[ROLL CALL]
[00:00:04]
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.
>> BEFORE WE GET STARTED I WANT TO GET GO OVER THE GROUND RULES HELPS EVERYONE UNDERSTAND OVERDOING APPEAR.
THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO BE PRESENTED WITH AN AGENDA ITEM AND AFTER THAT IF THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT AGENDA ITEM IS INTERESTED THEY CAN HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY AT THAT TIME. AND THEN I WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING IF IT IS APPROPRIATE. SOME THINGS DO NOT GET PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SOME THINGS DO. THAT'S GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THE ISSUE AT HAND.
I WANT EVERYONE TO BE HEARD SO FEEL FREE TO COME ON, DO NOT BE SHY. WE ASK THAT YOU KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES OR LESS.
ONCE EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN AM GOING TO CLOSE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE WILL DELIBERATE AND HEAVY VOTE ON THAT ITEM. THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO VOTE BASED ON STATE LAWS, LOCAL LAWS AND THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2030 AND ALSO FOR THE GENERAL GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY.
ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK QUICKLY ABOUT SUBDIVISION PLAT. OUR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY ARE RELATED TO THE APPROVAL OF THE TRENCHES.
FOR THE FINAL AUTHORITY IN THAT CASE.
BY ALABAMA STATUTE A MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION SUCH AS OURS IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY FOR THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT'S.
IN REGARDS TO PLAT'S THE COMMISSION ACTS AS ADMINISTRATIVE BODY IT IS BOUND BY LIMITATIONS CONTAINED IN STATE LAWS, THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAT THIS COMMITTEE HAS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED.
WHILE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE REQUIRED ON EACH OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT'S ESPECIALLY WE WELCOME ALL COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AS WE WOULD ANY OTHER AGENDA ITEM.
BUT PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT OUR AUTHORITY IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO CONFIRMING THAT THE PLAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE CODIFIED IN LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT I PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED. SO THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS GOING TO BE CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.
AT THIS TIME, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT WERE LOOKING FOR COMMENTS.
SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA AT ALL, THE OTHER CATEGORY IS SOMETHING IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE HAVE A TOTAL OF SEVEN ITEMS THAT INCLUDE REZONING'S AND A COUPLE OF FINAL CHANGES.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THOSE? ALL RIGHT, SEE NO ONE WE MOVE ON.
NO OLD BUSINESS AND SO WE COME TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
I WOULD FIRST LIKE TO ASK IF ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO PULL ANY ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AT THIS TIME?>> I DON'T NECESSARY WANT TO PULL ONE FROM THE AGENDA BUT I LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION. IF THAT'S THE CASE, I DON'T KNOW HOW MAKE A NEGATIVE MOTION TO MERELY GET IT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA SO I CAN ASK A QUESTION.
>> I MOVE THAT WE REMOVE THE DONAHUE RIDGE PHASE B ANNEXATION FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED TO SAY NO. OKAY REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE REMAINING CONSENT AGENDA IS THE TENANT MAY THE REST OF THE REGULAR MEETING FROM 13 MAY.
FOSTER ANNEXATION. RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 5 ACRES.
AND THEN THERE'S QUAIL CHASE ITEM NUMBER THREE.
ANOTHER ANNEXATION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL THAT IS PL 21 Ã00314. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS CAMDEN PHASE 2. HIS FINAL APPROVAL FOR A SUBDIVISION. IT'S PL Ã2021 Ã00313.
[00:05:02]
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS SUTHERLAND SUBDIVISION IS A REDIVISION OF LOT 1 AND AT WEBER FARMS SOUTH. WHICH IS ALSO A FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND IT'S PL Ã2021 Ã 00319.ITEM NUMBER SIX IS DONAHUE RIDGE PHASE 4 BOND EXTENSION.
THAT IS PL Ã2021 Ã00321. THE FINAL ONE IS YARBOROUGH FARMS SUBDIVISION, PINE VALLEY WHICH IS A WAIVER TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND REQUEST FOR WAIVER AND THAT IS 2021 Ã00329. ANY COMMENT FROM STAFF?
