[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6170273,"mediaKeyId","5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d","parentId",5398288,"title","Residents press city to secure and clean 92 Bowen property; council approves consent agenda including related actions","audioSeconds",139,"startMs",2100000,"endMs",2239000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d&start=2100&end=2239","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d/thumbnail_2100000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6170273/Roswell/Fulton-County/Georgia/Residents-press-city-to-secure-and-clean-92-Bowen-property-council-approves-consent-agenda-including-related-actions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170273-8f268cb3e6e2a412c9566b9ea6d42d42/orig.mp4?Expires=1770974515&Signature=EwOqxapWElw6Y2jP0ts4XUw-qcxR9~Stv1~pRyFElMliUFnj8~JQ3kgnsnjxoPGNgSB-dqR2mLS1GJayy9MWOBFB0NLh-47g4zqf-ro5BFXBS4bIXGNTufe44SsdNuk1LuWzZggDs8fWRIdInWUqKbV~YhCSlZrlrmnx8utBZjOKr~djaXpYopx23l9aoAF33TxDeo7WqmF54JXzYmS~hBGyhkE7su4Ch4TFK-spqKrDLhrIgK4EMMwuffP~iTdlZSKwhyGXrhBxMZ1ZpCVF3cDweCAVdtNX7-99J5wcjVP09cnKE2j98mG8e~3uKnEibqlkfLOp~AhS2N8HfDQbKA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-07-15T12:51:57Z","article","Residents at the July 14 meeting pressed city staff for details about a city‑owned property at 92 Bowen that residents say has sat vacant and deteriorated since the city purchased it more than a year earlier.

Courtney Rozier asked whether insurance reimbursements applied to all structures and whether an estimate had been requested for demolition of the sanctuary building. City staff said they would follow up and provided an on‑record summary: staff estimated roughly $192,000 in insurance reimbursement for storm damage at structures behind the property and said demolition of specific accessory structures was funded from the park maintenance fund. Staff said a recommendation to demolish a single‑story ranch home on the parcel is based on “extensive vandalism and continued public safety issues.”

Resident Ashley Glass, who identified herself as a concerned community member, described the sanctuary at 92 Bowen as having open doors, broken glass, discarded bottles and drug paraphernalia, and urged the city to “clean up the property now, at least put gates up.” She called on the city to enforce the same standards on publicly owned property that it enforces on private property under the state’s minimum standard codes.

Council action and next steps: staff told the council the demolition estimate for the sanctuary building and a full plan would be provided to the Marion Council (city committee) in the coming month; staff said they would follow up on the specific questions Courtney Rozier raised. The consent agenda, which included the item related to the Bowen property, was approved unanimously by voice/hand vote (recorded as 5‑0).

Why it matters: residents argued the city should “lead by example” in maintaining publicly owned property and asked whether the city would pursue code enforcement or other actions. City staff committed to provide the requested follow‑up answers and to present demolition estimates and a plan to the appropriate council committee.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Roswell City Council: Regular Meeting (July 14, 2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Residents asked the Roswell City Council on July 14 to secure and clean a city‑owned property at 92 Bowen and sought details about insurance reimbursements and potential demolition.","taxTitle","Roswell, Fulton County, Georgia","taxId",2962,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6170277,"Council approves transmission of 2025 impact fee annual report and capital improvement element to state",390,2752000,3142000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d&start=2752&end=3142","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d/thumbnail_2752000.jpg","/articles/6170277/Roswell/Fulton-County/Georgia/Council-approves-transmission-of-2025-impact-fee-annual-report-and-capital-improvement-element-to-state","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170277-abcf9b2ba6f117ed40252794312cccfe/orig.mp4?Expires=1770974515&Signature=W9Oi58LwutqvXYsYnfQgRttA2V-UXcfFOpFnv-wu92S7Ug5nDnz5qkEHZSk6ql6Saz1jug3stTSYiJBW8S9ZWtlDdiKdDr9fT9kN594ISb-m4P9I4fZ~3IOG~UTOscrfkLnxB9U~UcpJnqMG2TWUI0DzfpPYkaIGUkbYv490mxXh-KC9U5znpvkdy0cTahXd63w~HH3xaiFz3mgGJ0JCLvvf~0xFIasHibb8a8kEmyPI1NtPcC7a47loYe9QpGdae8QfOEXP4lvsqXEhdiPtRJMpBSAC8b091u4mDWZF3k6eGHjL5IsJdFxk8-QUWcsIJc8plwcf-Ka~s3xuJ7MlAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Roswell City Council on July 14 unanimously approved city staff’s request to transmit the 2025 Community Work Program and Capital Improvement Element, including the annual financial report for the city’s impact fee program, to the Georgia Department of Community Affairs for review.

