Aug 11, 2022 Planning Commission

[ROLL CALL ]

[00:00:09]

FIVE O'CLOCK SOMEWHERE! AND IT IS TIME TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. I WANT TO WELCOME THOSE IN ATTENDANCE AND THOSE WATCHING THROUGH THE STREAMING MEDIA THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED. APPRECIATE YOUR INTEREST IN THINGS THAT GO ON IN YOUR COMMUNITY AND THE WORK OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BEFORE WE HAVE ROLL CALL, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE TWO NEW MEMBERS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. WE HAVE DANA CAMP ON THIS END.

>> THANK YOU. >> AND DAVID WISDOM ON THIS

END. >> THANK YOU.

>> WE WELCOME THEM AND LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THEM.

AND WE WILL HAVE ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

MEETING -- WE HAVE A SLIDE ON THE AGENDA, RIGHT? AT THE BEGINNING OF THE AGENDA CALLED CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT MAY WISH TO DIRECT A QUESTION OR RAISE AN ISSUE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT DOES NOT RELATE TO ANY OTHER ITEM ON THE AGENDA. WE WILL HAVE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DISCUSS THOSE AS THEY COME UP ON THE AGENDA.

BUT IF THERE IS ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND RAISE ANY ISSUE OR ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO NOW.

THERE IS NOT ANYONE, SO WE WILL MOVE ON WITH THE NEXT ITEM.

BEFORE WE DO, I WANT TO ANNOUNCE TO ANYONE HERE THAT MIGHTBE HERE FOR THAT PARTICULAR ONE , ITEM NUMBER 12 ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS BIG DAN'S CAR WASH, HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT. SO IF YOU ARE HERE REGARDING THAT ONE, THAT WILL NOT BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT BECAUSE THAT ONE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. FOR THOSE WHO MAY NOT BE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS THAT WE USE AT OUR MEETINGS.

AND I THINK IF YOU DO UNDERSTAND, IT WILL HELP YOU INTERACT WITH IT. EVERY AGENDA ITEM, EACH AGENDA ITEM THAT YOU SEE ON OUR AGENDA WILL BE PRESENTED KINDA BY PRESENTATION BY THE STAFF. FOLLOWING THAT, THE APPLICANT HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY FURTHER CLARIFICATION OR FURTHER COMMENTS RELATED TO HIS OR HER PROPOSAL ON THE AGENDA.

AND IF IT'S APPLICABLE, AND MANY TIMES IT IS APPLICABLE AND REQUIRED BY LAW, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THAT AGENDA ITEMS. THE PUBLIC HEARING, OF COURSE, IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE TO SPEAK AS THEY SEE FIT.

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM ANYBODY THAT HAS ANYTHING TO SAY REGARDING THAT AGENDA ITEM. HOWEVER, WE WILL ASK YOU TO KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES AND MAKE YOUR COMMENTS RELEVANT TO THAT PARTICULAR ITEM OF THE AGENDA.

AFTER THE HEARING IS CLOSED, ANY QUESTIONS OR ISSUES BROUGHT UP DURING THE HEARING WILL BE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM -- TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO THE RESPOND TO THOSE THAT ARE BROUGHT UP IN THE HEARING. AND FOLLOWING THE INPUT -- FOLLOWING THIS INPUT, THE INPUT FROM THE CITY STAFF.

THE PUBLIC, ANY CORRESPONDENCE THAT HAS BEEN MADE ART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD. THE COMMISSION WILL DELIBERATE AND ACT ON THAT PROPOSAL. COMMISSIONERS VOTES WILL BE BASED ON FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.

CASE LAW. THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE AND STRATEGIC PLAN AND INPUT AND DATA RECEIPT .

WE DO RECEIVE A GOOD AMOUNT OF CORRESPONDENCE.

WE INVITE THOSE CORRESPONDENCE AND WE DO READ EACH ONE OF THOSE. BEST PRACTICES AND PLANNING PRINCIPLES OFF-SITE AND ON-SITE IMPACTS THE OVERALL PUBLIC SAFETY HEALTH AND WELFARE. IN ZONING MATTERS, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL AUTHORITY AND WE ARE AN ADVISORY TO THE CITY COUNCIL. ANY ZONING MATTER ONCE ACTED ON BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION HERE TONIGHT WILL BE FORWARDED ONTO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION.

THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND, BY LEGISLATION, IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.E HAVE THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR THE SUBDIVISION.

HOWEVER, IT IS A VERY TECHNICAL PROCESS.

WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WHICH WE HAVE AND KEEP UPDATED AS NEEDS REQUIRE.

AND WHEN WE REVIEW A SUBDIVISION PLAT, WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT THAT SUBDIVISION PLAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE

[00:05:01]

SO IT IS PRIMARILY A TECHNICAL REVIEW.

AND WE HAVE AUTHORITY, PRIMARILY LIMITED, TO MAKE SURE THE SUBDIVISIONS MEET OR EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR

[CONSENT AGENDA]

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, THE ONLY COMMENTS I WOULD MAKE IS THE MINUTES YOU WOULD BE PROVING TONIGHT UNDER CONSENT WOULD BE THE ADVISEMENTS THAT WERE MAILED OUT TO YOU YESTERDAY.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. THERE WERE A FEW THINGS THAT MADE MINOR CHANGES IN THOSE MINUTES BUT YOU HAVE RECEIVED UPDATES YESTERDAY ? OVER TODAY. SO OUR CONSENT AGENDA INCLUDES -- OH, YOU WANT TO COVER THE ANNEXATIONS IN THE OTHER ITEMS? NO? YOU'VE GOT THEM BEFORE YOU.

THERE ARE THREE ITEMS, PLUS THE MINUTES OF THE (INDISCERNIBLE) MEETING JULY 11 AND THE REGULAR MEETING JULY 14.

DOES ANYONE WANT TO REMOVE ANY OF THOSE ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA SO THEY CAN BE FURTHER DISCUSSED?

IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION? >> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA INCLUDING THE MINUTES.

>> SECOND. >> THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND

[4. Preliminary plat – Christine P Chase & Betty P Rice PP-2022-017 ]

OUR NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS CHRISTINE CHASE AND BETTY RICE

SUBDIVISION, I BELIEVE. >> HELLO.

THIS IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR A FIVE LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE PLANNING JURISDICTION. IT IS LOCATED ON LEE ROAD 400.

IT IS CURRENTLY 33 ACRES TO BE DIVIDED INTO FIVE LOTS.

ALL OF THESE LOTS ARE FOUR ACRE OR:: ACRES OR MORE.

AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S QUITE FAR FROM CITY LIMITS (INDISCERNIBLE). BUT JUST WITHIN.

HERE ARE THE FIVE LOTS. WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION THERE ARE TWO EXISTING -- THEY WON'T BE IN THE SUBDIVISION, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE WAY THEY ARE NUMBERED.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.

THERE ARE FOUR CONDITIONS FROM LEE COUNTY ENGINEERING, TWO FROM OUR JS DEPARTMENT, ONE FROM OUR WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND 4 FROM PLANNING. THESE ARE NOTATIONAL AND JUST APPLY TO DIFFERENT NOTES OR ADDING DIFFERENT THINGS TO THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT. WE DID RECEIVE TO COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS. BOTH OF THEM ASKED IF THESE WERE SINGLE-FAMILY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

WE DO NOT HAVE THAT ANSWER. ALSO, WE DON'T HAVE THAT JURISDICTION EITHER. AND THERE WAS ONE REQUEST FROM ONE CITIZEN -- SHE LIVES ON THE WEST SIDE.

AND SHE JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW -- SHE WOULD JUST LIKE TO KEEP SOME OF THE TREE LINE THERE. THAT'S ALL SHE ASKED OF THE APPLICANT. SO I PROMISED I WOULD RELAY THAT TO HER. AND THAT IS IT FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO QUESTIONS OF STAFF RIGHT NOW? IF NOT, THEN THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT NOW. IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO ASK QUESTIONS OR MAKE ANY COMMENTS REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND SIGN IN.

NO ONE? WELL, THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING! IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AMONG THE STAFF? IS THERE ANYONE PREPARED FOR

MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PC CASE PP 2022-0 17 WITH ALL STAFF COMMENTS.>

[5. Final plat – Christine P Chase & Betty P Rice FP-2022-013]

SECOND. >> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR OFTHE MOTION, SAY AYE.

MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM .

>> THIS IS THE FINAL PLAT WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT WAS JUST APPROVED. THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. IT IS THE SAME AS A PRELIMINARY IN THE SAME CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL AS WELL.

>> THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND I MIGHT COMMENT FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT NOT BE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS. PLAN APPROVAL CONSISTS OF TWO STEPS. ONE IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS BROUGHT IN, EXAMINED AND APPROVED.

IF, HOWEVER BETWEEN THE TIME THE PLAN IS PRESENTED, THEY RUN IT AND GET INVOLVED IN DEVELOPING THE SUBDIVISION,

[00:10:06]

IN THIS CASE, THIS IS A VERY SIMPLE SUBDIVISION.THEREFORE, WE ARE GOING TO ENTERTAIN THE FINAL PLAT THE SAME NIGHT THAT WE APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY. SO THERE IS NO PUBLIC HEARING

[6. Annexation – The Stables AX-2022-012 ]

ISTHERE ANYONE PREPARED TO --? >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE FP 2020

2201 THREE FINAL PLAT. >> SECOND.

>> ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR THE MOTION, SAY AYE.

THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM .

(INDISCERNIBLE) WHO IS PRESENTING THAT.

>> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. THIS IS THE FIRST OF THREE REQUESTS ON YOUR AGENDA SO SIDE WITH THIS PROPERTY.

THE FIRST REQUEST IS THE ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 146.6 ACRES INTO THE CITY LIMITS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE FAR WEST SIDE OF TOWN, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 14, AND IN BETWEEN WIMBERLY ROAD AND LOIS TURK ROAD.

THE PROPERTY IS LARGELY UNDEVELOPED, BUT IT DOES HAVE AN EQUESTRIAN CENTER ON THE WEST SIDE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY LIMITS ON THE EAST. THE PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY LIMITS AND IS WITHIN THE OPTIMAL GROWTH BOUNDARY.

HEREFORE, IT SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR ANNEXATION. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

PROPERTY OWNERS ARE REPRESENTED BY TJ JOHNSON OF HOLLAND HOMES LLC, AND WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU

MIGHT HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. THERE'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS ANNEXATION. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS PROPOSAL? I --

>> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

ANY QUESTION OR DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR THAT MOTION, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSE, SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES.

[7. Rezoning – The Stables – PUBLIC HEARING RZ-2022-007 ]

>> THE SECOND REQUEST FOR THE STAPLES TONIGHT IS FOR PRE-ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 154.2 ACRES.

AND THEY ARE WISHING TO REZONE FROM RURAL TO LIMITED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. LOGAN DID A GOOD JOB EXPLAINING THEPROPERTIES . IT'S GOT AN EQUESTRIAN CENTER.

UP HERE, TO THE NORTH, A MOBILE HOME PARK.

THE AREA IS RURAL IN NATURE WITH MEDIUM TO LARGE SIZED LOTS STOP THE MAP SHOWING THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS AROUND THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST IS GOING TO BE WIMBERLY ESTATES.

TO THE NORTH, JUST SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 14, WIMBERLY STATION.

AND THEN, FURTHER TO THE WEST IS BROOKHAVEN FARMS. THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THIS PROPERTY IS RURAL, WHICH ALLOWS FOR ONE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT PER THREE ACRES. IN THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE TO ALL D, WHICH WOULD PERMIT FIVE DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THEY DO HAVE A PDD REQUEST FOLLOWING THIS THAT PROPOSES 385 LOTS THAT WOULD PUT THEM AT 2 AND A HALF UNITS PER ACRE. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE ANNEXATION -- OR, EXCUSE ME, THE REZONING REQUEST BASED ON THE CONFLICT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

IN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SURROUNDING USES AND EXISTING

CHARACTER OF THE AREA. >> OKAY.