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND I APPRECIATE THE NEW YELLOW BOXES. ON THE BOND EXTENSIONS.
>> HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[2. Donahue Ridge, Phase 8 PL-2021-00297]
>> OPPOSED TO SAY NO, CONSENT CARRIES.
LET'S GO BACK TO DONAHUE RIDGE PHASE 8 IS WHAT WE WILL HAVE A LOOK AT WHO IS THE STAFF ON THAT ONE? MR. KIP DO WANT TO GIVE US A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT IS GOING ON.
>> IS A REQUEST TO ANNEX 9.99 ACRES JUST SOUTH WHERE OUR PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SYDNEY LANE WOULD END.
THIS IS PHASE 7 THAT YOU SEE RIGHT ABOVE IT.
IT IS NOT BEEN PLAT YET. IT IS NOT BEEN RECORDED.
SO THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY PROPOSING TO EXTEND THE SIMILAR TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AGAINST THE SINGLE FAMILY.
THERE ARE SOME FLOODPLAINS IN THE CREEK THAT GO UP IN THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. EARLIER IN PHASES THEY HAVE INCLUDED THAT IN PHASES SEVEN THEY DID NOT INCLUDED IN THEIR PROPOSING NOT INCLUDED THERE EITHER.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE ANNEXATION.
>> MY QUESTION IS, RELATED TO THAT PROPERTY TO THE NORTHEAST, WITHOUT BEING ANNEXED AT THIS TIME IT LEAVES A SLIVER OF ALBEIT ON DEVELOPABLE LAND TO THE EAST BUT I LIKE TO KNOW NUMBER ONE IS THAT STRIP OF LAND IN THE SAME OWNERSHIP AS THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE ABOUT TO ANNEX AND IF SO, WHAT IS THE PLAN? WILL THEY EVENTUALLY BRING THAT WITHIN CITY LIMITS OR WILL WE CREATE A WHOLE RATE THERE IS A MOVE DOWN THE.
>> IS OWNED BY THE SAME ENTITY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO WITH THE PLAN.
>> IS THE REPRESENTATIVE HERE TODAY?
>> GOOD EVENING, FOR SACRED. THAT SLIVER OF LAND WILL EVENTUALLY COME IN. THE PROBLEM WE RUN INTO AS PART OF OUR PERFORM OF ZONING WHEN YOU GET A LOT WE WOULD PREFER THAT THE LOTS GO ALL THE WAY THERE.
BUT WHEN YOU GET A LOT OVER 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND EIGHT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION YOU HAVE TO HAVE MORE THAN 72 FEET OF ROAD FRONTAGE. THESE LOTS ARE 65.
THAT IS ONE THING THE CURRENT THE WAY THE CURRENT ZONING IT DISCOURAGES YOU FROM GETTING BIGGER LOTS IN A CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION WITHOUT GETTING MORE FRUIT ROAD FRONTAGE.
WE WOULD MAKE THE LOT DEEPER AND GIVE THEM AN ACRE AND IT WOULD BE PART OF THEIRS. NOW TO THE NORTHEAST OF THEIR THERE IS A MASTER DETENTION POND THAT'S BEHIND PHASE 7 SO THAT WOULD SAY SEPARATELY BUT THESE LOTS IT WAS REALLY, WE ARE TRYING TO LOOP IT BACK IN AND IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT.
WE WILL PROBABLY BRING IT IN WHEN WE BRING IN THE NEXT PHASE.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO INCLUDE THE PART THAT HAS RETENTION.
>> YEAH, WE WERE GOING TO BRING THAT ALL IN.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THERE'S A BREAKDOWN IN COMMUNICATION BETWEEN WHAT WE SUBMITTED AND THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WE GOT FROM OUR SURVEYOR. IT WAS LEFT OUT.
THE INTENT OF IT IT IS GOING TO COME IN.
>> IS THERE ANYTHING WE HAVE TO DO TO REFLECT THAT?
>> I'M SATISFIED IF IT'S PART OF THE RECORD.
