May 12, 2022 Planning Commission

[00:00:08]

>> GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO

[ROLL CALL ]

(ROLL CALL). >> OKAY. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE HAVE QUITE A CROWD HERE TONIGHT, I WOULD LIKE TO GO OVER THE RULES OF THE ROAD FOR THE PROCESS WE ARE GOING TO HAVE HERE TONIGHT. AND SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THE COMMISSION WILL BE PRESENTED DIFFERENT ITEMS BY THE CITY STAFF, THE PLANNING STAFF AND THEN THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THAT ITEM WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO SAY ANYTHING IF THEY WOULD LIKE, AND THEN I WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING IF IT'S APPROPRIATE.

SOME THINGS DO REQUIRE PUBLIC AND SOME DO NOT. AND THEN THAT'S WHEN IT WILL FEWER TIME TO COME OUT AND TELL US WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT ITEM AT ISSUE AND IF YOU CAN KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES AND FOCUS ON THE TOPIC AT HAND, WE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. ONCE EVERYBODY HAS SPOKEN, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE WILL HAVE MAYBE SOME DISCUSSION FOR CLARIFICATION AND THEN A MOTION AND FINAL DISCUSSION AND A VOTE. SO THE COMMISSION IS GOING TO VOTE BASED ON STATE AND LOCAL LAWS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE 2030 PLAN.

IN ADDITION TO THE VOTING THEY DID THE VOTE ACROSS THAT I JUST TALKED ABOUT, I WOULD LIKE TO SUMMARIZE THE RULES RELATED TO THE SUBDIVISION PLATS. WE ARE THE FINAL AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION PLATS, AND SO AS A MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION SUCH AS OURS, WE MAKE A FINAL CALL ON THESE PLATS AND WE ARE ONLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY, SO WHAT WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DO IS IF THE PLATS MEET A CERTAIN SET OF CRITERIA, WE WOULD BASICALLY HAVE TO VOTE IT.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE PATIENT WITH US IN THAT CASE BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO MEET THE -- PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE REQUIRED ON PRELIMINARY PLATS. WE JUST HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT THE PLAQUE MEETS OR EXCEEDS CERTAIN CRITERIA. AND THEN FINALLY I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A POINT THAT EXCEPT FOR THE PLATS, ANYTHING THAT WE VOTE FOR IS GOING TO BE MADE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL. THERE WILL BE ANOTHER CHANCE FOR ANYBODY TO TALK TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE AS SOON AS WE PASS IT ON. THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS CITIZENS COMMUNICATION AND AT THIS TIME, WE ASK IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR ANYTHING THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEEDINGS AT ALL.O IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING MORE TO TALK ABOUT THAT'S NOT RELATED NOW IS THE TIME TO COME TO THE SUMMARY TALK ABOUT THE VARIOUS ITEMS LATER AND THEN I WILL ADDRESS

[CONSENT AGENDA ]

ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA?

>> NO SIR. >> TO HAVE A MOTION? >> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA INCLUDING THE MINUTES FROM PACKET AND REGULAR APRIL MEETINGS.

>> SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE

[4. Conditional Use – Boulevard Phase 5 – PUBLIC HEARING CU-2022-015 ]

BOULEVARD PHASE 5. CU 015. >> THAT IS CORRECT. GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE FOR 40 UNITS OF A MULTIPLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND THREE ACADEMIC DETACHED DWELLING UNITS OR ADDU'S. THE PROPERTY IS IN THE FIFTH PHASE OF THE BOULEVARD WHICH IS OFF OF HARPER AVENUE. THIS PHASE IS COMPRISED OF JUST OVER -- A LITTLE LESS THAN FOUR AND HALF ACRES ADJACENT TO THE RAILROAD TRACK.

CSX. LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET IT BACK TO THE RED DOT.

[00:05:02]

THE PORTION ALONG THE RAILROAD TRACK WAS FORMALLY CSX RIGHT-OF-WAY WHICH HAS BEEN SOLD TO THE DEVELOPER SO IT IS NOW A LOT OF RECORD. GIDDEN STREET OFF OF HARPER COMES OUT HERE AND THEN THE THREE ADDUS WILL BE RIGHT HERE. AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS THE FIFTH PHASE OF THE BOULEVARD. THE 40 ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND THE ADDUS WOULD PUT THE TOTAL NUMBER AT 139 UNITS. THE PROPOSED DENSITY IS NINE UNITS PER ACRE, AND THE ZONING DISTRICT ALLOWS 12. HOWEVER THE FUTURE LAND USE OF MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPOSES EIGHT DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, HOWEVER, IT IS IN KEEPING WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, AND WE DO RECOMMEND FORWARDING IT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, AND THOSE CONDITIONS ARE DEDICATING ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG BRYANT AVENUE, AS WELL AS CONTINUING THE STUB OUT OF GIDDENS STREET INTO THE DEVELOPMENT. AND I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS CASE,

BUT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. >> DOES CONDITIONS IN THE

NOTES? >> YES, THEY ARE. >> UNDER D.

>> THANK YOU. >> I DON'T GUESS I EVER GOT TO THE SITE PLAN, DID I?

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

WITH A REPRESENTATIVE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> PARKER LEWIS. I'M HERE WITH MIKE. GOT A LITTLE CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF TODAY WHICH WAS GOOD AND HELPFUL BEFORE THE MEETING. THOSE TWO CONDITIONS THAT ARE PART OF THE APPROVAL, I WANTED TO TOUCH ON BOTH OF THOSE. THE LANGUAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE FIRST ONE IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL WIDENING OF BRYANT AVENUE AN ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATED, WE ONLY CONTROL ABOUT 20 PERCENT OF THAT BRYANT AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO WE UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT FROM STAFF AND WILL WORK WITH THEM ON THAT SORT OF BRYANT RIGHT AWAY AND CONFIGURATION OF THAT ROAD. THE SECOND ONE IS ONE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST BE REMOVED AS A CONDITION. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO MAYBE GO OUT THERE ONCE THIS PACKET HIT YOUR DESK, BUT GIDDENS STREET IS A VERY NARROW -- IT'S REALLY A ONE-LANE DRIVE. IT LOOKS MORE LIKE A DRIVEWAY.

THE CHURCH OWNS PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF GIDDEN STREET NSA AND ASPHALT PARKING LOT AND SO THE STREET ASPHALT IN THE PARKING LOT AS WELL REALLY JUST SORT OF MERGED TOGETHER, AND THERE'S REALLY ONLY ONE OR TWO RESIDENCES, I THINK, MAYBE AT THE END OF THAT DEAD-END. WE UNDERSTAND WHY STAFF MADE THE COMMENT IN TERMS OF CONNECTING TO GIDDENS.