>> ARE THERE NO CONDITIONS OF NOTE?

>> NOT ON THE REZONING. >> OKAY.

GOT IT. >> ANY MORE QUESTIONS OF AMBER? OKAY. THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. AND I SHALL OPEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING NOW. ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE COME FORWARD, SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME. I DON'T SEE ANYONE COMING FORWARD. ANYONE?OKAY, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION.

ANYBODY WISH TO DISCUSS? >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT

[00:15:03]

I UNDERSTANDING IS WHEN WE DO THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WE DO SOME KIND OF IMPACT STUDIES BASED ON WHAT WE ARE PLANNING TO REZONE, THOSE AREAS. SO I KNOW THOSE WOULD'VE BEEN DONE TO KEEP THAT AREA RURAL. HAS THERE BEEN ANY KIND OF IMPACT STUDY OR ANYTHING DONE TO SEE HOW IT WOULD AFFECT, YOU KNOW, WATER, SEWAGE, WATER, POLICE, ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO DO SUCH A MAJOR REZONING? I'M NOT SURE WHO TO ASK

(LAUGHING). >> KEN JOHNSON WITH WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. THE SITE ITSELF IS ACTUALLY WELL WEST OF OUR EXISTING SEWER SHEDS.

OUR PLANNING HAS NOT CONTEMPLATED THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS NATURE IN THIS AREA. SO IN ORDER -- IF THIS WERE TO MOVE FORWARD FOR ANY REASON, WE WOULD REQUIRE A LOT MORE DISCUSSION WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THE ENGINEER JUST TO ADDRESS ANY UTILITY SERVICE, PRIMARILY SANITARY AND SEWAGE TO THIS AREA.ND NOT ONLY THAT, LOOKING HOW IT WOULD IMPACT OUR SYSTEM AS A WHOLE . AND TO THAT END, IT WOULD LIKELY BE WORKING WITH THEM TO COME UP WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO ADDRESS ANY OF THOSE (INDISCERNIBLE) CONCERNS

(INDISCERNIBLE). >> OF WHAT I'M HEARING IS YOU HAVE NOT HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS AT THIS POINT?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> IS THIS AUBURN WATER WORKS? >> (INDISCERNIBLE).

>> AND HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN SINCE WE HAVE LOOKED AT OPTIMAL BOUNDARY? THERE WAS AN UPDATE. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING A MORE COMPLETE UPDATE THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

SO THAT INCLUDES AN UPDATE TO THE GROWTH MODEL, WHICH IS WHAT WAS USED ORIGINALLY TO DETERMINE OPTIMAL BOUNDARY IN THOSE AREAS THAT SHOULD BE DESIGNATED RURAL.

THAT'S ALL BASED ON POPULATION PROJECTIONS, SCHOOL CAPACITY, YOUR STATION CAPACITY, SEWER CAPACITY.

SO IT'S BEEN SOMETIME SINCE IT'S BEEN LOOKED AT HOLISTICALLY. THE LAST TIME THE GROWTH BOUNDARY ALONE WAS LOOKED AT WAS IN 2018.

>> OKAY. HOW CLOSE IS THIS TO THE

OPTIMAL BOUNDARY? >> WITHIN THE OPTIMAL BOUNDARY.

>> HOW CLOSE ARE WE PUSHING TO --?

>> THE OPTIMAL BOUNDARY EXTENDS ABOUT ONE MILE TO THE WEST.

>> OKAY. (INDISCERNIBLE).

RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON THE LAND USE.

>> THE FUTURE OWNER LAND USE.

>> I DON'T SO MUCH HAVE ISSUE WITH THE LAND USE PLAN AS A COMPLETE LACK OF WATER RESOURCES AND OUR INABILITY TO ACCOMMODATE A DEVELOPMENT OF THAT SIZE WITHOUT SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND AGREEMENTS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

IF IT'S NOWHERE IN THE SCOPE OF OUR PLAN FOR THE WATERWORKS BOARD, THEN I DON'T SEE HOW IT MAKES GOOD SENSE TO ALLOW THIS AT THIS TIME.FISCALLY SPEAKING, OR ANYTHING ELSE.

>> WELL, ONE OF MY QUESTIONS WOULD BE -- IF THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN THE PROCESS -- THAT IS NOT THERE.

I UNDERSTAND. BUT WHAT IF THEY WERE ABLE -- THE APPLICANT OR PERSON ? I WAS READY TO ENTERTAIN DOING THEIR OWN STUFF? SO THEN WE ARE JUST UP AGAINST

LAND USE? >> APPLICANT APPEARS TO BE HERE --.

SPEAKING OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE SANITARY AND SEWER. ONE OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED WITH WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IS REALLY A CONCERN OF WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY HAPPEN. THIS OPENS UPWHAT WE WOULD CALL A SEWER SHED . AND IF YOU REZONE THIS, THEN THE ANTICIPATION WOULD BE THAT IT WOULD OPEN UP OTHER REZONING'S. WE WANT TO LOOK AT THIS ENTIRE BASIN AND TO WHAT IT WOULD IMPACT IT WOULD BE.

NOT JUST THE SINGLE DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE WANT TO DO SOME WISE PLANNING AS WE WOULD NORMALLY DO AND HOW THIS WOULD COME INTO PLAY.

AND THAT WOULD AFFECT EVERYTHING.INDISCERNIBLE) WE HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO HAVE THOSE DELIBERATIONS.

THAT'S MONTHS AND MONTHS OF DISCUSSION STOP.