Director of Community Development Michelle Alexander summarized the filing requirement under the Georgia Development Act and said the packet combines the annual financial report for the impact fee account, the capital improvements list and the five‑year community work program. “The balance as of December 2024 from our financials was $5,800,000,” Alexander told council. She added the report separates a full fiscal‑year accounting and a catch‑up six‑month reporting period because the city changed its fiscal year; staff said the six‑month period included roughly $200,000 in fee collections. For the reported fiscal period staff said expenditures totaled $859,009.49.

Alexander emphasized the transmittal is a statutory reporting step, not a budget appropriation: “This is not committing you to those costs. This is giving you a range of magnitude of scale of what the project needs.” If approved for transmittal, the documents go to DCA and the Atlanta Regional Commission for review; staff will return to council later for adoption and any related budget actions. Alexander noted the state review deadline is Oct. 31.

What it covers: the city’s impact fee program supports three categories — transportation, public safety (police and fire) and recreation/parks — and the packet lists projects and estimated costs by category. Staff also noted items added to the lists this year: certain vehicle types for fire and police made eligible for impact‑fee funding, as well as project entries from the Facilities Services master plan and North Fulton comprehensive transportation work.

Public questions and clarification: resident Courtney Rozier asked whether project start dates in the list indicate construction start or design start and whether transportation projects have an interactive map available. Staff said project start dates may reflect design start dates rather than construction and pointed residents to the transportation interactive map at rosvillegov.info/rdot for project‑level status. Transportation staff offered to follow up with residents to identify specific projects and timelines.

Council action and next steps: Pro Tem Lee Hills moved to approve transmittal; Council Member Sarah Beeson seconded. The council voted 5‑0. Staff will transmit the documents for DCA/ARC review and return with any required revisions and a final adoption resolution, plus any budget requests needed to implement projects.","City staff will transmit the 2025 Community Work Program and Capital Improvement Element, including the annual impact fee financial report, to the Georgia Department of Community Affairs and ARC; council approved transmittal 5‑0 and staff said the submission does not itself commit city budget funds.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6170283,"Roswell council approves first reading of Hill Street overlay to bind redevelopment plan",3220,3587000,6807000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d&start=3587&end=6807","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d/thumbnail_3587000.jpg","/articles/6170283/Roswell/Fulton-County/Georgia/Roswell-council-approves-first-reading-of-Hill-Street-overlay-to-bind-redevelopment-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170283-ce5c1ddde5d64ea23373df853e32ecca/orig.mp4?Expires=1770974515&Signature=TvmeyuNpWpngrp-IEbdd-itZJD3KaZkagEHJgOgtMR-4Tja3pEKD-MEGXLb~bijtgGexIwqzHl3RymPZeSCGN7DLY8p1kdgxfDina98DEy5YNB9mgmGotL0MDvbho9IAkjXtRXEWKvyRTFPib1PqtA6Gwk5TWCWzy9l7Hscro-Uo~Rfg3IBR4TpiIBRwnHUDcYr6W7y6qnkvXWiufclfLRJGyLClqWs6pBVtwCFMQhhbDmaPvv0MXM99BEkENMxuEHHgXkoBcgQjy32j5U1hXulgkvWCsFfPOnim8a8C~JaKk7OBSTk-DPI3HoS07jz8yMTUM95HpWIPUOQB0NuQjQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Roswell Mayor Kirk Wilson and the City Council on July 14 gave first‑reading approval to a text and map amendment that would create a Hill Street overlay district and place a site‑specific regulating plan into the Unified Development Code.

The vote, 5‑0, authorizes transmittal of the ordinance language and map and asks the Planning Commission to review and provide comments before the second reading. City Attorney David Davidson read the ordinance on the record: “This is an ordinance to amend the Unified Development Code by modifying article 8 overlay districts.”

The overlay is meant to bind a concept plan tied to a pending development agreement for a six‑acre site near City Hall along Hill Street and Highway 9. City staff described the overlay as a regulatory mechanism that places both graphic and textual controls in the code so the project proceeds in the configuration the council negotiated with the developer. “It entitles the site to the exact project that you have agreed to,” Director of Community Development Michelle Alexander said during the presentation.

Why it matters: council and staff said the overlay is a tool to protect the city’s negotiated terms — uses, building placement, parking, sidewalks and design standards — and to limit entitlement changes without returning to council. The city’s economic development team said the project is intended to catalyze downtown redevelopment, reuse part of the police facility and fund a public parking structure.

What was discussed: staff explained the overlay contains two parts: a regulating plan that specifies building locations, uses and dimensional standards for the six‑acre project; and an “eligible sites” area where limited changes (notably allowing townhomes if parcels are assembled) would be permitted under defined conditions. Staff compared standards in the overlay to the underlying DX zoning and said some items (for example, amenity and sidewalk standards) differ from the underlying district to deliver the negotiated concept. Michelle Alexander described the overlay as “site specific” and repeatedly emphasized that the regulating plan is binding.

Public comment and adjacent owners: several nearby property owners and one group representing owners said they support the project; Ron Redner told the council he and other owners of roughly six acres on the IX‑zoned side supported the overlay. Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and Planning Commission review were highlighted: staff said the HPC will have a future, formal opportunity to review design materials, and the Planning Commission requested to review the completed text prior to second reading. The council’s motion specifically requested that the Planning Commission provide comments to council by July 18 ahead of the second reading.