THAT SATISFIES ME. READY FOR THE MOTION I CAN MAKE ONE.
>> ALL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 2021 Ã00297.
[00:10:08]
>> EMOTION IN A SECOND ANY COMMENTS?
>> SHE MADE A MOTION AND I MADE A SECOND.
>> THAT'S WHAT LOOKING FOR. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> OPPOSED TO SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES.
NOW WE ARE ON TO NEW BUSINESS. THE FIRST ITEM IS DONAHUE RIDGE
[8. Donahue Ridge, Phase 8 Rezoning PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00298]
PHASE 8 REZONING. PL Ã2021 Ã00318.>> THIS IS A REQUEST FROM ITS ACROSS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY THAT YOU RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL OF ANNEXATION 9.99 ACRES FROM RURAL TO DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOUSING.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS I STATED BEFORE AND WHERE CINDY LANE WOULD EXTEND AND TERMINATE.
THE FUTURE LANE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WHOLE AREA AND THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT MEETS THAT DENSITY AND USES.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND THERE WERE NOT ANY MAJOR ISSUES. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK IN THIS AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE DO.
SEE NONE OF THE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND ASK FOR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ARE MOTION FROM THE COMMISSION.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY COMMENTS? OKAY ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> AS OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES.
[9. Donahue Ridge, Phase 8 PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00318]
ITEM NUMBER NINE. DONAHUE RIDGE PHASE 8.SAME BASIC PROPERTY THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL THIS IS 2021 Ã00318. MR. KIP.
>> SAME SUBJECT PROPERTY THE REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT ON ITS HEAD AND AND A HALF ACRES TO SUBDIVIDE INTO 31 LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION LAYOUT WITH CINDY LANE EXTENDING SOUTH AND A NEW ROAD COMING OFF OF IT. THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION MEETS THE SUBDIVISION MEGAN REGULATIONS AND STAFF APPROVAL.
>> THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL.
ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON DONAHUE RIDGE PHASE 8 PRELIMINARY PLAT. OKAY, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ASK FOR QUESTIONS COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION.
>> I WOULD LIKE, IT DOES NOT SAY ON HERE APPROVAL FOR STAFF COMMENTS BECAUSE I MADE A NOTE DURING PACKET THAT WE DID NOT WANT TO CONFIRM FINAL UNTIL THE RECORDING WAS DONE OF FA SEVEN.
I DO NOT KNOW IF YOU WANT TO PUT ANYTHING ABOUT THE CLUB PLAINTIFF BEING WITH THE FINAL PLAT.
>> NO, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO IF THEY WOULD READ AS THE NEXT ELEMENT THEY WOULD BRING IT IN AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE 2021 Ã 00318 DONAHUE RIDGE PHASE 8.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY COMMENTS? I WOULD LIKE TEMPORAL CALL FOR THIS.
[10. Woodward Oaks PDD Amendment PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00300]
>> OKAY, ITEM NUMBER 10. WOODWARD OAKS PDD AND MINUTES.
>> THIS IS AN AMENDMENT REQUEST TO REZONE THE 236 ACRE WOODWARD OAKS PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. TO ALLOW A DIFFERENT
[00:15:03]
DISTRIBUTIONAL DWELLING UNITS AS WELL AS THE ADDITION OF 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE.IT IS LOCATED ALONG MIRACLE ROAD BETWEEN FARMVILLE ROAD AND NORTH DONAHUE DRIVE. AS YOU SEE ON THE MAP.
>> THIS IS THE PROPOSED, THIS IS THE CURRENT MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
AND THEY'RE PROPOSING THE FOLLOWING.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD APPROXIMATELY FIVE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND 39 TOWNHOMES AND 29 COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT UNITS. EXCUSE ME, THEY'RE GONNA REDUCE THE SINGLE FAMILY BY FIVE. AND THEN AGAIN THE TONY THOUSAND SQUARE-FOOT COMMERCIAL AREA ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THIS CHANGE IS A HIGHLY CONCENTRATED ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF NEAR FARMVILLE ROAD.
