HABERSHAM COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SUBJECT: City of Baldwin Annexation of approximately 145 acres (Parcel 053 029)

DATE: June 9, 2020 (X) RECOMMENDATION( ) POLICY DISCUSSION

BUDGET INFORMATION: ( ) STATUS REPORTANNUAL- N/A ( ) OTHERCAPITAL- N/A

COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED ON: June 15, 2020

PURPOSE: As required by Georgia law, the City of Baldwin has notified Habersham County of a proposed annexation application. The Board of Commissioners have an opportunity to object if you feel the proposed annexation create some issue with the potential land use or service issues. If objecting, the County must notify Baldwin within thirty (30) days and we’d enter an arbitration process.

BACKGROUND / HISTORY: The City of Baldwin is legally obligated to provide an opportunity for the Board of Commissioners to object to the proposed annexations.

FACTS AND ISSUES: Staff has reviewed the proposed annexation and find the following: a. The proposed annexation does not create an unincorporated island. There is a

2.833 acres tract proposed to remain unincorporated which would avoid creating an unincorporated island consisting of Parcel 051 005.

b. Per the County Attorney, the annexation is not contiguous to the validly annexed portions City of Baldwin. There are at least three locations where properties where illegally annexed without the required 50-foot minimum common boundary.

c. The proposed zoning of Planned Residential Development (PRD) zoning appears consistent with the recommended suburban transition character area in the Comprehensive Plan.

d. There are a proposed 730 total units with a mixture of single- and multi-family homes in the development. Of the 730 total dwelling units, 704 of them will access the property via Thompson Road. In addition, there is a proposed commercial area totaling 40,000 square feet of commercial space, but little detail is given on the proposed uses.

e. The current County zoning of the property includes approximately 39 acres zoned LI, Low Intensity Use District and the remaining approximately 106 acres zoned AG, Agricultural District. Given the minimum lot sizes established by the County, there could a maximum of 39 homes built on the LI portion and 10 homes constructed on the AG portion for a total of 49 homes. The 730 dwellings are a dramatic increase in proposed density.

f. According to the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), a typical single-family home will generate approximately 10 vehicle trips per day. Per the applicant’s site plan,

it appears approximately 7,000 vehicle trips (per the ITE trip generation manual) will utilize Thompson Road for access. This figure doesn’t include any trips generated by the proposed commercial uses given the lack of information on them.

g. Thompson Road transitions to a gravel road which lacks dedicated right-of-way on the property, so anyone travelling south to Gainesville from the development would travel on the gravel portion of Thompson Road. It is estimated 60% to 70% of the vehicle trips would travel south towards Alto Mud Creek Road on the gravel portion of the road. The gravel roadbed would quickly deteriorate and would need constant maintenance from upwards of an estimated 4,900 daily trips. To give some perspective, Duncan Bridge Road, on the north side of HWY 365, currently has a traffic count of 5,180 vehicles (from GDOT in 2017) per day. The gravel roadbed of Thompson Road would deteriorate quickly and require immediate paving to insure a safe travel route.

h. Thompson Road also lacks dedicated right-of-way on the gravel portion of the road. Any improvements to the road would necessitate ROW acquisition from adjoining property owners.

i. Finally, traffic travelling south on Thompson Road would cross a currently single lane bridge. The Public Works Director has expressed serious concerns about 4,000 to 5,000 vehicle trips per day crossing the bridge. In his opinion, the bridge would have to be replaced with a full two-lane bridge to accommodate the anticipated traffic.

j. In the opinion of the Public Works Director, the proposed traffic on Thompson Road will far exceed the current capacity of the gravel roadbed and the single lane bridge requiring immediate, costly upgrades.

k. If there are no objections to this annexation, staff strongly recommends it being conditioned on Baldwin accepting maintenance responsibilities for the entirety of Thompson Road.

l. If objections occur, the County would have to formally notify Baldwin via certified mail within thirty (30) days and we would enter an arbitration process.

m. The BOC must vote for objection only and it must be based on a “material increase in burden” related to: (a) Proposed change in zoning or land use; (b) Proposed increase in density; or (c) Infrastructure demands related to the proposed change in zoning or land use.

OPTIONS: The Board of Commissioners could act on these applications as follows: 1. Vote to have an objection to the annexation application by stating the objection is based on a material

increase in burden related to a proposed increase in density and infrastructure demands related to the proposed change in zoning or land use.

2. Vote to have no objection to the annexation with a condition of Baldwin accepting maintenance responsibilities for the entirety of Thompson Road.

3. Take no action, thus having no objections. 4. Commission defined alternative.

RECOMMENDED SAMPLE MOTION: Motion to object to the Baldwin annexation of parcel 053 029 based on the proposed increase in density and infrastructure demands related to the proposed change in zoning or land use.

DEPARTMENT: Prepared by: Mike Beecham

Director ______________________________

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________ DATE:_____________________ County Manager

Annexation Timeline and Dispute Resolution

I’ll attempt to outline and summarize the annexation requirements and dispute resolution process as outlined in state law. I’ll also reference the relevant state law for each section.

City Notification – When an annexation application is received by a city, they are required to notify the county within five (5) days by certified mail. OCGA 36-36-6 and 36-36-111.

Contiguous – In order to annex property, the annexation must be contiguous to existing municipal property. Annexation can occur across the WIDTH of unincorporated roads, streams, railroads ROW, etc. For the purposes of annexations, they are not considered to be a barrier to annexation. OCGA 36-36-20 but the annexation of the length of a roadway or right of way is prohibited. OCGA 36-36-21.