IT MAY HELP US A LITTLE BIT WITH CONNECTIVITY BUT IT REALLY WOULD PROBABLY BE AN EXTREME NEGATIVE, I THINK, FOR THE CHURCH SINCE IT'S THEIR CHURCH PARKING AND SORT OF A NARROW CONFIGURATION OF A ROADWAY. WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT THAT SECOND CONDITION NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN.

>> SO WHERE IS THE ACCESS COMING FROM?

>> OUR ACCESS -- >> DO I HAVE THIS?

YOU ALL GOT FANCY. >> IS NOT A POWER BUTTON?

AM I GOING TO SHUT IT DOWN? >> HOLD DOWN THE TOP ONE.

>> WELL, LET ME GO TO HERE. THIS IS MAYBE THE BEST ONE.

SO YOU SEE RIGHT HERE IS GIDDEN STREET TO THE EAST.

OUR DRIVEWAY INTO PHASE 4 IS ONLY LIKE 250 FEET TO THE WEST OF GIDDEN STREET. OUR DRIVEWAY THAT WE CONNECT TO TO HARPER IS ACTUALLY WIDENED THIN GIDDEN STREET IS.

IT'S A NICE TWO LANE DRIVEWAY -- SORRY.

[00:10:02]

SOMEBODY CHANGED IT ON ME. >> IT'S HARD.> I'M SORRY.

I DIDN'T LOOK AT IT. THERE WE GO.

LET ME SET THAT DOWN. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE THAT. THAT'S SORT OF A TIGHT SCALE.

RIGHT HERE IS THIS PHASE, AND THERE IS THE GIDDEN STREET CONNECTION, AND THIS PHASE IS COMING OFF THIS LITTLE DRIVEWAY THAT COMES RIGHT DOWN TO HARPER.

>> SO YOU GO NORTH AND THEN HANG A RIGHT?

>> EXACTLY. YOU GO NORTH OFF OF HARPER AND THEN TURN RIGHT INTO THIS ENCLAVE.

>> BUT THAT'S THE ONLY INGRESS/EGRESS?

>> THAT'S THE CLOSEST ONE ON HARPER, BUT THERE ARE THREE WAYS OUT -- THERE ARE I THINK THREE CONNECTIONS TO HARPER.

OVER TO HARPER. AND THEN THIS WOULD COME OVER -- IF YOU COME OVER, YOU JUST GO RIGHT UP TO HERE BACK OUT TO BRYANT. SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS IN AND OUT EVEN WITHOUT THE GIDDEN CONNECTION.

>> BUT BRYANT CONNECTS TO SUMMERHILL, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES. >> SO YOU CAN GET IN THERE? I DROVE THIS SITE. I WANTED TO LOOK AT IT.

AND THEN THERE IS THE TWO, MAYBE THREE.

>> THERE'S NOT ONE CURRENTLY. I WILL LOOK AT THAT TIGHTER IN TERMS OF THE IMPACTS TO BRYANT. THERE'S A POSSIBILITY WE MAY REVISE THIS LAYOUT A BIT AND GO TO STAGE INSTEAD OF GOING TO BRYANT. WE REALLY NEED TO WORK WITH ENGINEERING STAFF TIGHTER ON THAT FINAL DETERMINATION.

>> BUT IT'S A MINIMUM TOO. >> THERE IS AT LEAST TWO ON HARPER, AND I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THERE IS A THIRD ONE OR JUST TWO. WE DIDN'T DO THE FIRST COUPLE

OF PHASES ON BOULEVARD. >> I WENT IN ONE AND WENT OUT THE OTHER.> I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> OKAY. THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.

AT THIS TIME ONLY REQUIRE THE PUBLIC HEARING.OULD ANYBODY LIKE TO COME FORWARD TO LOOK ON THIS ITEM? WHEN YOU ARE DONE CAN YOU SIGN IN ON THE SAME PAD HE IS

WORKING ON? >> MY NAME IS GREG AND I AM THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THOSE TWO RESIDENCES AT THE AND OF GIDDENS STREET WE JUST GOT IN TALKING ABOUT.

WE BROUGHT THEM BACK IN 2003 AND HAVE OWNED THEM SINCE THEN.

OVER THE YEARS, THE DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF US AND I GUESS IT'S TO THE EAST OF US. THE BUILDING THAT'S GOING ON, THE DRIVEWAYS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN, AND SO FORTH, HAVE CAUSED AS A TERRIBLE WATER PROBLEM.

TO THE POINT WHERE I CAN'T MOW RIGHT NOW.

SINCE THE LAST RAIN. THERE IS -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NAME OF THE STREET IS OUT HERE, BUT FROM THERE TO GIDDEN STREET IS A DROP OF ABOUT 17 FEET ELEVATION.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING BETWEEN THE SERVICE AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN SINCE WE BOUGHT AND NOW THAT'S WHAT'S CAUSED A PROBLEM. NOW I SEE THE DEVELOPMENT IS COMING IN AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE SERVICE, MORE ROOF SURFACE AND MORE WATER RUNOFF, AND I'M SCARED TO DEATH WE'RE GOING TO GET UNDERWATER. I'VE GOT NO COMPLAINT WITH BOULEVARD AND ALL OF THAT. I'M JUST ASKING.

I'M MAKING A PLEA TO THE DEVELOPER, AND PLEASE, TO BE AWARE OF THIS, AND WHEN THEY START THE BUILDING AND SO FORTH. WE ARE IN A LOW SPOT THERE.

THANKS FOR HEARING ME OUT AND I APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE?

>> MATTHEW HALL. 559 BRYANT AVENUE IT'S THE SITE THAT THE LOWER RIGHT CORNER OF THE UPPER PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT. IS IT OKAY TO ASK SOME

QUESTIONS? >> GO AHEAD.

>> I WAS CURIOUS IF THE DEVELOPMENT INCREASE RIGHT AWAY

[00:15:02]

PROPOSAL? >> GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTIONS AND WE WILL ANSWER THEM ALL.

>> I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE STREET WIDENING.

WHERE EXACTLY THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> ON WHICH STREET? >> ON BRYANT AVENUE AND BRYANT CIRCLE. I'M ALSO CURIOUS -- IT'S HARD TO READ FROM THE PLAN WITH THE SETBACK IN THE REAR IS GOING TO BE ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. I CAN SEE IT WRITTEN THERE BUT I CAN'T QUITE READ IT. AND THEN I CAN TELL -- A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS IN THE PLAN HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN TERMS OF THE OFFSTREET PARKING AND THEN ALSO THE HEIGHT AND SCALE OF THE BUILDINGS THEY WILL BE SIMILAR TO THE EXISTING BOULEVARD DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST. THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE AND HAVE A COUPLE OF SHORT COMMENTS.

