OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Johns Creek City Council Work Session Summary - June 1, 2026

City CouncilMonday, June 1, 2026
BodyJohns Creek, Georgia
SessionCity Council
DateMonday, June 1, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:01

Thank you, Mayor.

0:02

We are recording.

0:02

Okay.

0:03

I just want to call this meeting of the Johns Creek City Council to order this work session on June 1st, 2026 at 5.03 p.m.

0:12

Thank you.

0:12

Would you lead the pledge?

0:14

Be glad to I pledgedly just to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic.

0:33

Mayor Shermarks?

0:34

None, thank you.

0:35

Thank you.

0:36

The first item on our ongoing projects is e-bikes and electric scooters and parks.

0:40

We have Assistant City Manager Haggard for presentation.

0:45

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

0:46

Tonight we're seeking counsel direction regarding the use of e-bikes and electric scooters in city parks.

0:52

Before I begin, I'd like to note there is a minor correction to the memo, an incorrect State Code reference related to e-bikes was used.

0:59

However, the correction does not affect the discussion or options presented tonight.

1:04

While council updated the code earlier this year regarding e-bike use on public sidewalks, park use was not specifically addressed.

1:12

Since then, staff has observed the increased use of e-bikes and scooters throughout parks grounds, including areas beyond sidewalks and trails.

1:20

In some cases, this has resulted in conflicts with other park users, damage to park grounds, and police involvement.

1:27

The current code does not clearly regulate e-bike or scooter use in parks.

1:32

So staff has outlined several potential approaches for council's consideration, ranging from prohibiting e-bikes and electric shooters in parks to allowing broader use with options options such as limiting operation to parking lots or other designated areas.

1:47

Tonight we are seeking council's policy direction on the desired approach so we can return with ordinance amendments that reflect council's intent.

1:56

And with that, I'll answer questions.

2:02

I think you are asking for us to opine on one of the options.

2:04

I'll just start out by saying that I think we ought to go to no motorized bikes inside the parks.

2:11

So I agree with that.

2:14

My one caveat is non-motorized bikes, and I know you are not asking that, but I would like to allow children to continue to use bikes on sidewalks and trails in the park.

2:22

Non-motorized bikes.

2:29

Thank you, Chris.

2:30

Again.

2:32

That's the stuff like if you see a something is not working, we need to come back and discuss.

2:37

So I really appreciate that.

2:40

Option one.

2:41

Which is again if you have a consensus, that's fine, but maybe the stretchy is going to be option three, but I would prefer option one.

2:53

You mind option one?

2:55

I'll give it a lot of the questions.

2:56

Okay.

2:58

Okay.

3:05

But I am with option one.

3:08

Larry?

3:10

So I am also with option one, but uh with a little caveat.

3:15

So um if someone is driving their uh riding or e-bike to one of the parks, I don't want them to have a uh to leave them outside the park.

3:26

That's a great point.

3:27

So I want a designated trail or sidewalk, if you will, to a designated parking lot with a designated parking area, just like motorcycle parkings here.

3:39

So it's they go in, they park it, and that's it.

3:43

Because it I think it's unrealistic, like we talked about last time on this subject for individuals to leave their bike on old Alabama as an example.

3:51

They're gonna be worried about it being stolen, so they'll they'll break the rule and just drive it in anyways.

3:57

So let's make it so it's reasonable in what we're asking them to do, but they should not be playing around on the e-bikes in the parks.

4:05

Option one and three, just tweak it like something.

4:09

Yeah, I think it's it's one as the as a foundation, but with with um a use to a parking spot designated parking spot.

4:18

A couple questions, just because I don't understand the technology that well.

4:20

Can you not ride the bike not motorized, just like human-powered?

4:24

Yeah.

4:24

So like can they not just turn human-powered from the time they entered the park grounds until they get to the parking spot or even walk it in?

4:30

Well, that's that's where you start differentiating between e-bike and e-scooter.

4:34

So uh I think we're trying to have a catch-all.

4:36

Uh they can just walk it in rather than write it in.

4:39

Well, I think that's getting a little bit more.

4:41

No one's gonna do that.

