Letter to the Editor: Quality of Life is the Primary Issue of Sandy Springs Election

In the first two terms of Sandy Spring's City Council, the Council has very successfully assured our necessities of life: fire, police and EMS protection. They have not been as successful at assuring the quality of life we sought when we voted to form our city.  

This election must be about quality of life if we are to attain that which we sought when we voted to become a city.

The Mayor and City Council (MCC) need to establish eco-friendly, fiscally viable zoning and use ordinances that are clear and consistently implemented. Other cities that have done this have found it to benefit the city, the overall ambiance, and the developers. 

Thus far, our MCC frequently votes contrary to its own ordinances (building height maximums, project density, and parking specifications) and Land Use Plan. Our stream, tree, irrigation and storm water ordinances do not effectively protect our residential properties, roads and infrastructures, or enhance our storm water system, and many are not consistent with state of the art operating procedures.  

For us to have a city that provides the quality of life and ambiance that we want, all parties involved must have a vested interest in making it so. That includes homeowners, renters, businesses and city government.  

When developers plan for a project, if they know upfront the irrigation, landscaping, stream buffer and architectural parameters that will be approved. they save money over the life of the project in legal fees and time wasted trying to negotiate a project. This happens only when they also know that the MCC will not approve variances to their existing ordinances except in very special circumstances. MCC consistency is key here.

The city, MCC and staff  benefit because their time and energy can be spent doing other essential items of business rather than having to participate with every new project. With the developers being held responsible for proper irrigation, storm water protection, and landscaping, the financial obligations to the city are diminished. Right now the city has often been picking up the tap for these items as incentives to developers. If developers aren’t concerned enough with the impact on the city and its overall quality, then they aren’t the neighbors we want or need.

The citizens benefit in many ways. Our MCC actions should be making our lives easier, not harder. Right now the citizens must fight to assure that the ambiance and integrity of their neighborhoods are protected, that the trees we cherish are protected, that our watersheds are protected from contamination and over use and that the MCC holds firmly to its own Land Use Plan and ordinances. This is a major expenditure of time, energy and often money for legal counsel that shouldn’t have to be expended. 

We will have this type of community ONLY when everyone on the City Council, including the mayor, knows that we will hold each of them accountable for their voting actions, with our votes now and in the future, for assuring the existence of state of the art ordinances that are consistently enforced.

Susan Joseph