NEW TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN 2019 A MY WIFE AND I BUILT A HOUSE THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE STRANGE.

I TEACH AT THE ARCHITECTURAL SCHOOL SO AS PART OF MY JOB DESCRIPTION TO BUILD A HOUSE BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS TO KEEP THE SCALE OF THE HOUSE DOWN. SO WE HAVE THE LOWEST HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR ITS SIZE. PROGRESS IS INEVITABLE AND I THINK THE PLAN IS REASONABLE AND WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN EVENTUALLY. BUT JUST A COMMENT.

WE HAVE VERY FEW NEIGHBORHOODS OF THIS SCALE IN AUBURN THAT ARE LEFT. THIS IS AN INTERESTING KIND OF LANDLOCKED CIRCLE. WONDERFUL SCALE OF HOMES.

IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE WHETHER THE DEVELOPMENT LEASES AT DD2 THINGS IN AND OUT OF EXISTING FAMILY RESIDENCES.

IF THE SCALE CAN BE KIND OF RESPECTFUL OR IN KEEPING WITH THE EXISTING FABRIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? MR. LEWIS, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP US. IT'S SORT OF FUNCTIONS AND I'VE BEEN ON THERE WERE A LOT OF FOLKS GO THE SAME WAY BUT SOMEONE WAS COMING THE OTHER WAY A WEEK OR TWO AGO.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TO WORK OUT WITH STAFF WOULD BE TO BE A CURB AND GUTTER STREET.

THAT'S ONE WAY. NEW RIGHT AWAY IS NOT GATED OR DO THEY WANT RIGHT AWAY SO THEY CAN MAKE IT CURB AND GUTTER IN TWO WAYS. THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE HAVEN'T WORKED OUT. THE ONLY CITY STREETS THAT DON'T HAVE CURB AND GUTTER OR OLD STREETS LIKE THIS STREETS THAT ARE IN MORE OF A RURAL SETTING.

OUR CITY STANDARDS ARE SIDEWALKS AND THINGS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT STAFF MAY BE THINKING AND OF COURSE THEN THAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN. IF IT'S 30 FEET AND YOU GO TO 50, THAT'S GETTING 10 FEET OF PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. I DON'T KNOW IF THESE NEIGHBORS WANT TO GIVE RIGHT AWAY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE. SOMETIMES THE CITY WILL DO EASEMENTS INSTEAD OF RIGHT AWAY SO PEOPLE KNOW THIS PROPERTY BUT THEY STILL HAVE CURB AND GUTTER SO GREAT QUESTIONS, LEGIT QUESTIONS. DON'T REALLY HAVE ANSWERS TONIGHT ON THAT. THOSE ARE 15 FOOT BUFFER YARNS IN THIS MD RD IS 1/2 TO ONE ANGER OF LIGHT -- ANGLE OF LIGHT. SO TO ANSWER ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THESE WILL BE SIMILAR BUILDINGS AS THE REST OF THE BOULEVARD. IT WILL BE IN THAT STYLE.

>> AND I GUESS WE ARE ALSO ASKING ABOUT THE SKILL OF THE HOUSE AS WE GET CLOSER TO THE EXISTING HOMES THAT ARE BUILT

SO YOU WON'T SCALE THEM DOWN. >> I THINK IT WILL BE THE SAME SCALE AS THE REST OF THE BOULEVARD.

>> ARE YOU IN THE CONCRETE BLOCK HOUSE? THAT'S COOL. I LIKE THAT.

>> IT'S PRETTY COOL. DRIVE THROUGH IF YOU GET A CHANCE. IT WILL BE SIMILAR IN STYLE.

I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THAT'S SOMETHING THE OWNERS MAY WANT TO THINK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER THROUGH WITH THOSE COUPLE OF HOUSES. THERE'S A COUPLE ADJACENT TO BRYANT. MAYBE WE WERE CHANGING IT AND DOING SOMETHING TWO STORIES OR THREE STORIES.

>> ALL RIGHT. THIS KIND OF QUESTION MAY BE ROOM STAFF. IS THERE A COMMENT AND ASKED FOR INDUSTRY? SO WHAT'S BEHIND WANTING TO USE THAT AS AN ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY AS OPPOSED TO WHAT'S

[00:20:07]

ALREADY EXISTING. >> A SOURCE OF SECONDARY ACCESS AND JUST AN ADDITIONAL CONNECTION POINT TO THE DEVELOPMENT FROM A STREET THAT'S BEEN STUBBED OUT FOR MANY YEARS. THE PRIMARY ACCESS WILL BE IN MY ESTIMATION OFF OF BRYANT CIRCLE ONTO SUMMERHILL AND THEN BACK TO THE EXISTING BOULEVARD DEVELOPMENT.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> THERE'S A QUESTION OF FLOODING ALSO. IF THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THAT ONE OF THE PROPERTIES HAD BEEN FLOODING QUITE A BIT SINCE THE DEVELOPMENT, I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THAT.

>> THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE HEARD IT.

I DON'T RECALL THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED THAT IN OUR OFFICE PREVIOUSLY, BUT THE ENGINEER IS IN THE ROOM.

HE IS VERY CLOSE TO ME. AS HE BEGINS TO DEVELOP THE ENGINEERING PLANS, WE WE WILL TAKE A LOOK TO MAKE SURE WE ARE

NOT ADVERSELY IMPACTING UP. >> BECAUSE THERE ARE ISSUES LIKE THAT. THAT'S A MATTER OF THE CITY BEING MADE AWARE OF IT AND THERE ARE MITIGATION EFFORTS.

> WE CAN LOOK INTO IT SEPARATELY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE DON'T WANT THE DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE IT ANY

WORSE. >> SURE.

ALL RIGHT. >> WE WILL DEFINITELY LOOK AT THAT. I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THERE HAS BEEN WHAT TRAINS ONTO THAT PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED. IT'S REALLY BRYANT AVENUE THAT DRAINS DOWN HIS LOT. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT FURTHER. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S A CHANGE FROM ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT OR IF THERE IS

SOMETHING ELSE GOING ON THERE. >> IS IT POSSIBLE SOME REGRADING DURING THE DEVELOPMENT -- WILL THAT POSSIBLY IMPROVE? IF IT'S DONE WITH KIND OF ADAM

MINES? >> I THINK HE SAID HE HAD OWNED A VERY LONG. WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT.