>> MR. CHAIR? I WAS LOOKING IN THE CODE

[00:20:01]

JUST FYI. >> SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR PUBLIC INTEREST. I FAILED TO GIVE THE APPLICANT, LIKE I INTENDED TO, AND OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS ANY OF THESE.YOU LIKE TO ANY OF THAT?

>> YES. GOOD EVENING.

CHRIS (NAME). MR. (NAME) HAD A GREAT POINT.

WE DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING STAFF HAS SAID ABOUT THE MAGNITUDE OF OUR REQUEST LIKE THIS.

AND IT WOULD OPEN UP A NEW WATERSHED FOR THE SEWER.

WE HAVE MET SEVERAL TIMES AND LOOKED AT SEWER.

WE'VE GOT CONCEPT FEASIBILITY STUDIES OUT FOR BOTH GRAVITY AND FORCE MAIN. I AGREE, IT'S A LONG WAY FROM BEING A COMPLETE DESIGN, BUT THESE THINGS HAPPEN IN STAGES ANYWAY, RIGHT? WE DON'T WANT TO GO INTO FULL DESIGN BEFORE WE EVEN ENTERTAIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE ABILITY TO DOSOMETHING LIKE THIS ON A SITE LIKE THIS .

ONE THING WE WILL SAY, YOU KNOW, WE PUT TOGETHER A PLAN OF 77 ACRE (INDISCERNIBLE) THAT WOULD BE COVENANT AND RESTRICTED FROM ANY DEVELOP ME FOREVER.

ON THE OTHER HALF OF THE SITE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING 385 HOMES, WHICH IS 2 AND A HALF UNITS PER ACRE.

WE DID NOT COME TO THAT NUMBER MAGICALLY.

THAT WAS APPROVED JUST NORTH OF THIS AT WIMBERLY STATION, WHICH IS SERVED BY AUBURN SEWER. WHEREAS THAT IS PUMPED TO A DIFFERENT WATERSHED. WE UNDERSTAND THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE WITH -- LIKE THIS. WE HAVE LOOKED AT TAKING SEWERS SOUTH INSTEAD. ANOTHER REASON WE FELT LIKE THIS MADE SENSE TO CONSIDER AT THIS TIME IS THE PROXIMITY TO THE OUTER LOOP. SO THAT WOULD TAKE THIS SIDE OF TOWN, FROM A VERY RURAL TO THE INTERSECTION OF TWO MAJOR ARTERIALS TO THE CITY OF AUBURN.

THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY TO THAT EFFECT IS A NEIGHBOR OF 385 HOMES IS SOMETHING THAT FOLKS WOULDN'T BE MOVING INTO NEXT YEAR. -- -- (INDISCERNIBLE).

SO WHEREAS THERE ARE SOME OBSTACLES TO OVERCOME, WE BELIEVE IT'S KIND OF TIME TO LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS SIDE OF TOWN WITH THE PROPOSED OUTER LOOP?T SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH THAT IT IS MENTIONED IN THE COMP PLAN AS A REASON WE WOULD LOOK K AT A COMP PLAN. THAT'S HOW WE KIND OF ARRIVED AT BOTH THE DENSITY AND THE LOCATION FOR THIS PROJECT.

SO WE ARE PROUD OF WHAT WE PUT TOGETHER.

WE UNDERSTAND THERE ARE A LOT OF HURDLES BETWEEN THAT AND MOVING FOLKS IN OUT THERE, BUT WE DO APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S CONSIDERATION. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO INTRODUCE SCOTT HANSEN, WHO IS ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WOULD LOVE

TO YOU ALL. >> WELL, I WISH YOU WOULD COME IN PUBLIC HEARING. BUT AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF -- (INDISCERNIBLE) YOU CAN COME FORWARD.

>> YES, SIR. THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

SCOTT HANSEN. I LIVE IN AUBURN.

MOST OF MY LIFE. THE CITY OF AUBURN BEGAN PLANNING FOR WHAT WE NOW KNOW AS (NAME) PARKWAY IN THE MID-50S. THE WESTERN SEGMENT WAS COMPLETED AROUND 1971. DRIVING SOUTH FROM NORTH COLLEGE ON THE NEW HIGHWAY, THE FIRST HINT OF CIVILIZATION WAS THE INTERSECTION OF WHAT IS NOW KNOWN AS NORTH DONAHUE.

BETWEEN THIS INTERSECTION AND LAKE MARTIN, THERE WAS LITTLE, OTHER THAN FARMS AND FORESTS. CAMDEN RIDGE MIGHT'VE BEEN AMONG THE EARLIEST DEVELOPMENT .

AT THE CORNER OF FARMVILLE ROAD AND NORTH DONAHUE.

TO ME, IT SEEMED LIKE WE WERE IN THE STICKS WHEN MY WIFE AND I MOVED IN OUT THERE IN 2000. I REMEMBER IN THE MID-80S DRIVING DOWN A DIRT ROAD, AND A PIG TRAIL TO A LOG CABIN OUT IN THE WOODS, TO PLAY MUSIC. I THINK I GOT MY 56 CHRYSLER STUCK IN A MUD HOLE TRYING TO GET OUT.

WE NOW KNOW THIS PATH AS RICHLAND ROAD STOP FROM (NAME) ROAD TO NORTH COLLEGE, THIS STRETCH OF (NAME) PARKWAY PROVIDES ACCESS TO (INDISCERNIBLE), AND INDUSTRIAL PARK, COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES AND SUBDIVISIONS.

WHILE SOUTH OF WIRE ROAD, AUBURN CULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND MEDICAL FACILITIES OPERATE SIDE-BY-SIDE.

FAST-FORWARD TO 2022, WITH AUBURN GROWING AT APPROXIMATELY 43 PERCENT FROM ONE CENSUS TO ANOTHER.