4:43

Because I think if they are on the edge of the park.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning Regulations████████████████████████████████████36%
Engineering And Infrastructure███████████████████████23%
Parks and Recreation██████████10%
Active Transportation███████7%
Naming Policy██████6%
Public Safety████4%
Economic Development████4%
Environmental Protection██2%
Community Engagement██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Johns Creek City Council Work Session - June 1, 2026

The Johns Creek City Council held a work session on June 1, 2026, at 5:03 PM. The meeting covered e-bikes in parks, landscaping policies, a multimodal transportation policy, home occupation regulations, and a naming issue for a city asset. Key decisions included direction to prohibit e-bikes in parks (except to designated parking), continued discussion on landscaping and multimodal policies, and significant revisions to a home occupation ordinance.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved the Jail Intergovernmental Agreement with Forsyth County and bonding requirements ordinance update.
  • Awarded the annual resurfacing and patching contract to Allied (per purchasing recommendation).

Discussion Items

E-Bikes and Electric Scooters in Parks

  • Assistant City Manager Haggard presented three options: full prohibition, limited use (e.g., parking lots only), or broader allowance. Staff noted increased use causing conflicts and damage.
  • Councilmembers expressed positions: Chris Coughlin supported prohibition (option one) but wanted bike racks at entrances. Larry agreed with option one but suggested designated parking areas within parks to avoid abandonment at boundaries. Brian Coughlin supported the approach but stressed enforcement concerns. Bob expressed concern about restricting access in large parks like Cauley Creek and requested future police data. John advocated for option three (broader use) but noted reckless behavior is a minority problem.
  • Consensus: Council directed staff to draft an ordinance prohibiting e-bikes and electric scooters from general park use, but allowing them to be ridden directly to designated bike racks at park entrances (or parking area) and then walked. No formal vote was taken.

Landscaping / Tree Replanting Policy Options

  • Director O’Connor presented three options: (1) work within existing right-of-way and install landscaping after road construction; (2) acquire additional right-of-way and install after construction; (3) acquire additional right-of-way and install during construction. Staff recommended option one, citing cost and reduced homeowner impact.
  • Councilmembers expressed views: Mayor favored case-by-case flexibility with landscape design on the front end but separate construction bid. Brian Coughlin supported option one but with allowance for staff to propose expanded right-of-way when beneficial. Stacy agreed and emphasized design should be completed before construction. John urged consistency in requiring builders to submit landscape plans concurrently. Bob wanted all projects to include full cost and rendering upfront.
  • Council direction: Staff to refine policy to allow case-by-case decisions, with landscape design completed during engineering phase, and separate bids for landscape work from road construction. No vote taken.

Multi-Modal Policy

  • Director O’Connor presented a draft multimodal policy and scoring matrix, with a prioritized list of top ten projects (mostly sidewalk widenings). Cost estimates ranged from $165,000 to $1.2 million (e.g., Project 1: 1,599 ft, $165,000).
  • Mayor proposed combining the multimodal list with the existing sidewalk prioritization list into a single matrix, weighting lack of sidewalks heavily. John agreed, noting many multimodal projects involve widening existing sidewalks. Stacy and Brian discussed concrete width (8 vs. 10 feet) and design details. Chris praised the policy as a resident demand. Bob suggested defining corridors (e.g., Medlock Bridge, State Bridge, 141) for 10-foot widths and others for 8-foot.
  • Council direction: Staff to explore merging sidewalk and multimodal scoring criteria, add columns showing sidewalk completion status, and bring a revised policy back for further discussion. No vote taken.

Review of Home Occupation Regulations and Prohibited Uses

  • Director Song presented a revised draft ordinance, with changes shown in blue reflecting previous council feedback. The ordinance aims to allow small-scale home businesses while preserving residential character.
  • Councilmember Elwood expressed concerns that the ordinance was too broad and could be weaponized. He questioned specific restrictions on square footage (25% or 250 sq. ft.), accessory buildings, animal care, massage therapy, retail sales, and noise/dust standards.
  • Council conducted straw polls on contested sections (with informal tallying):
    • Section A (square footage limit): 3 councilmembers wanted to keep the limit; no change.
    • Section B (access through principal entrance): kept as written.
    • Section C (accessory buildings): 4 voted to strike; removed.
    • Section E4 (automotive detailing): 4 voted to strike; removed from prohibited list.
    • Animal care/grooming (E): 3 supported striking; remained prohibited (failed to reach 4).
    • Massage therapy (E12): 3 supported striking; remained prohibited.
    • Section L (transporting of goods): Clarified to "commercial truck" to target large vehicles, not standard deliveries (e.g., FedEx, Amazon).
    • Section I (nuisance clause): kept.
  • Staff to incorporate these changes and present a revised ordinance at the public hearing on July 13, 2026.