THERE ARE A LOT OF FOLKS IN TOWN THAT HAVE OWN PROPERTY FOR 20 AND 30 AND 50 YEARS THAT SAID I'VE NEVER SEEN A FLOOD LIKE THIS -- DATA IS NOT REALLY APPLICABLE -- NEED TO LOOK AT

THAT. >> ANYMORE COMMENTS OR DO WE

HAVE A MOTION? >> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF ENGINEERING THE GIDDEN STREET EXPANSION, HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THE CHURCH AND THE CHURCH

PARKING LOT? >> YES.

>> HAVE YOU TALKED TO THE CHURCH ABOUT THAT?

>> I HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH THEM ABOUT THAT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT IS ALWAYS ADDITIONAL CONNECTION POINTS TO DEVELOPMENT.

AND SO DO THE CHURCHES IN THE OFF-PEAK TIME USUALLY JUST ON SUNDAYS AND SOMETIMES ON WEDNESDAYS.

THERE IS A PARKING LOT, GOOD VISIBILITY.

AND I DON'T EXPECT A LOT OF CUT THROUGH AS PEOPLE WOULD CALL IT FROM THE BOULEVARD. AGAIN, IT WOULD BE A SECONDARY MEANS OF ACCESS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TO HARBOR IF

NECESSARY. >> THANK YOU.

>> WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. WHEN I OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING. DID YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? THANK YOU, SIR.

>> CAN GET CLARIFICATION ON HOW TO MAKE THE MOTION AND WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE REMOVAL OF THE CONDITION.

WE NEED TO MAKE THE MOTION FIRST AND THEN AMEND THE

MOTION? >> MAKE IT ALL AT ONCE.

>> ALL RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I WILL DO.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE CU 2022 015 BOULEVARD WITH ALL STAFF COMMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE REMOVAL OF THE CONNECTION TO DEMONSTRATE.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

[5. Conditional Use – Taco Bell – PUBLIC HEARING CU-2022-016 ]

MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER 5. CONDITIONAL USE, TACO BELL. MS. SHEPHERD?

>> THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO ALLOW A ROAD SURFACE USED PLASTIC RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE THROUGH AT 1365 NORTH

[00:25:04]

THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION. IT'S 1.61 ACRES.

IT'S CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND THE LAND USE PLAN CAUSES GATEWAY COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR SO A COMMERCIAL USE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE HERE TO THE NORTHWEST ARE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND THEN TO THE SOUTH IS A GAS STATION, SOME COMMERCIAL, RETAIL AND TWO OTHER FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE THEORIES AS WELL. DID YOU DRIVE THROUGH AS WELL.

IT'S JUNE -- ZONE CDD. SO IT DOES FIT IN WITH WHAT'S GOING ON AT THAT INTERSECTION. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED AND SHOWS A RESTAURANT THAT IS 2551 SQUARE FEET WITH A SMALL PATIO AREA RIGHT HERE.

THERE IS ONE DRIVE-THROUGH LANE AND ONE PASS BIPLANE.

I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY.

THE MENU BOX IS LOCATED RIGHT AROUND HERE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER CLOSEST TO NORTH DONAHUE SO THIS IS WHERE THE CARS WOULD STACK UP. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THE REMOVAL OF THE PLANNING CONDITION NUMBER ONE. THAT ONE IS ABOUT MATERIALS AND THAT ONE DOES NOT APPLY ANYMORE.

WE'VE GOTTEN CLARIFICATION THERE WILL NOT BE METAL, SO WE -- IT'S GOING TO BE A PAINTED AND SEALED PRODUCT.

IT LOOKS LIKE THAT. >> IS CONSISTENT WITH THE

GATEWAY TYPE? >> YES AND THEIR LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING WILL BE CONSISTENT AS WELL.

>> IT WILL BE FURTHER REVIEWED AT THE RT.

>> YES. WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THIS FROM THE GENTLEMAN WHO IS THE OWNER OF THIS ACCESS LAND RIGHT HERE AND HE IS HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT AS WELL. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

ME? >> I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT

THE ACCESS ROAD. >> I WILL LET HIM SPEAK TO THAT. THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.

>> LET ME SAY AM GOING TO RECRUIT MIGHT -- RECUSE MYSELF

FROM THIS MATTER. >> AND STEPHEN VINCENT AND I REPRESENT THE PEOPLE ON THE DRIVEWAY.

IT IS A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY. WE HAVE HAD NO COMMUNICATION FROM TACALA, LLC REGARDING A REQUEST TO ACCESS THAT.

THERE IS ACTUALLY PROPERTY THAT LAND AND TIMBER OWNS BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY AND THIS VACANT LOT.

SO AS WE SEE IT RIGHT NOW -- >> LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT PART. YOU ARE SAYING YOU OWN THE PRIVATE DRIVEWAY AND ALSO A SLICE OF LAND BETWEEN YOUR

DRIVEWAY AND THIS PARCEL. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> SO THERE HAS BEEN NO COMMUNICATION WITH US REGARDING

THAT. >> THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ENTITIES THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONTACTED.

>> SAME ENTITY. LAND AND TIMBER OWNS THE STRIP AND THE ONLY DRIVEWAY. AND IS PRIVATELY OWNED.

THERE IS NO WAY THEY CAN CONNECT TO THAT PRIVATE STREET.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> YES. DOES LAND AND TIMBER OPPOSE

GRANTING ACCESS TO TACO BELL? >> YES, SIR.

>> WITH A REPRESENTATIVE LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK?

>> MIKE COREY WITH TACALA AND THE THINGS THAT HE WAS MENTIONING, THOSE ARE NORMALLY THINGS WE DO AFTER CONDITIONAL USE AND WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE APPROVED, SO THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE TONIGHT AND WE WILL WORK WITH ENGINEERING STAFF AND WE WOULD NOT BE THE LAND OWNERS OF THAT WOULD BE COMMUNICATION THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE LANDOWNER THAT OWNS THE PRIVATE DRIVE. WE UNDERSTAND IN THIS DISTRICT AND ALONG THE CORRIDOR WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO DONAHUE DRIVE. SO UPON ACCEPTANCE WE WILL THEN MAKE ALL OF THESE OTHER AVENUES.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING SO I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.

WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK? SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE AND SELL THE ISSUE OF THE ACCESS IS NOT REALLY BEFORE US. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

STAFF OR EMOTION? >> TO CLARIFY, WE ARE JUST USE FOR TALK ABOUT.

[00:30:20]

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FIRST CONDITION UNDER

PLANNING, NUMBER ONE. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

[6. Conditional Use – Circle K – PUBLIC HEARING CU-2022-017 ]

MOTION CARRIES. NUMBER SIX IS ANOTHER CONDITIONAL USE. CIRCLE K. CU 2022.