I'VE HEARD SOME SAY THAT WE APPEAR TO BE GROWING AT A SIMILAR RATE. DISCUSSIONS OF AN OUTER LOOP AROUND THE WEST SIDE OF AUBURN WERE REFERENCED IN THE 2030

[00:25:06]

SUBDIVISIONS LIKE WOODLAND PARK AND WIMBERLY STATION IN EXISTENCE FOR AT LEAST THE LAST 20 YEARS, BY MY MEMORY, LIE JUST TO THE NORTH OF US AND WEST OF THE PROPOSED OUTER LOOP. MANY HOMES ALONG LEE ROAD 57, ALSO SHOWN HERE IS WILLIE TURK ROAD, ARE ON ALREADY EXISTING QUARTER ACRE LOTS. IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR 100 YEARS. AS THE CROW FLIES, IT'S ABOUT 1 AND A HALF MILES FROM THE SILO DEVELOPMENT ON WIRE ROAD TO OUR FARM. A LOT OF THE ACREAGE DEVELOPED SINCE THE MID-90S IS ON LAND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ZONED R, JUST LIKE THE STABLES. AUBURN WILL CONTINUE TO GROW 20, 30, OR EVEN 40+ PERCENT. AND WE WILL NEED ROOM FOR THIS GROWTH. THE LOCATION OF THE STABLES IS WELL WITHIN THE OPTIMAL BOUNDARIES NOW SHOWN ON AUBURN PLAN DOCUMENTS. IT'S NEXT DOOR TO PROPERTY WITH SIMILAR OR HIGHER DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.LOOKING FORWARD A DRIVE DOWN THE OUTER LOOP WILL INCLUDE LAND USES WITH HOMES ON SMALL AND LARGE LOTS.

AGRICULTURAL LOTS. COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES, INDUSTRIAL PARKS, AND EASY ACCESS TO I 85, JUST LIKE (NAME) PARKWAY. WE ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL OF THE STABLES AS PART OF THE PLANNING THE GROWTH OF AUBURN.

THANKS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU, MR. HANSON.

>> I'D LIKE A MINUTE OR TWO. JEAN HANSEN.

>> OKAY. >> I'M JEAN HANSEN AND ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO COME BEFORE YOU TO SPEAK.

MY HUSBAND IS A 99-YEAR-OLD MAN AND HE WANTS TO THANK YOU, TOO, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. WE HAVE LOVED THIS PIECE OF LAND FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. MY HUSBAND IS A 1952 GRADUATE OF AUBURN -- WHAT WAS API AT ONE TIME.

AND WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LIVE HERE SINCE 1956.

AND HAVE OUR CHILDREN GROW UP HERE BECAUSE OF OUR LOVE FOR AUBURN. AND THE (NAME) FAMILY, THEY HAVE CLOSE TIES TO AUBURN. THE GRIMES FAMILY, AFTER THE GRADUATION FROM AUBURN UNIVERSITY, THEY MOVED AWAY STOP BUT WHEN IT WAS TIME TO COME BACK, THEY WANTED TO COME BACK TO AUBURN. WE OWNED THIS LAND JOINTLY WITH THEM, AND WE LOOK FOR WAYS THAT WE CAN SERVE THE COMMUNITY AND GIVE BACK TO A COMMUNITY THAT HAD BEEN SO GOOD TO US.

AND WE DECIDED WE SHOULD BUILD A BARN.

AND BOARD HORSES FOR OTHERS SO THEY CAN COME OUT AND ENJOY OUR LAND. WELL, IT QUICKLY GREW AND GREW AND GREW. WEHADFOR ANYMORE HORSES .

WE BUILT SHOW BARNS. WE HAD HORSE SHOWS.

OUR GOAL WAS TO KEEP SOME YOUNG GIRLS OUT OF THE MALL AND BARS AND GIVE THEM A PLACE TOHANG OUT , RATHER THAN STRAIGHT TO THESE OTHER PLACES THAT THEY COULD GO.

WE BROUGHT PEOPLE INTO THIS AREA FROM BIRMINGHAM,MONTGOMERY , TENNESSEE, SOUTH CAROLINA, MISSISSIPPI AND SOUTH CAROLINA.

AND WHILE THEY WERE HERE, THEY WERE BUYING GROCERIES.

I MEAN, THEY STAYED FOR WEEKS. ALL SUMMER LONG, WHEN THE CAMPUS WAS VIRTUALLY EMPTY, WE HAD PEOPLE COMING IN THIS COMMUNITY SPENDING THEIR MONEY. AND COMING TO OUR HORSE SHOWS THAT WOULD LAST BACK TO BACK TWO WEEKS IN A ROW STOP AND IT TOOK A LOT OF MANPOWER, BUT WE LOVED WATCHING THE CHILDREN PLAY. HANG OVER THE FENCE.

WALK THE TRAILS. SOME OF THEM WOULD GO FISH IN THE POND. I WATCH ONE LITTLE BOY ONE DAY, HE KEPT THROWING SAND UP IN THE AIR, WHILE HIS SISTER WAS TAKING WRITING LESSONS. THAT GAVE US A LOT OF JOY.

AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE CONSIDERATION.

AUBURN HAS A LOT OF GROWING PAINS.

AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT COME INTO

[00:30:01]

I KNOW WHEN THEY COME, THEY WANT TO FIND A PLACE TO LIVE.

MANY OF THEM LIKE TO LIVE A LITTLE FURTHER OUT.

OR MAYBE THEY WANT TO DRIVE TO MONTGOMERY OR TALLAHASSEE TO WORK? AND THEN, GO TO OUR SCHOOLS.

SO I ASK YOUR FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION OF THIS PROJECT.

I THINK IT'S VERY WORTHWHILE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU OKAY. I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM THE DEVELOPER, THE PROPOSERS ? WITH THE LANDOWNERS.

WE'VE HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO ONE SPOKE.

SO IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION WE NEED TO HAVE ON THIS PROPOSAL? I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION -- WHAT IS THE TIMETABLE? WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE OUTER LOOP. NORMALLY, OUTER LOOPS COME -- THERE WAS NO (INDISCERNIBLE). WHAT WAS THE TIMETABLE FOR THIS

OUTER LOOP? >> CURRENTLY WE DON'T HAVE A TIMETABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE OUTER LOOP.