THIS IS GENERALLY IN RESPONSE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCHOOL AND THE FIRE STATION HAS ALSO BEEN ADDED UP THERE.
DEVELOPERS REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL INCENTIVE ON TOP OF WHAT HE ALREADY HAS. THEY ARE ALLOWED UP TO TWO INCENTIVES PER BDD. THE EXISTING INCENTIVE IS TO ALLOW 10 FOOT SETBACKS FOR THIS UNIT IN EXCHANGE FOR REAR PARKING FOR THE OFFICE AND TOWNHOME USES WHICH ALREADY APPROVED. THE SECOND REQUEST AS PART OF THIS CASE IS TO ALLOW 20 PERCENT MORE ALLOWABLE SERVICE RATIO TO THE COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
WHICH WOULD BRING THEM UP FROM 50 PERCENT TO ALLOWABLE ISR TO A MAXIMUM OF 70 PERCENT. COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS, THIS WILL BE A LITTLE NEW. WE HAVE HAD THIS USE FOR QUITE SOME TIME AVAILABLE AND ALLOWABLE THIS WILL BE ONE OF THE FIRST THAT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED THROUGH THE PDD.
WE HAVE OTHER CONDOMINIUMS AND OWNERSHIPS WHERE IT'S ALL SINGLE LOT. YOU HAVE LOTS OF DIFFERENT STRUCTURES THAT ARE ON OWNERSHIP THE STRUCTURE BUT NOT THE LOT SIZES THEMSELVES. THIS WILL BE FOR BOTH STRUCTURE AND LOT. IT CREATES A DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENT THEN WE HAVE TYPICALLY SEEN.
STAFF FEELS IT IS APPROPRIATE WITH THE WAY THEY ARE CONCENTRATING IN THE AREA THE WAY THEY ARE.
WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL. WITH THE ADDITION THAT THE ISR BE LIMITED TO JUST THE PROPOSED COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE IN FAVOR OR FOUR AGAINST THE PROPOSAL. ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE? ALRIGHT THANKS. OKAY THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING SOME CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO IF YOU LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK ABOUT THE WOODWARD OAKS PDD AN AMENDMENT, PLEASE DO SO. SEE NO ONE ALL APPROVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AS FOR QUESTIONS COMMENT ARE MOTION FROM THE COMMISSION.
>> DID WE GET CLARIFICATION IF THEY WERE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE?
>> THE ALLEYS WILL BE PUBLIC AS I UNDERSTAND.
A LOT OF THOSE STILL HAS TO BE WORKED OUT THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM AT WHEN WE GO THROUGH IT AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE SPECIFICATIONS THEY ARE PROVIDING WITH THE WIDTH AND RADIUS IS TYPICAL DETAILS LIKE THAT.
>> YOU SAID THE FIRST INCENTIVE WAS THE 10 FOOT SETBACK FOR REAR PARKING AND THE SECOND INCENTIVE IS AN INCREASE IN ISR?
>> I DID. I THINK I LEFT OFF THE EXCHANGE.
>> THE EXCHANGE OF THE PROVIDING WILL BE IMPROVED.
AS YOU CAN SEE THERE'S QUITE A LOT ALONG THE CREEK TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY. THEY ARE GOING TO BE INCORPORATING BIKE TRAILS AS I UNDERSTAND THEY ARE ALREADY WORKING TO WORK THOSE TRAILS IN.
>> AND THEN REAR PARKING ON THE 20,000 SQUARE-FOOT?
>> THERE IS A PLAN AND A MOTION TO MAKE THAT OPEN SPACE ACCESSIBLE TO THE RESIDENTS?
>> OKAY. I DON'T LIVE OUT THERE SO.
>> THE TOWNHOMES THERE WILL BE THE SAME DESIGNS THAT THEY HAVE IN THE CURRENT TOWNHOMES SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY WHICH USES THAT
[00:20:02]
PARKING.>> THANKS I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE EXCHANGE WAS.
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE ITEM 10 ON THE AGENDA WITH THE STAFF COMMENTS AS JUST DISCUSSED.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A ROLL CALL AMBER, PLEASE.