MS. SHEPHERD. >> THIS IS ANOTHER CONDITIONAL USE. THIS IS FOR ANOTHER ROAD SURFACE USED FOR GASOLINE SERVICE STATION AND THIS IS GOING TO BE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SHELTON BELL ROAD -- SHELTON MILL ROAD AND HIGHWAY 80 AND IF APPROVED IT WILL BE A CIRCLE K GAS STATION AND CONVENIENCE STORE.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN BOTH THE CITY OF AUBURN AND THE CITY OF OPELIKA. THE SMALLER PIECE RIGHT HERE ALONG SHELTON MILL ROAD IS ABOUT ONE ACRE AND THAT'S IN THE CITY OF OPELIKA IN THIS LARGER PARCEL OVERHEARS IN THE CITY OF AUBURN AND IT'S ABOUT FOUR ACRES IN THE BUILDING WILL STRADDLE BOTH, BUT THE BUILDING WILL BE PRIMARILY IN OPELIKA BUT ALSO IN AUBURN. THEY DID GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN OPELIKA FOR CONDITIONAL USE AND THAT WAS APPROVED AND THAT DOES NOT GO BEFORE COUNCIL AND OPELIKA SO THAT WAS APPROVED THERE.ND NOW THEY ARE HERE --

>> SO YOU ARE SAYING THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THERE WOULD NOT

HAVE TO -- >> AND OBLIQUE THAT THEY APPROVED THE CONDITIONAL USE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR THAT AS WELL.

THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN LISTS THIS AS A GATEWAY COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, SO I GAS STATION, COMMERCIAL USE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. THE AUBURN PART OF THE PROPERTY IS ZONED CDD AND TO THE NORTH AND THE EAST IS OPELIKA AND TO THE SOUTH IS A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S ZONED DDH. SHELTON COVE.

AND SO THAT WAS BACK RIGHT BACK UP TO THIS PROPERTY HERE.

THIS IS THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT WE RECEIVED THAT YOU HAVE ALL SEEN BEFORE. IT SHOWS A BUILDING THAT IS ABOUT 5172 SQUARE FEET. IT HAS REGULAR GASOLINE PUMPS IN THE FRONT AND DIESEL PUMPS IN THE BACK.

THERE IS ACCESS FROM SHELTON MILL AND FROM HIGHWAY 280.

AND IF YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A THINK LINE OF WHAT IS -- MAYBE THIS IS AUBURN. AND SO FAR WITH THEIR SITE PLAN THEY HAVE MET BOTH OUR REQUIREMENTS AND OPELIKA'S REGARDING BUFFER YARDS AND LANDSCAPING, AND I'M ASSUMING THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE FURTHER DISCUSSION AT A LATER TIME ON MEETING OTHER IMPORTANT THINGS AS WELL.

AND THEN WE TALKED TO THEM. AND TODAY WE RECEIVED A REVISED PLAN WHERE THEY MOVED THIS DRIVEWAY FURTHER SOUTH ON SHELTON COVE, AND THEN THEY MOVED THE DIESEL PUMPS FURTHER WEST AND FURTHER NORTH. AND SO THEY HAVE DOUBLED KIND OF A DISTANCE WHERE THEY WERE RIGHT HERE.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH, AGAIN, THE REMOVAL OF THE FIRST PLANNING CONDITION BECAUSE IT'S ADDRESSED AND WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND WE DO NOT NEED IT TWICE.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ANSWER THIS TIME? A LOT OF THEM YOU MAY HAVE CANNOT BE ANSWERED NOW.

>> SO DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE DISTANCE BETWEEN ADJACENT -- IS HERE AND WE JUST RECEIVED THIS TODAY SO I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO MEASURE IT. I JUST NOTICED THE DIFFERENCE IN IT. WE RECEIVED THEM AT 1:00 BUT I

DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE. >> (NAMES READ.).

>> IT DOES BACK UP TO -- WHERE IS MY -- IT BACKS UP TO THE

REAR YARDS. >> BUT YOU COME UP TO THE NEW

PLANTS. >> THIS IS JUST ONE OF THEM.

THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME ESSENTIAL CHANGES.

THE PARKING STAYED THE SAME AND ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS.

[00:35:02]

>> IS A REPRESENTATIVE HERE. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND SIGNING

IN HERE. >> I'M INTERESTED IN TWO THINGS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE DIESEL PUMPS AND MAYBE THE REGULAR PUMPS CLOSEST TO THE HOME.

WHERE ARE THE FUEL TANKS GOING TO BE BURIED.> AND PULLING AT UP THE SITE PLAN NOW. THE DIESEL CANOPY SITS ABOUT 220 FEET FROM THE CLOSEST HOME AND WE HAVE MEASURE THAT OUT AND WE ALSO SET ABOUT 160 FEET FROM WHERE THE CLOSEST YARD ENDS. HE WILL SEE IF YOU LOOK ON AN AERIAL IT'S A HEAVILY WOODED AREA BETWEEN THE HOME AND OUR BUILDING. TANK FARM WILL BE IN FRONT OF

OUR SITE. >> WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

>> UNDERGROUND STORAGE. >> UNDERGROUND STORAGE IS WHAT I'M ASKING.> IS BETWEEN THE FRONT CANOPY AND YOU CAN SEE IT

APPEAR. >> THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE DIESEL THAT'S OUT IN THAT SAME AREA AS WELL?

>> YES HER. >> THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THERE ARE A COUPLE OF POINTS WE WANTED TO MAKE AS FAR AS THE CONDITIONS. THE FIRST POINT WE WANTED TO BRING UP AND REALLY OBJECT TO IS UNDER ENGINEERING LINE ITEM NUMBER TWO. THE CONNECTIVITY SHOULD PROVIDE TO TURNBERRY LANE AND IF YOU SEE TD RUN OF NOW IS THE TIME TO DISCUSS IT, BUT TO CREATE A DRIVEWAY GOES THROUGH THAT I WOULD PROBABLY NOT WANT A COMMERCIAL DRIVE EMPTYING INTO MY NEIGHBORHOOD IF I LIVED THERE.

AND SO WHILE I AM NOT A MEMBER OF THAT COMMUNITY, I WOULD LIKE TO BE A GOOD DEVELOPER AND A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND NOT LET COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC DRIVE THROUGH.

>> AND YOUR SITE IS RELATIVELY FAR FROM THAT, CORRECT? I AM FAMILIAR WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> YOU HAVE TO PUT SOME SORT OF ROAD ACCESS FROM YOUR FACILITY ALL THE WAY OVER TO THAT STUB.

>> I'M WEARY OF THE TRAFFIC THAT WE DRIVE THROUGH.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION FOR THAT TO BE REMOVED.