WE ARE IN THE FINAL STAGES OF AN UPDATE TO THE FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND EVALUATING THE PROJECT ALIGNMENTS.

WE ARE WAITING ON L.TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL BUT THERE IS NO

FUNDING IN PLACE RIGHT NOW. >> WE ARE TALKING ABOUT YEARS?

>> YES, YEARS. MANY MORE YEARS.

>> OKAY. SO, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

>> I MAY BE OUTNUMBERED HERE, BUT I DON'T MIND BEING A YES FOR THIS, SO IT MAY PUSH US AS STAFF AND CITY TO LOOK AT THIS AREA (INDISCERNIBLE) THEN WE MAY HAVE EXPECTED.

I ALSO REALIZE WE ARE GROWING LEAPS AND BOUNDS.

>> IS THAT EMOTION? >> SURE!

>> BUT I MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROJECT.

>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR MOTION WAS! ALL RIGHT. A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THIS REZONING BE APPROVED.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? THE MOTION HAS DIED FROM A LACK OF SECOND.

>> I MOVED (INDISCERNIBLE) WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL RZ

2022 07. >> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO FORWARD TO COUNSEL WITH RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.

IS THERE A SECOND THAT MOTION? >> SECOND.

>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

ANYBODY WISH TO DISCUSS THE MOTION?

>> I THINK THE FACT THAT THIS IS GOING FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL WILL GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THAT DISCUSSION THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE ABOUT THIS.

I THINK THE INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES ARE REALLY THE KINDS OF DECISIONS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MAKING.

BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONES WITH THE POCKETBOOK TO MAKE IT.

AND SO, FOR THAT REASON, YOU KNOW I'M HAPPY TO SAY THE CITY COUNCIL I DON'T MIND THIS DEVELOPMENT.

BUT THAT'S JUST NOT REALLY WHAT I THINK IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY

AT THIS POINT IN TIME. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION? THEN I CALL FOR THE QUESTION, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL.

RECOMMEND DENIAL IS APPROVED. WHICH BRINGS US TO 1/3 ITEM ON

[8. Planned Development District – The Stables – PUBLIC HEARING RZ-2022-008 ]

>> I'M NOT SURE HOW THIS WOULD WORK WITHOUT THE LDD ZONING, BUT THEY HAVE ALSO REQUESTED TO APPLY THE LAND DEVELOP DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO 154 ACRES. SAME SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN WIMBERLY AND ELLIS KIRK RHODES.

HERE'S A FUTURE LAND USE. HE LOOKED AT THISLITTLE EARLIER. THE MAJORITY OF RURAL IN THE AREA . AND THEN , LIMITED RESIDENTIAL AND, MAY BE, MEDIA MASTER PLAN EXCUSE.

I'M SORRY. DOWN TO THE SOUTHEAST.

HERE'S THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

385 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, WHICH AMENITIES BEING THE LARGE POND ON THE SITE. IN THE EQUESTRIAN CENTER THAT THEY WOULD MAKE INTO A BANQUET HALL OF SORTS.

[00:35:05]

THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION BEING RURAL ONE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME FOR THREE ACRES, AND THE LDD WOULD PERMIT FIVE DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH IS A MAXIMUM OF 770 UNITS.

THAT'S ABOUT IT. Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU. >> THANKS.

>> THIS ALSO REQUIRES THE PUBLICHEARING .

IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY

REGARDING THIS (INDISCERNIBLE)? >> JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. WE UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY AS A DEVELOPER WE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF THAT (INDISCERNIBLE) INFRASTRUCTURE.

JUST MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD.

THERE IS NO EXPECTED BURDEN OF AUBURN FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE

(INDISCERNIBLE). >> THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND REFER TO THE BOARD AS TO HOW YOU WISH TO DISPENSE WITH THIS. IT WOULD SEEM THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO APPROVE IT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE REZONING.

BUT WE STILL HAVE TO SEND SOMETHING TO THE CITY COUNCIL,

SO WE NEED A MOTION. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY

RZ 2022-008. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY

[9. Annexation – Sonic Tools AX-2022-014]

OKAY. NEXT ITEM IS SONIC TOOLS.

>> MR. CHAIR? JUST FOR CLARITY, WAS THAT A

UNANIMOUS DECISION ? >> YES.

I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE. >> AND THESE WILL BE ADVERTISED FOR THE SEPTEMBER 20 CITY COUNCIL.

>> ALL RIGHT WHO'S GOING TO TELL US ABOUT SONIC TOOLS?

>> OKAY. THIS IS ANOTHER ANNEXATION REQUEST FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT HAS MULTIPLE REQUESTS ON THE AGENDA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE 2900 BLOCK RANGE OF (NAME) OR BEEHIVE ROAD.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE BEING REPRESENTED BY MATT COBB.

THE PROPERTY AS I MENTIONED IS LOCATED ON BEEHIVE ROAD.

IT IS TO THE WEST OF THE AUBURN TECHNOLOGY PARK WEST.

AND A LITTLE BIT TO THE EAST OF THE BRIGGS AND STRATTON FACILITY, AS WELL AS SOUTH OF THE NEW ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS TO THE SOUTH WITH CURRENT CITY LIMITS.

IT IS (INDISCERNIBLE) BOUNDARY, THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION REQUEST.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

IT 7.9 ACRES. IF THAT IS IMPORTANT.

PROBABLY! >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PETITIONER PRESENT? AND WHAT THEY LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE PROJECT?

>> I DO NOT SEE HIM. >> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THIS IS IN ANNEXATION.

THERE IS NO PUBLIC HEARING INVOLVED.WHAT DISCUSSION WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVEREGARDING THIS ? IS ANYONE PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> MY ONLY QUESTION WOULD BE IS IF THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN ASKED IF HE WAS INTERESTED IN SEEING THE ENTIRE PARCEL OF HIS PROPERTY? AND IF THERE IS A REASON, PERHAPS, WHY HE DOES NOT WANT TO DO THAT?

>> THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE.

HE CAN COME FORWARD TO THAT. >> (LAUGHING) SORRY.

I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU THOUGHT TO, PERHAPS, NX THE ENTIRE

PARCEL AS A -- >> MY NAME IS MATT COBB.

I APPRECIATE YOU HAVING ME HERE.

I WORKED ON BEHALF OF AU ALLIANCE.

AT THIS POINT, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY REASON OR OBLIGATION TO ANNEX EVERYTHING IN. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR A PARTICULAR USE AND A PARTICULAR PROJECT.

AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO JUST ANNEX THIS NINE ACRES IN AT

THIS POINT STOP. >> IS AT NINE ACRES SUFFICIENT FOR WHAT THEY NEED? I MEAN, THERE WON'T BE ANY BLEED OVER INTO THE PART THAT'S NOT BEING AN EXTEND FOR THEIR

BUSINESS? >> AS OF RIGHT NOW.

[00:40:01]

>> OH, THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

OR WANT TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

[10. Rezoning – Sonic Tools – PUBLIC HEARING RZ-2022-009 ]

-- -- WITH ALL COMMENTS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

ALL THEY WERE THE MOTION SAY AYE.

MOTION CARRIES. OKAY.

THE REZONING REQUEST REGARDING SONIC TOOLS.

>> GOOD EVENING. AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS REZONING REQUEST FOR THE SAME PROPERTY.

THEY ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE NINE ACRES FROM RURAL TO INDUSTRIAL. 7.9 ACRES OF THAT PROPERTY PENDING ANNEXATION, OF COURSE. THE PROPERTY IS ALONG BEEHIVE ROAD. THIS IS JUST A FURTHER ZOOMED OUT PHOTO OF THE AREA, SHOWING THE CITY LIMITS.

IT'S THE COLORED AREAS -- THE GRAIN AND THE PURPLE.

GREEN IS OBVIOUSLY RURAL, AND PURPLE IS INDUSTRIAL.

IT IS ADJACENT TO THE WEST OF THE WEST TECH PARK.

SIMILAR PROXIMITY TO TECH PARK WEST ANNEX.

THE BRIGGS AND STRATTON BUILDING -- THERE IS ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES OUT THIS WAY.

THE NJ ENTERPRISES IS OUT AT THE INTERSECTION OF BEEHIVE AND (NAME) ROAD. IN THE CITY'S NEW PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY ALONG WIRE ROAD. THE OVERALL PROPERTY IS JUST UNDER 45 ACRES. AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REZONE NINE OF THAT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE EXHIBIT SHOWING THE PROPERTY. THIS AREA HERE IS ALREADY IN THE CITY LIMITS. AND THIS IS THE AREA THAT LOGAN PRESENTED TO REZONE. ANNEX, I'M SORRY.

THE FUTURE LAND USE IN THIS AREA IS RURAL.

HOWEVER, OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, THE AREA HAS BEEN TRANSITIONING TO MORE INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS.

THE TECH PARK WAS CONSTRUCTED BACK IN 2007, I BELIEVE.

AND THE ANNEX WAS A FEW YEARS LATER, I THINK IN 2015.

BRIGGS AND STRATTON WAS DEVELOPED AND REZONED IN 2018 STOP AND THAT'S ALL THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OUT THAT WAY. KNOWING THAT THIS AREA IS TRANSITIONING TOWARDS INDUSTRIAL.

HOWEVER, THE FUTURE LAND USE IS RURAL.

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> CAN THIS PROJECT MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT THE ANNEXATION

IF IT REMAINS IN THE COUNTY? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> IS THIS BUSINESS CURRENTLY ALREADY IN THE CITY OF AUBURN?

>> YES. WAS GONNA TOUCH ON THAT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE.

BUT I CAN GO INTO THAT NOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE ?

>> NO, IT CAN WAIT. THANK YOU.> MM-HMM.

>> OKAY, DOES THE PETITIONER HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD REGARDING TO THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF HIS PROJECT?

>> NO, SIR, UNLESS THERE IS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. I SHALL OPEN AT THIS TIME.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL? IF NOT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS?IF NOT, IS THERE ANYONE PREPARED TO MAKE A

MOTION? >> I WILL MOVE TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF

THE REZONING OF RX 2022 009. >> SECOND.

>> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

I WOULD LIKE A ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

[00:45:14]

>> OKAY. THE MOTION HAS BEEN APPROVED TO

[11. Conditional Use – Sonic Tools – PUBLIC HEARING CU-2022-036 ]

OKAY THE NEXT ITEM IS A CONDITIONAL USE FOR SONIC

TOOLS. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

THIS IS CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USE. SPECIFICALLY A DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE FACILITY. THERE ARE REQUESTING TO CONSTRUCT A 130,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING.

ON THE PROPERTY WE JUST MENTIONED.

IT WOULD BE ON NINE ACRES. THEY WILL ACCESS OFF OF BEEHIVE ROAD. THE FACILITY IS HERE.

THE EXISTING BUSINESS HAS BEEN IN AUBURN, I BELIEVE, SINCE 2015. THEY ARE EXPERIENCING SIGNIFICANT GROWTH AND HAVE OUTGROWN THEIR CURRENT FACILITY ON NORTH (NAME) ROAD. AND INSTEAD OF OPENING UP A SECOND LOCATION, THEY ARE CHOOSING TO CONSTRUCT A BRAND-NEW FACILITY. AND ALL OF THEIR PRODUCT WOULD BE HOUSED UNDER ONE ROOF. AND THAT IS THERE REASON FOR CONSIDERING THIS NEW LOCATION. AS WITH THE PREVIOUS CASE, WE DO RECOMMEND DENIAL. HOWEVER, WE DO UNDERSTAND IS THIS AREA IS TRANSITIONING TOWARDS INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY.

>> OKAY. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF KATIE? WITH THE PETITIONER HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD REGARDING YOUR CONDITIONAL USE?