>> OKAY, THAT CARRIES SO ITEM NUMBER 11 IS THE WOODWARD OAKS
[11. Woodward Oaks Commercial PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00320]
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. IT IS PL Ã2021 Ã00320.>> THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE ATTACHED TO THE REZONING THAT YOU JUST ACTED ON. IT'S CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL REQUEST FOR DIFFERENT USES FOR THAT 20 SQUARE-FOOT AREA THAT WAS ADDED. TYPICALLY, OUR CONDITIONAL OUR INSTITUTIONAL ROAD SERVICE NURSERY, COMMERCIAL SUPPORT AND COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT USES ART IN YOUR PACKET.
EACH ONE OF THOSE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.
SPECIFIC AREAS THAT IT WOULD SHOW, EXCUSE ME, THAT IT WOULD BE IN IS IN THE BLUE AREA ON YOUR MAP THERE ON THE VERY TOP OF THE PLANET DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WHERE IT INTERSECTS WITH (NAME?) ROAD. IT'S ABOUT 1.9 ACRES AND AS DEVELOPING SITE THAT PERMITTED AREA THAT IT HAS WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE MAXIMUM FIVE DIFFERENT KINDS OF USES.
THAT'S BASED ON MINIMUM LOT AREAS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE TO. OUT OF THAT LIST, THAT IS THE MOST THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH ONE CAVEAT, ONE OF THE REQUESTS FOR PRINTING PUBLISHING USES WE FEEL MIGHT NOT BE APPROPRIATE IN THAT AREA.
IT IS A LITTLE DECEIVING WITH WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK OF AS PRINTING AND PUBLISHING USE. A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK LIKE KINKO'S OR COPYCAT HOWEVER THE ZONING ORDINANCE ALSO INCLUDES THINGS LIKE CRAFT MASTER PRODUCTION FACILITY THAT'S OFF OF NORTH (NAME?) ROAD. THAT PARTICULAR KIND OF USE WOULD BE ALLOWABLE IN THIS ARE , IT WOULD TAKE ON THE ENTIRE SIDE BASED ON ITS SIZE BUT IT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE UP THERE SO STAFF IS REQUESTING THAT THAT BE TAKEN OUT.
>> IS THAT PART OF THE COMMENTS?
>> I THINK IN THE REPORT IT SAYS APPROVAL.
>> WHICH COULD POSSIBLY MEAN A LOT OF LATE TIME EMPLOYEES WORK IN PARTICULAR.
>> AS WELL AS MORE WHOLESALE DELIVERY.
>> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION, IS THERE HEARING WE NEED TO DO FIRST?
>> SO THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING SO IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT OR SPEAK ON THIS ITEM ON THE WOODWARD OAKS COMMERCIAL, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW.
ALL RIGHT SEE NO ONE I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THE FAST FOOD RESTAURANT REQUEST WITH HAPPY POTENTIALLY WITH DRIVE-THROUGH AS WELL. OR IF IT HAD A DRIVE-THROUGH WITH DEBBIE ANOTHER CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST?
>> AS A ROAD SERVICE USE FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS INCLUDE THOSE DIRECTORS AND SO IF YOU WERE TO IMPROVE THAT HERE THERE WOULD BE, IT WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO COME BACK TO YOU.
>> I ALWAYS THOUGHT THE DRIVE-THROUGH ASPECT OF IT WAS A CONDITIONAL USE.
>> DRIVE-THROUGH'S ARE TYPICALLY PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT IS IN. LIKE WHERE YOU WOULD SEE THE SITUATIONS THEY WOULD COME TO YOU SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT USE
[00:25:01]
NOT NECESSARILY JUST BECAUSE IT IS A PART OF A GREATER DEVELOPMENT.>> I THINK THE TABLE PERMITTED USES IT SAYS RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THROUGH.
>> THAT LEAVES US, DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE 2021 Ã 00320 WITH STAFF COMMENTS.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? CANAVERAL CALL POLICE.
>> MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE ONTO ITEM NUMBER 12 THE
[12. Tal-Hiem Drive Subdivision PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00312]
TAL-HIEM SUBDIVISION. PL Ã2021 Ã00312.>> THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY ZONED AS LTD.
THE PROPOSED LAYOUT FOR THE PULMONARY PLAT, 20 LOTS THEY ARE CONVENTIONAL. AND THIS IS AN AERIAL SHOT SHOWING THE AREAS PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS PACKET. LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FIRST. SO THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING SO PLEASE COME FORWARD IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN SPEAKING ON TAL-HIEM DRIVE SUBDIVISION.
SEE NONE I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN JUST ASK ABOUT WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING SOME KIND OF STUB OUT KIND OF ACTION GOING ON HERE IN THE FINAL PLAT. WHAT HAS BECOME OF THAT?
>> WHEN WE ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION WE HAD MADE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM THAT SAID THE APPROVAL IS GOOD BE SUBJECT TO A STUB OUT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THIS.
>> OKAY, IT IS THERE. ALL RIGHT, THAT ADDRESSES MY QUESTION. FURTHER QUESTIONS? PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED, I AM SORRY.
>> ALL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 12 WITH STAFF COMMENTS.
>> A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL POLICE.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT ITEM IT IS CLEAR TO EVERYBODY THAT WHEN THAT MOTION INCLUDES THE STUB OUT TO THE EAST AND SPECIFIED IN THIS NOTE WHEN MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS CLEAR.
>> ENGINEERING COMMENT, RIGHT?
[13. Quail Chase Subdivsion PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00315]
>> OKAY, ITEM NUMBER 13 IS QUAIL CHASE SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS PL 2021 Ã00315. IT IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR A CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION.
>> THIS IS A REQUEST BLAKE RICE, BARRETT SIMPSON INCORPORATED ON BEHALF OF QUAIL CHASE GROUP.
IT'LL BE ZONED, IT IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST FOR 51 A LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION. ON APPROXIMATELY 271 ACRES.
I BELIEVE ALLISON FRAZIER WANTED TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU, REGARDING THE STUB OUTS SPECIFICALLY ON THIS WENT TO THE WEST I HAVE TALKED TO THE ENGINEER AND WE WILL ASK YOUR CONSIDERATION. WE HAVE A STAFF COMMENTS ON A SUB OUTS BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS MORE CLOSELY WITH THE ENGINEER ONCE THEY SUBMIT YOUR PLANS.
THERE'S ABOUT A 60 FOOT ELEVATION DIFFERENCE SO I NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE DO IS IN THE BEST INTEREST LONG-TERM
[00:30:03]
OF THE CITY. IT IS A COMMENT THAT IF IT DOES NOT SHOW BACK UP I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE WORKED THROUGH THAT.>> LIKE ONLY SEE THE FINAL PLAT.
>> IT WILL BE REFLECT ON THE FINAL PLAT.
>> IF IT'S REMOVED IT WILL BE BECAUSE IT'S A HARDSHIP FOR THE CITY TO MAINTAIN.
>> I THINK IT'S A LITTLE HARD STUFF CALLED GRANITE.
>> SHOULD THAT BE INCLUDED IN THE MOTION THAT THE STUB OUT TO THE WEST BE FEASIBLE AS DETERMINED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS?
>> I DID NOT WANT TO PUT THE WHOLE BURDEN ON THE STAFF ABOUT BEING CLEAR THAT WE AGREED.
>> OKAY THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING SO AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE LENGTH, THERE'S A STAFF COMMENT ABOUT THAT AND THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED VIA A WAIVER FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. 1400 FEET.
>> AS I WAS SAYING WE WILL OPEN FOR PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON IT THE QUAIL CHASE PRELIMINARY PLAT, PLEASE DO SO. SEE NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR MOTION.
>> QUESTION, OPTIMAL BOUNDARY WHERE IS THAT?
>> I DO NOT KNOW WHERE IT ENDS BUT THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE OPTIMAL.
>> I KNEW IT HAD TO BE ON THE WEST SIDE, RIGHT?