THE SECOND POINT WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS AND REALLY OBJECT TO IS A COMBINATION OF THE LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANES.

COMING OFF OF SHELTON MILL. THERE WERE COMMENTS BUT WE DIDN'T SITE PLAN THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO BE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO SATISFY WHAT YOU CAN'T SEE -- THERE'S A LIFT STATION WITH A RIGHT AWAY. IT PUMPS IT TO THE SEWER

WHETHER IT'S GRAVITY OR FORCE. >> (AWAY FROM MIC).

>> IT WOULD BE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO MOVE AND SINCE WE CAN'T DETERMINE WHO OWNS IT, I DON'T KNOW IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD

OWNS IT. >> OR OPELIKA.

>> MOVING IT BECAUSE OF A LOT OF ISSUES ESPECIALLY WITH THIS FUNCTIONALITY. I'M ASSUMING IT SERVICES THE SAME AREA WE ARE DISCUSSING. I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION TO

REMOVE THE (UNINTELLIGIBLE). >> THIRD CONDITION?

[00:40:14]

>> WE DON'T WANT TO RELOCATE MOLESTATION BUT WE ARE HAPPY TO

PUSH IT FURTHER TO THE SOUTH. >> WE SAW THAT WITH THE NEW SITE PLANS IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING?

>> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO BASICALLY YOU ARE SAYING YOU CAN BE LOCATED FURTHER TO THE SOUTH BUT NOT HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

HOW IS IT GOING TO BE ORIENTED. >> SO WE CAN PUSH THE ENTRANCE, THE EGRESS AND INGRESS TO SOUTH AND IT WILL BE SITUATED AT APPROXIMATELY 75 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF BP'S CURB CUT. WE CAN PUSH IT TO 75 AND THAT'S AS FAR AS WE ARE ALLOWED TO GO AND AM HAPPY TO DO THAT.

BUT WE CAN'T ACCOMMODATE WE ARE GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ACCOMMODATE IS MOVING THE STATION AND MOVING THE RIGHT

DECENTLY AND LEFTY SELLING. >> TO MOVE INTO THE NEW SITE PLAN, WE ARE LOOKING AT THEM. THERE WE GO.

THIS IS WHAT YOU PROPOSE TO DO? >> YES, SIR.

EXACTLY. >> AND THE LIFT STATIONS KIND OF HALFWAY UP THAT OR THE PARKING SPACES ARE JUST TO THE

RIGHT. >> I THINK IT'S OVER THERE.

>> AM HAVING TROUBLE VISUALIZING THIS.

>> IS RIGHT AROUND IN HERE. >> (OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS).

>> MAY I CLARIFY ONE QUICK THING? THE ADDITIONAL LANES ARE REQUIRED SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GIVE HIM RELIEF ON BUT WE NOTICE THAT BECAUSE WE NEED THE ENTRANCE MOVED REALLY TO SUPPORT THOSE. I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.

DON'T GET INTO THE ADDITIONAL LANE COMMENT.

THAT DOESN'T TECHNICALLY APPLY TO YOU.

>> WE ARE DOING THE CONDITIONAL USE AND THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT ON HERE THAT'S OUTSIDE OF JUST USE.

>> I GUESS I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE

ACTUALLY LOOKING AT. >> THAT WILL BE GOOD FOR RIGHT NOW.ET'S GO AHEAD WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING AND IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON IT, PLEASE DO.

SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, COULD I MAKE A COMMENT? AS WAS MENTIONED BY MORGAN, WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT FOR A WHILE NOW ON THESE VARIOUS ISSUES.

THE PLAN THAT CAME IN TODAY IS -- HAS NOT BEEN FULLY REVIEWED BY STAFF. SO ENGINEERING HASN'T HAD TIME TO LOOK AT THAT AND DETERMINE IF THE RELOCATED DRIVEWAY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS. I DON'T THINK WE'RE PREPARED TO TELL YOU IT DOES OR DOESN'T AT THIS TIME, BUT THOSE ARE ISSUES THAT LIKE YOU SENT IS IN THE DESIGN MANUAL.

SO THERE IS THE USE QUESTION AND THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE SUBMITTED WITH CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION THAT ARE PERTINENT TO THE USE ON SITE AND HOW IT FUNCTIONS ON ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE MARKED IT IF IT WAS A QUESTION OF YOU SHE WOULDN'T GET A SITE PLAN.

PART OF ITS COMPATIBILITY AND YOU NEED TO LOOK AT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF WHERE IT IS. THAT'S WHY YOU ARE GETTING SOME OF THIS. MY OTHER QUESTION IS OUR YOU SATISFIED ENOUGH WITH US TO SEND IT TO KITTY LTD CITY COUNCIL OR DEFLECTOR QUESTIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE DETERMINED THAT MIGHT WARRANT --

>> ESPECIALLY SINCE THIS CAME IN TODAY AND THERE HASN'T BEEN ENOUGH REVIEW. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) TO GET THIS ALL SQUARED AWAY. THAT WOULD BE A SUGGESTION I

WOULD HAVE. >> OR ME JUST VOTING ON WHETHER IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR A GAS STATION.

>> IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT TAKING STAFF COMMENTS. IF WE ARE GOING TO LEAVE THE STAFF COMMENTS, THAT'S A DIFFERENT THING.

[00:45:01]

>> TREND -- (OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS) (OVERLAPPING

SPEAKERS). >> WE CAN HAVE A MOTION TOO.

>> JUST IN RESPONSE TO THOSE TWO.

TO THOSE ENGINEERING A DRIVE THROUGH THE INTERSECTION A LOT GOING TO 280 AND THAT CORNER IS VERY HEAVILY TRAVELED WITH PEOPLE COMING AND GOING TO THE LIGHT.

I UNDERSTAND WHY THE TURNINGS ARE NECESSARY AND THEY SHOULD BE RIGHT THERE. I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE CONNECTIVITY DOWN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE SOME DISTANCE THERE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I DON'T OWN THE CONDITIONAL USE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO REMOVE

THAT CONDITION. >> WHICH ONE?

>> DOORBELL CONNECTIVITY TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD

THAT'S DIRECTLY BEHIND. >> I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF THAT AND HOW IT CAME ABOUT IF IT WAS JUST ON THE PLAT OR IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAN WE CAN RESEARCH THAT LATER ON.

IN LIEU OF SOMETHING THAT MANDATES IT BEING THERE, I THINK IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR THAT SHE WOULD BE SOME -- WITH THE REQUIREMENT BE TOO STOP IT OUT TO THE DRIVE THAT COMES IN? WOULD NECESSARILY CONNECT TO THE ACTUAL GAS STATION?