Financial and program details discussed: staff presented a conservative revenue model that included property and sales tax, a ground‑lease payment to the city, parking revenues that are expected to cover debt service for the parking deck, proceeds from sale of townhouse pads and a possible future participation payment if the project is sold. Staff stated a model range of approximately $300,000–$400,000 per year in combined property and use tax initially, and said the ground lease and other revenues would supplement that. During the meeting staff noted differing figures were stated in discussion and agreed to provide exact final numbers as part of the documentation for second reading.

Council action and next steps: Council Member Alan Sells moved the recommended motion; Council Member David Johnson seconded. The record shows a unanimous 5‑0 vote to adopt the ordinance on first reading and to send the completed amendment to the Planning Commission for comment before second reading. Staff said the final design, parking agreements, and other implementing documents will return to the council for approval.

Questions and safeguards: residents asked about project flexibility if the developer’s plan changes; staff and council members said the overlay plus the city’s development agreements and procurement processes are intended to protect the city and require council approval for material changes. City staff and council members acknowledged that financial and construction risks remain until closing and construction, and that the city’s legal and procurement teams will continue vetting developers and contractors.

The council’s first‑reading approval does not itself approve final construction documents, budget appropriations or conveyances; those require subsequent council action and, where applicable, captioned procurement steps and final development agreements.","Council voted 5-0 to approve the first reading of a text and map amendment creating a Hill Street overlay district that ties a six‑acre regulating plan to a development agreement and requires follow‑up review by the Planning Commission and Historic Preservation Commission.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6170268,"Roswell council agrees to join amicus brief in Chang v. City of Milton appeal",112,6835000,6947000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d&start=6835&end=6947","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5398288-38d4be665b159a6a1a6d126075fc405d/thumbnail_6835000.jpg","/articles/6170268/Roswell/Fulton-County/Georgia/Roswell-council-agrees-to-join-amicus-brief-in-Chang-v-City-of-Milton-appeal","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6170268-3f34f0a20b10872c8d12a9405af4078b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770974515&Signature=ZvwpoJw6AvYygM5JkM4tXt9pCsWNlgcKeflW-2dDP7~6XSR-L18z6vf1Yka1filABa4JLDSVOZlj6qPbPp2TODG9sPHV4OEJKWbr56~JB0WZlnXtP5~k56j0lp7eWk2q8uAKb5iXVTe2wlW2RtdgHQYClDDtRu96ix53Q0ehrV83zB3INjB58PoKneFN~ZiwBKipgheaf4032rL-2BfbQ-eP1MlZuJxdCNUCEa-mC6XSXXWsLoEv4ROsSJniJOQsymRcFg-rPjxRwPG3m-h7OyYkKbw3gr8IzMYk6h54ef0hB9dC2nPS8MyIYZR324bz5HJ1ZPNoPG6AgW~zbrndbQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Roswell City Council on July 14 authorized city attorneys to participate in an amicus (friend‑of‑the‑court) brief in an appeal before the Georgia Supreme Court stemming from Chang v. City of Milton.

City Attorney David Davidson described the issue: a jury previously awarded $35 million to plaintiffs whose son ran off the road after hitting an object placed in Milton’s right of way. Davidson said the Court of Appeals affirmed a ruling that municipalities could be responsible for objects outside the traveled roadway but still within the right of way. He told the council the city is seeking to file an amicus brief to ask the state supreme court to consider broader issues and potential consequences for municipalities.

Davidson said the potential implications are significant for municipal operations: depending on the court’s ruling, local governments might be required to remove or regulate neighborhood signs and other objects located in rights of way, even where utilities and poles are mandated by state rules. “The jury found for the his parents who sued the city of Milton, for $35,000,000,” Davidson told council in his summary, and he urged the council to authorize participation in the brief.

Council action: Council Member David Johnson moved approval; Pro Tem Lee Hills seconded. Council voted 5‑0 to authorize participation in the amicus brief. Staff said the city will join other municipalities in preparing the brief and will follow normal legal review procedures.

Why it matters: staff said the outcome could affect municipal liability and maintenance obligations across Georgia and could require operational changes if the court affirms expanded duties for local governments. The resolution authorizes city attorneys to proceed with participation; no changes to municipal code were proposed at this meeting.","Council approved a city attorney recommendation authorizing the city to participate in a friend‑of‑the‑court brief urging the Georgia Supreme Court to reconsider a lower court ruling that expanded municipal liability for objects in the right of way; council voted 5‑0 to authorize the resolution.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents press city to secure and clean 92 Bowen property; council approves consent agenda including related actions

Council approves transmission of 2025 impact fee annual report and capital improvement element to state

Roswell council approves first reading of Hill Street overlay to bind redevelopment plan

Roswell council agrees to join amicus brief in Chang v. City of Milton appeal