Unincorporated Islands – The annexation is prohibited from creating any unincorporated islands. These are defined as an unincorporated property surrounded by municipal property(s). OCGA 36-36-4

County Review – The County has thirty (30) days from receipt of the city notification provided above to review the proposed annexation. The city is prohibited from taking final action on an annexation within this timeframe. OCGA 36-36-113(c)

County Objections – The county must take a formal vote to object. If no vote is taken, the county is deemed to have no objections after the thirtieth (30th) day listed above. The county may object because of a material increase in burden upon the county directly related to any one or more of the following:

1. The proposed change in zoning or land use: Generally, this means the proposed use of the property must be in conflict with the county’s Comprehensive Plan.

2. Proposed increase in density: The proposed density after annexation must be an increase from the density permitted in the county to warrant objection.

3. Infrastructure demands related to the proposed change in zoning or land use: The proposed use must materially increase the burden on the county infrastructure.

OCGA 36-36-113(a)

County Objection Procedure – If the county objects to a proposed annexation, the two local governments must enter a state defined resolution process. Within fifteen (15) days a five (5) member arbitration panel must be appointed by the following:

1. The Georgia Department of Community Affairs (DCA) is required to develop three pools of arbitrators:

a. One pool which consists of persons who are currently or within the previous six (6) years a municipal elected official;

b. One pool which consists of persons who are currently or within the previous six (6) years a county elected official; and

c. one pool which consists of persons with a master’s degree or higher in public administration or planning and who are currently employed by an institution of higher learning in this state, other than the Carl Vinson Institute of Government.

2. The DCA shall pick four (4) persons at random from each city and county pool and three from the academic pool to serve as the arbitration panel. The city can strike two (2) persons from the county elected officials pool; the county can strike two (2) persons from the municipal elected officials pool; and the city and county may each strike one (1) person from the academic pool.

OCGA 36-36-114

Arbitration Panel – The panel shall hold a hearing “as soon as practicable” to hear evidence from the city, county, and applicant. The hearing shall be open to the public. The panel’s first order of business shall be determining if the county’s objection is valid according to OCGA 36-36-113(d). For an objection to be valid, in addition to meeting the criteria already laid out above, it must provide evidence that:

1. the proposed change in zoning or land use will result in a significantly increased net cost in infrastructure;

2. a significantly diminished value or useful life of a capital outlay project; 3. a substantial change intensity with respect to how the property is used, or a use significantly

different from its current allowable use.

Assuming the panel finds the county objection valid, within (60) days of their appointment the panel shall render a binding decision by majority vote. The panel, in its findings, may establish reasonable zoning, land use, or density conditions applicable to the annexation and propose any reasonable mitigating measures as to an objection pertaining to infrastructure demands.

The county shall bear at least 75 percent of the cost of the arbitration. The panel shall apportion the remaining 25 percent of the cost of the arbitration equitably between the city and the county as the facts warrant; provided, however, that if the panel determines that any party has advanced a position that is substantially frivolous, the costs shall be borne by the party that has advanced such position.

OCGA 36-36-115

Appeal – An appeal of the arbitration panel’s decision may be filed by the city governing authority, the county governing authority or the applicant. The appeal must be filed within ten (10) calendar days of receiving the panel’s decision.

OCGA 36-36-116

MEMORANDUM

There are multiple issues involving this annexation request outlined for your consideration:

1.A. The notice to the County was not timely. O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-6 provides that “(u)pon accepting an application for annexation pursuant to Code Section 36-36-21 (100 percent method) …, the governing authority of the annexing municipality shall within five business days give written notice of the proposed annexation to the governing authority of the county which the area proposed for annexation is located.” This is further clarified in O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-111, which states: “Upon receipt (emphasis added) of a petition of annexation, a municipal corporation shall notify the governing authority of the county in which the territory to be annexed is located by certified mail or by statutory overnight deliver. … The municipal corporation shall take no final action on such annexation except as otherwise provided in this article.” The City of Baldwin has given notice within five days of its first action on the application – not receipt, which was back on May 15, 2020. Which brings us to the second part of this objection.

1.B. The untimeliness results in a delay in when the City can consider the annexation. As spelled out in O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-111 above, the City can take no action “except as otherwise provide in this article”. O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-113 provides that the County has 30 days to file any objection from the date of its receipt of the notice provided for in O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-111. The County received the notice of annexation on June 9, 2020 and, thus, the City cannot take any action on this matter prior to July 9, 2020.

2. The proposed property is NOT contiguous to validly annexed portions of the City. O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-21 prohibits the annexation of the length of a road without the actual consent of the County by written resolution. A review of the alleged municipal limits of Baldwin indicate at least three locations where properties were illegally annexed without the required 50-foot minimum common boundary. See Exhibit “A”. Again, a city cannot annex the length of a street and thus there was no way to obtain contiguity without illegally annexing the length of a road without the written consent of the County by resolution. To annex, the property must be continuous and abut the existing city limits a minimum of 50 feet.

3. If County does not object to the lack of contiguity, then this annexation is in violation of O.C.G.A. Section 36-36-4, which prohibits the creation of unincorporated islands. If the City contends it properly annexed the length of U.S. Highway 365 from Wilbanks Road south of Anderson Village, which is prohibited, then this truly creates an unincorporated island. See Exhibit “A”.

4. Finally, the County should object as the proposed land use is (1) a change in land use, (2) a significantly denser use and (3) increases infrastructure demands – Thompson Road improvements. The County needs the full 30 days to evaluate these as well as determine whether this proposed land use fits within the comprehensive plan adopted for this by the County.