>> I THINK IT COULD CONNECT THE DRIVE IT COULD CONNECT TO THE ACTUAL DRIVE. IT'S REALLY A WAY FOR THE RESIDENTS, IF YOU ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU WANT TO GO TO THIS CONVENIENCE STORE YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET OUT ON CHILTON HILL ROAD TO THEN GET BACK INTO IT.

>> I KNOW THAT'S NOT REALLY A HARD DECISION TO MAKE HOW IT CONNECTS. AND MOST OF THAT UNDEVELOPED LAND CURRENTLY, I KNOW WE DISCUSSED IT.

IT MAY NOT BE A LOT THAT CAN GO THERE POTENTIALLY.

BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE ORDER. >> THERE'S A DETENTION ON THAT RECTANGULAR AREA ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER.

THE OTHER THING I WOULD REMEMBER OR REMIND YOU IS WE HAD PLANNING CONDITION NUMBER TWO WE TALKED ABOUT ON MONDAY.

AND IT WAS RECOMMENDING THAT THE DIESEL PUMPS NOT BE UP AGAINST RESIDENTIAL. IT MAKES AN ATTEMPT TO RELOCATE THAT AND IT DOESN'T SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT.

ONE THING AND DETERMINATION I WOULD SAY IF YOU ARE SATISFIED WITH THAT MODIFIED PLAN THAT REMOVES IT FAR ENOUGH AWAY AND PROVIDES ENOUGH AND YOU WOULD WANT TO DELETE THAT IF YOU ARE -- OURS IS INSISTENT IT BE REFINED FURTHER I WOULD

ENCOURAGE YOU TO LEAVE IT IN. >> ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT?

>> THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF QUESTIONS LEFT ON THIS ONE.

I GUESS I'M KIND OF LEANING TOWARDS (AWAY FROM MIC).

SOME OF THIS STUFF IRONED OUT. I THINK I REFLECT EVERYBODY ELSE'S SENTIMENT THAT A CONNECTION TURNBERRY LANE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT I'M NOT QUITE SURE OF THE REST OF IT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A DIFFERENT DESIGN WITH THE DIESEL HUBS.

>> I WOULD SAY THE DIESEL PUMPS NEED TO BE MOVED FURTHER AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE AND MAYBE A PLAN THAT INCLUDES THE REQUIRED RIGHT AND LEFT TURN LANES.

SO WE CAN SORT OF SEE WITH THAT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE.

>> DO I HEAR A MOTION? >> IT SAYS CONDITIONAL USE DOES FALL UNDER SORT OF ISSUES. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE MAKE IT SAFE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE LIVING THERE.

SO WHAT WILL WE DO? >> MOTION TO TABLE THE SPIRIT

(OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS). >> MAKE THE MOTION TO POSTPONE

INTO THE JUNE REGULAR MEETING. >> SECOND.

[7. Preliminary Plat – Sandhill Acres – PUBLIC HEARING PP-2022-005 ]

>> DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE AND ALL OPPOSED SAY NO. THAT IS POSTPONED UNTIL THE

NEXT MEETING. >> JUNE 9.

>> ITEM NUMBER SEVEN PRELIMINARY PLAT SANDHILL AKERS. THIS IS 202-2005.

MR. KIP. >> THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION APPROXIMATELY 75 ACRES AND THEY ARE REQUESTING ABOUT 22 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF SANDHILL ROAD SOUTH

[00:50:06]

IT IS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND IT'S ROLE.

AND HERE'S THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THE PLAT ALL LOTS ARE OVER THREE ACRES AND WOULD BE SERVICED BY SEPTIC.HE PLAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OF STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. WE DID RECEIVE NOT NECESSARILY A COMPLAINT BUT AN EMAIL FROM THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH EAST AND I BELIEVE WE'VE ADDRESSED ALL OF THE QUESTIONS AND AUTHORIZED TO DATE THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> THANK YOU. WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE MIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? COME ON UP.

>> PLEASE SIGN AND WHEN YOU'RE DONE.

>> MY NAME IS TJ JOHNSON OF HOLLAND HOMES REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER. OUR INTENT IS A THREE ACRE RURAL SUBDIVISION TO BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF TOWN NORTH OF THE PRESERVE AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I DID CORRESPOND WITH MR. TO FORWARD. WE HAD SEVERAL PHONE CONVERSATIONS AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO HIM AS WELL. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING SO I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK SAY NO AND I

WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

[8. Waiver – S/D Reg Waiver WZ-2022-004 ]

>> A MOTION IN A SECOND. MOTION CARRIES.

THE LAST ITEM IS A WAIVER. SUBDIVISION REGULATION WAIVER.

WC 2022 Ã004. MR. KIPP.

>> THIS IS A WAIVER TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATION THE CITY OF AUBURN. THE PROPERTY OWNERS'S NAME IS CAROLYN MOORE ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO SUBDIVIDE TWO LOTS IN FLAT GLASS WITHIN THE PLANNING JURISDICTION.

PROPERTY IS LOCATED -- CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

PRETTY FAR OUT FROM THE CITY LIMITS AND IT IS NOT WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND NOT WITHIN THE BOUNDARY BUT IT IS WITHIN OUR PLANNING JURISDICTION, SO IT IS SUBJECT TO CITY OF AUBURN SUBJECT REGULATIONS. THE INTENT OF LIMITING FLAG LAPSES TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAY CONFLICTS AND ENSURE THAT LAND THAT MIGHT COME IN THE CITY LIMITS WOULD NOT BE IN CONFLICT WITH ZONING OR COMP PLAN POSITION -- PROVISIONS.

GIVEN WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WE DON'T FORESEE NOT CAUSING ANY ISSUES FOR WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING.OWEVER WE ARE NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT THE WAIVER BECAUSE IT DOES NOT DICTATE THEY ARE NOT DEPRIVED OF THE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS IS CURRENTLY REPORTED. HOWEVER, AGAIN, WE DON'T FORESEE ANY ISSUES OF THE WAIVER WORK TO BE GRANTED.

DRIVEWAY SPACING LOCATION, IT'LL ALL BE REVIEWED BY THE

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT. >> THERE'S TWO FLAG LOTS AND

THEY COME SOUND. >> THERE ARE TWO CONFORMING LOTS AND I BELIEVE IT'S 18 ACRES YOU WILL.

[00:55:04]

>> I AM CAROLYN MOORE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY HUSBAND.

I JUST LIKE TO STATE OUR CASE FROM 58 YEARS AGO.

I'M NOT GOING TO BE OVER FIVE MINUTES.

