, May 24th at 6pm, the Milton Coalition publicly launched its petition against cluster housing in rural Milton.  The current proposed rezonings in Milton represent an existential threat to our community.

You might recall that citizens previously opined on this issue when 838 signed a petition against the CSO, which was pivotal in Council’s denial of the CSO.  However, some Council Members have argued that the current rezonings are somehow different or that citizen pressure had nothing to do with their vote.  It is our strong belief that current proposed rezonings are a misuse of Milton’s zoning laws meant to achieve the goals of the CSO on a piecemeal basis.  These rezonings are actually worse than the CSO in that they offer none of the protections and restrictions of the CSO.  Incredibly, on April 25th, Council actually accepted the builder’s conditions for a cluster home subdivision at 745 Ebenezer Road . . . yes, that’s right, the builder’s conditions + the builder’s site plan are THE ZONING for development.  (Thankfully, Mayor Lockwood vetoed the zoning approval, citing numerous and egregious procedural violations).

So here we are back with another petition.  This petition makes crystal clear what citizens demand.  It captures the main issues we have identified as critical to Milton’s rural identity.  And it makes very clear the consequences of continuing to deny the will of citizens:  WE WILL VOTE YOU OUT OF OFFICE!

Citizens, thank you for your concern for our City.  Please forward the petition (to your Milton family, neighbors, and friends.  Let’s send a message to our City Council that citizens matter!

Milton Coalition Petition Against Cluster Housing In Rural Milton

I oppose cluster housing in un-sewered areas of Milton. (Milton residents only)

In signing this petition, I am:

1. opposing any zoning changes, variances, or other schemes that result in homes on less than one acre in un-sewered areas.

2. opposing any zoning changes or variances that accelerate development.

3. opposing community septic.

4. opposing any and all sewer extensions beyond areas where sewer is already permitted.

5. calling for reforms needed to make the zoning process citizen-centric.

6. advocating for sensible enhancements to current AG-1 zoning to preserve Milton’s rural character.

7. expressing my dissatisfaction with the influence of Special Interests in Milton.

8. advocating for clean, competent, courageous and citizen-centric government.

9. pledging to vote in elections against any Council Member that does not uphold the principles of this petition.