Say No to the CSO

I don't believe that the CSO is in the best interest for the residents or City of Milton. There are too many questions, especially with the latest discovery.

Increases density. Conservation my left foot. NOT for Milton.

The CSO may have originally been a decent and well intentioned concept but has morphed into something that is WRONG for Milton! We have kept sewer out and our AG1 standards require a 1 lot minimum so why change that? The CSO will only serve to increase density in Milton. If I wanted to move to Forsyth County, I would! Why is the community not being better informed? Why is Community Development pushing this? They don't live here, so why should they have a say in how are city is planned?

The CSO is a Trojan horse that will turn Milton into the next Sandy Springs. No thanks.

What a misnomer! Since when does increasing density equal conservation?

The CSO is a shell game that increases density and reduces green space!

I am totally opposed to the Milton CSO! It is a developers dream! It DOUBLES the density - it will clog the schools and roads further! This is NOT conservation!

I am opposed to the Milton CSO.

Milton City is worse then the Unincorporated Fulton County we used to be in

The CSO was and is a good concept. However, as written after numerous draft iterations, it is not good for Milton. Allowing the Community Development group discretion for as small as a 50 foot exterior buffer is inadequate view-shed protection for adjacent landowners and right-of-way road drivers.

I am opposed to the CSO because it is not the right solution for Milton. 1) It will allow more homes, including homes on land that could not be developed under AG-1. 2) It allows homes on 1/4 acre. This is NOT in keeping with the beautiful and unique look and feel of Milton and 3) It allows community sewer. The City of Milton was founded in large part to stop city sewer from coming in, and it is unfathomable that we would allow it now. Public sewer not only will increase the amount of development, but it also creates financial liability to the City and we the tax payers when those community sewers fail.

I am opposed to the Milton CSO.

I AM TOTALLY OPPOSED and agree the information has not been communicated to the residents of Milton.

I am opposed to the CSO at this time. I don't feel all the information surrounding this ordinance has been adequately collected and communicated to the people of Milton.

The CSO is an attempted land grab which will greatly impact the few remaining land owners that have held on. SAY NO TO CSO.

I believe that the Milton CSO unconstitutional is an implied exercise of eminent domain powers which in the clearest sense is an unlawful taking of property without just compensation. Additionally, the proposed zoning has no rational relationship to any powers necessary to regulate the property owners in Milton. The end result of this will be a challenge to the council and city manager which will deplete resources of both the City and citizenry, resulting in not only a victory for the land owners, but a resulting transfer of power to many newly elected City officials who will be replacing those in favor of this CSO that deals with the land owners on roads..

I am totally opposed to the Milton CSO. I've lived in same location for 36 years and do not intend to move. The 1 house per acre is our protection against high density. Any changes to that will have negative results. Leave it as is.

We oppose the CSO. One acre lots preserve just as much land as a CSO. Community septic will end up costing the citizens more tax dollars we could spend on parks and open spaces. It will not increase the value of properties in Milton. If you really asked the MAJORITY they would say no to the CSO. Stop only listening to PRM they are not the only citizens in Milton. I also oppose the text amendments where the City is changing the setbacks making 100 feet of my front yard unbuild-able.

The CSO is not right for Milton since we have kept sewer out and our AG1 standards require a 1 lot minimum. The CSO will increase density in Milton.

I am opposed to the CSO because 1) it will not conserve greenspace 2) it will result in a higher population density and higher population in Milton, adding additional stress to our already overstressed schools, roads, and infrastructure. 3) the planning commission has unanimously rejected the CSO 3 times 4) the leaked emails reveal an incompetently managed and corrupted process, which predictably resulted in a CSO that perversely accelerates development