WE HAVE BEEN MARRIED 58 YEARS AND HAVE FOUR WONDERFUL NONPROFIT CHILDREN. WHO ARE PRODUCTIVE CITIZENS IN GEORGIA AND ALABAMA. THE LAND THAT'S IN QUESTION TODAY HAS BEEN A MY HUSBAND PASSED MY FAMILY FOR APPROXIMATELY HUNDRED YEARS. MY HUSBAND'S GREAT GRANDMA -- IT'S KNOWN AS BEANIE ROAD WHICH IS HIS GREAT GRANDFATHER'S LAST NAME. YOU MIGHT HAVE GUESSED THAT JAMES AND I ARE IN OUR LATE 70S AND 80S. SO HAVING A DESIRE TO GET OUR AFFAIRS AND CONDITIONS THAT WILL BE LESS CONFUSING AND STRESSFUL FOR OUR FOUR CHILDREN, WE THOUGHT IT BEST TO SETTLE -- APPROXIMATELY ONE YEAR AGO WE DECIDED TO DIVIDE THE 18+ ACRES THAT ARE IN QUESTION TODAY INTO FOUR EQUAL PARTS AND GIVE THEM TO OUR CHILDREN.

SO WITH THIS IN MIND, WE CONTACTED MR. (NAME), WHOM YOU ALL KNOW. LATE LAST SUMMER ALONG WITH TWO OTHER SURVEYORS WE FOUND IN THE BOOK.

AT THE TIME, THEY WERE VERY BUSY AND COULD NOT TAKE ON THE PROJECT AT THAT TIME. IT WAS EXPLAINED TO THEM WHAT OUR PLANS WERE ABOUT DIVIDING IT INTO FOUR PARTS.

IT WAS SUGGESTED BY THEN WE MIGHT NEED TO CHECK WITH COUNTY ENGINEER KENDRA ANDREWS IN THE AUBURN PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S WHEN EACH ONE OF THEM SUGGESTED.

SO THE TERM SUBDIVISION HAD BEEN MENTIONED BY THEM, AND TO MAKE SURE WE COULD DO WHAT HE WANTED, I CALLED MR. ANDREWS AT THE COUNTY AND EXPLAINED OUR INTENT TO SPLIT THE LAND INTO FOUR LOTS. HE EXPLAINED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBDIVIDING AND SUBDIVISION.

FOR LAST WOULD BE CONSIDERED SUBDIVIDING.

AND NOT SUBDIVISION. YOU MUST HAVE LESS THAN -- NO LESS THAN 30 FEET OF FRONTAGE PER LOT.

SURVEYOR WOULD HAVE TO PRESENT A DRAWING FOR APPROVAL.

BUT HE ADVISED THAT I BEST CHECK WITH AUBURN PLANNING DEPARTMENT. BEFORE WE PROCEEDED WITH PLANS TO SPEND MONEY ON SURVEYING, I CALLED AND SPOKE WITH MR. HOWELL AND I SPOKE WITH LOGAN KIP.

MR. HOWELL GAVE NO PARTICULAR ROAD OR DRIVEWAY SPECIFICATIONS BUT SAID THAT FOUR LOTS OR LESS WOULD BE FINE.

MR. KIP SAID ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS MR. HOWARD BUT HE MENTIONED FLAG LOTS MIGHT BE IN ORDER MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THREE MILES. THIS INFORMATION WE PROCEEDED TO HAVE MR. SPRAY VERY TO DO THE WORK IN HIS EARLIEST CONVENIENCE. ONCE MR. SPRAYBERRY DREW A DRAWING WE THOUGHT HE HAD DONE A PERFECT JOB.

THE LOTS WERE EQUALLY DIVIDED, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED.

BUT ONCE THE DRAWING WAS TAKEN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HERE AT AUBURN, THINGS CAME TO A HALT.

WE SINCE THEN HAVE TALKED TO LOGAN KIPP WHO HAS NEVER DENIED THAT OUR ORIGINAL CONVERSATION WAY BACK WHEN TOOK PLACE.

AND FOR THAT I'M GRATEFUL. DURING OUR RECENT CONVERSATION, MR. KIPP USED THE TERM 60 FEET WIDE WITH WE DON'T SEE NO 60 FEET WIDE ROAD. THERE ARE SOME I HADN'T SEEN.

[01:00:03]

AND I KNOW YOU HAVE HEARD THAT YOU CAN'T FIGHT CITY HALL, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD I KNOW CITY HALL CAN HAVE MERCY.

THANK YOU. >> THIS DOESN'T REQUIRE A

PUBLIC HEARING. >> CAN I SAY SOMETHING ABOUT

THIS? >> ARE YOU THE ENGINEER?

>> I'M A CERTIFIED ENGINEER. >> I HAVE KNOWN MR. MOORE EVER SINCE I WAS A LITTLE KID BUT I'VE KNOWN THEM A LONG TIME.

THEY ARE FRIENDS OF MINE. SO THEY CAME TO ME WITH THIS AND THEY TOLD ME WHAT THEY WANTED FOR EQUAL LOTS AS IT WAS I COULD GET THEM AND TO HAVE FOUR ACCESS STRIPS TO GET THEM AS EQUAL AS I COULD GET THEM. SO WE WENT OUT THERE AND SURVEY THE PROPERTY AND I MADE A DRAWING SHOWING -- AS WE SEE

HERE. >> YES, SIR.

AND THAT PROPERTY IS DOWN ON THE VERY EDGE OF THE PLANNING JURISDICTION. IT'S WAY OUT THERE ON THE WAY THAT I SEE THAT THIS CAN HAPPEN YESTERDAY I TALKED TO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND THEY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT AND I KNOW OF. WHAT WE CAN DO IS HAVE A JOINT DRIVEWAY EASEMENT AND HAVE ONE OR TWO ACCESSES OFF THE ROAD AND COME IN AND GET ON THE STRIPS AND GOING THERE TO THOSE FOUR LOTS. THEY'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP ANYTHING OR MAKE ANY MONEY. THEY JUST WANT A FAMILY SUBDIVISION FOR THEIR FOUR CHILDREN.

SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF WE COULD GET A WAIVER ON THIS.

>> IS THERE DISCUSSION OR MOTION ON THAT?

>> SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A REASONABLE THING TO ACCOMMODATE

. >> WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE WC 20 22 Ã004. >> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.LL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAY NO.

MOTION CARRIES. WE HAVE THE WAIVER.

>> THANK YOU. >> SO THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF THE MEETING. -- I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.

DO WE KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE STATUS OF THIS SHORT-TERM RENTAL THING IN THE COURT SYSTEM? DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY IDEA ON THAT AT THIS POINT? I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. ANYTHING FROM STAFF?

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.