Decision on Status of Asset Name

  • Mayor proposed referring the naming of the Mark Burkhalter Amphitheater to the ACE (Arts, Culture, and Events) committee for evaluation, possibly considering monetization or alternative naming. The mayor noted the name had never been officially adopted by council and that Burkhalter supported exploring options.
  • Councilmember Larry expressed reluctance to change an established name but agreed to refer. Stacy questioned why change now. Bob preferred to keep the name. Chris suggested future naming rights sales for revenue.
  • Council agreed to refer the matter to ACE for feedback and recommendation. No vote taken.

Key Outcomes

  • E-bikes in parks: Staff to draft ordinance prohibiting use except for direct access to designated parking areas.
  • Landscaping policy: Staff to develop a case-by-case approach with front-end design and separate construction.
  • Multimodal policy: Staff to combine scoring criteria with sidewalk list; revise matrix and return for further discussion.
  • Home occupation regulations: Specific changes approved (strike C and E4, clarify L); remaining prohibitions upheld; revised ordinance to be presented July 13.
  • Asset naming: Referred to ACE committee for evaluation.
  • Consent items: Jail IGA and resurfacing contract approved.
  • Meeting adjourned at 7:02 PM.

Meeting Transcript

Thank you, Mayor. We are recording. Okay. I just want to call this meeting of the Johns Creek City Council to order this work session on June 1st, 2026 at 5.03 p.m. Thank you. Would you lead the pledge? Be glad to I pledgedly just to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic. Mayor Shermarks? None, thank you. Thank you. The first item on our ongoing projects is e-bikes and electric scooters and parks. We have Assistant City Manager Haggard for presentation. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Tonight we're seeking counsel direction regarding the use of e-bikes and electric scooters in city parks. Before I begin, I'd like to note there is a minor correction to the memo, an incorrect State Code reference related to e-bikes was used. However, the correction does not affect the discussion or options presented tonight. While council updated the code earlier this year regarding e-bike use on public sidewalks, park use was not specifically addressed. Since then, staff has observed the increased use of e-bikes and scooters throughout parks grounds, including areas beyond sidewalks and trails. In some cases, this has resulted in conflicts with other park users, damage to park grounds, and police involvement. The current code does not clearly regulate e-bike or scooter use in parks. So staff has outlined several potential approaches for council's consideration, ranging from prohibiting e-bikes and electric shooters in parks to allowing broader use with options options such as limiting operation to parking lots or other designated areas. Tonight we are seeking council's policy direction on the desired approach so we can return with ordinance amendments that reflect council's intent. And with that, I'll answer questions. I think you are asking for us to opine on one of the options. I'll just start out by saying that I think we ought to go to no motorized bikes inside the parks. So I agree with that. My one caveat is non-motorized bikes, and I know you are not asking that, but I would like to allow children to continue to use bikes on sidewalks and trails in the park. Non-motorized bikes. Thank you, Chris. Again. That's the stuff like if you see a something is not working, we need to come back and discuss. So I really appreciate that. Option one. Which is again if you have a consensus, that's fine, but maybe the stretchy is going to be option three, but I would prefer option one. You mind option one? I'll give it a lot of the questions. Okay. Okay. But I am with option one. Larry? So I am also with option one, but uh with a little caveat. So um if someone is driving their uh riding or e-bike to one of the parks, I don't want them to have a uh to leave them outside the park. That's a great point. So I want a designated trail or sidewalk, if you will, to a designated parking lot with a designated parking area, just like motorcycle parkings here. So it's they go in, they park it, and that's it. Because it I think it's unrealistic, like we talked about last time on this subject for individuals to leave their bike on old Alabama as an example. They're gonna be worried about it being stolen, so they'll they'll break the rule and just drive it in anyways. So let's make it so it's reasonable in what we're asking them to do, but they should not be playing around on the e-bikes in the parks. Option one and three, just tweak it like something. Yeah, I think it's it's one as the as a foundation, but with with um a use to a parking spot designated parking spot.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com