>> ALL MOVED TO APPROVE WITH ALL STAFF COMMENTS.
>> THE WEST CONNECTIVITY STUB OUT AS DETERMINED BY PRT.
>> MOTION IS A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? ROLL CALL POLICE.
[14. Mimms Trail, 11th Addition, Phase B PUBLIC HEARING PL-2021-00317]
>> MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER 14 MIMMS TRAIL 11TH EDITION PHASE BE. PL Ã2021 Ã00317.
FOR PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL THIS TIME.
>> FORESIGHT GROUP ON BEHALF OF CLAYTON PROPERTIES GROUP.
IT IS A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF 57 PERFORMANCE LOTS, 56 FAMILY AND ONE OPEN SPACE.
THIS WOULD BE THE MIMMS TRAIL 11TH EDITION PHASE B.
ZONED LED ZONED LDD WITH THE OVERLAY.
THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
THIS IS THE LOT LAYOUT PROPOSED.
AN AERIAL SHOWING THE UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON MIMMS TRAIL, 11TH EDITION, PHASE B, PLEASE COME FORWARD. I HOPE SHE'S NOT TRYING TO COME IN AND, OKAY. SEE NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THAT PUBLIC HEARING. AND ASK FOR ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR EMOTION.
>> I THINK IT'S UNIQUE TO SEE PRELIMINARY PLAT WITHOUT ONE CALLED THE SECT CUL-DE-SAC. AS THEY CAN MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. NEXT TO HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO A ROLL CALL POLICE.
[15. Ludlum and King Office PL-2020-00310]
>> MOTION CARRIES. THE LAST ITEM IS LUDLUM AND KING OFFICE PL Ã2020 Ã00310.
>> SCREEN ENCLOSURE TO BE LOCATED IN OUR BUFFER YARD.
[00:35:07]
IT'S LOCATED AT 2468 E. UNIVERSITY DRIVE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOWN. YOU SEE SHELDON MILL AREA DIRECTLY SOUTH OF IT. AND A LITTLE BIT TO THE EAST YOU HAVE EDINA ROAD AS IT EXTENDS ON NORTH AND SOUTH OR EXCUSE ME EAST UNIVERSITY. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDING WHICH IS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR DRG.THE OFFICE SPACE IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND DOES NOT NEED ANY APPROVALS FOR THE USE ITSELF HOWEVER BECAUSE IT'S LOCATED ON A DESIGNATED CORRIDOR THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR ALL USES TO HAVE FIVE FEET MINIMUM BUFFER YARDS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. THIS PARTICULAR CASE THE APPLICANT HAS SAID THAT THERE IS SOME STEEP GRADES ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE WHICH IS PUSHED THE DEVELOPMENT CLOSER TO THE EAST. THE ADJOINING PROPERTY IS THE SOCIAL SECURITY OFFICE THAT IS UP ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOWN.
WITH THAT, THE SPACE THEY HAVE WHERE THEY WANT TO PUT THE DUMPSTERS IS LOCATED THERE. IT IS ADJACENT TO THE NEXT PROPERTY OVER THEM STRIP HAD. HOWEVER, THERE IS A SPACING BASED ON THAT PROPERTIES FIVE FOOT BUFFER ALLOWANCE.
THE ONLY CONCERNED STAFF HAD WERE SOME OVERHEAD POWER LINES THAT WERE IN THE AREA. THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY PLANNING ON RELOCATING THOSE SO THEY WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH ANY KIND OF TRASH COLLECTION. THIS SPECIFIC LOCATION WILL BE SETTLED DURING DRT BUT SO LONG AS THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE SITE PLAN WHICH THEY HAVE DONE, STAFF IS COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
>> THERE IS NO PUBLIC HEARING IT REQUIRED FOR THIS SO ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS OR MOTION FROM THE COMMISSION?
>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF WHATEVER NUMBER THIS IS FOR THE WAIVER SUBJECT TO MEETING ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AS INDICATED IN THE STAFF COMMENTS.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> MOTION CARRIES. THAT'S THE END OF OU
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.