>> YES HER. I KNOW CONDITIONAL USE IS BASED ON THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AND TOTAL BUILDOUT.

I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW ONE OF THE FUTURE, HOPEFULLY, TENANTS OF THIS PROPERTY IS HERE WITH ME.

THERE 130,000 SQUARE FEET IS A 10 YEAR DEVELOPMENT PHASING.

SO THEIR ORIGINAL -- FIRST PHASE OF THIS -- THEY ARE STILL GOING THROUGH DUE DILIGENCE RIGHT NOW IS APPROXIMATELY 50,000 SQUARE FEET. SO 50,000 SQUARE FEET GETS THEM TO THE THREE TO FIVE YEAR AS HER GROWTH IS ON.

EVEN THE 130,000 SQUARE FEET ARE SHOWN, THAT IS FOR CONDITIONAL USE OF THE ENTIRE DEVELOPED PROJECT.

BUT THAT IS A 10 YEAR PLAN FOR THEM.

SO WE WANTED TO COME IN SHOWING YOU THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROJECT OVER THE FULL PHASING. AT THIS POINT, WHEN PLANS COME THROUGH, DRT IS GONNA BE A 50,000 SQUARE FEET WITH THREE TRUCKS A WEEK. SO THEY ARE DISTRIBUTION AND WAREHOUSE, BUT THERE IS NOT A LOT OF MOVEMENT IS WHAT I WANT TO GET TO. SO THERE IS 130,000 THERE, BUT THAT IS LONG-TERM OBJECTIVE FOR THE POTENTIAL CLIENT HERE.

SO UPFRONT, WE'RE LOOKING AT 50, MAYBE AN EXPANSION IN THREE TO FIVE YEARS MAY BE ANOTHER 30.

AND UP TO 130 IF IT GETS TO THAT POINT.

BUT BEING HERE IN FRONT OF YOU, PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL, HOPEFULLY, THE TOTAL BUILDOUT IS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT PROJECTING FOR THEIR COMPANY AS A HUB HERE IN AUBURN. ONCE HE GETS PAST THAT POINT, THEY WOULD BE (INDISCERNIBLE) TO HOST OTHER PLACES.

I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS NOT GOING OUT THERE AND CLEARING FOR 130,000 SQUARE FEET OF (INDISCERNIBLE). THE FIRST PHASE WILL BE AROUND 50,000. AND WE WILL BE WORKING WITH LEE COUNTY FOR ANYTHING WE NEED TO BE WORKING WITH (INDISCERNIBLE), TRAFFIC AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

>> ARE STRICTLY DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE?

NO MANUFACTURING? >> NO MANUFACTURING.

EVERYTHING COMES FROM OVERSEAS AND DISTRIBUTED HERE.

LIKE I SAID, THEY ARE LOOKING AT THREE TRUCKS A WEEK.

THEIR PROJECTION IN THE FIRST THREE TO FIVE YEARS IS 90 TRUCKS PER YEAR. TRAFFIC IS VERY MINIMAL WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE IS A LOT OF VEHICLES AND A LOT OF TRUCKS. BUT THEY ARE PROJECTING 90 TRUCKS IN AN ENTIRE YEAR. THE WAY THE COMPANY WORKS.

>> WHAT SIZE IS THE BUILDING THEY ARE IN NOW?

>> CURRENTLY TWO BUILDINGS. ONCE 15,001 IS 30,000.

>> A NORTH DEAN IS WHAT? >> (INDISCERNIBLE) (AWAY FROM

MICROPHONE). >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> THERE JUST MOVING THAT FACILITY INTO ONE FACILITY WHICH EQUALS THE 50,000.

THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO GET LOGISTICS, RIGHT?

>> THANK YOU. >> IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE

QUESTIONS --. >> I'VE A QUESTION FOR STAFF

[00:50:02]

>> THAT IS CORRECT. THIS IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR LARGER PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS.

>> MM-HMM. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.

>> AND JUST TO CLARIFY THE REASON SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD NOT GO INTO THE (INDISCERNIBLE) IS THIS IS JUST DISTRIBUTION. (INDISCERNIBLE) TECH PARK THEY PROVIDE MANY MORE SERVICES IN THIS BUSINESS WOULD REQUIRE.

>> YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES IN OUR

TECH PARKS. >> WE DO NOT.

>> IS NOT A USE ALLOWED BY THE INDUSTRIAL BOARD.

>> I JUST WANTED TO ASKED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR.

>> OKAY. I THINK WE NEED A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ONE AS WELL. I'LL OPEN AT PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO ADDRESS THE CONDITIONAL USE OF 130,000 SQUARE-FOOT WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY AT THE SITE? THERE'S NO ONE, SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE. SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE AND SECONDED TO APPROVE.

ALL IN FAVOR THE MOTION SAY AYE.

ALL OPPOSED, SAY NO. SO THE PROPOSAL IS APPROVED.

OKAY. >> HELLO.

[13. Conditional Use – Session – PUBLIC HEARING CU-2022-035]

RIGHT ALONG THERE. IT IS IN THE URBAN CORE AND COLLEGE EDGE OVERLAY DISTRICT, WHICH IS THE SURROUNDING AREA IS PRIMARILY THE SAME STOP THE BUILDING IS MULTI USE, MULTI-TENANT BUILDING. THE SESSION, IT WOULD BE A BAR THAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED AS A MORE REFINED, MORE SOPHISTICATED EXPERIENCE WHERE WHEN YOU WALK IN THE DOOR, YOU WOULD BE SEATED. ONCE EVERYONE IS SEATED AND ALL THE SEATS ARE FILLED, THAT WOULD BE THEIR CAPACITY.O YOU WOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLE STANDING BEHIND YOU.

THIS WOULD BE A SECOND LOCATION, WITH THE FIRST IN TUSCALOOSA.HE APPLICANT AND OWNER IS VERY EXCITED TO COME HERE. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH NO CONDITIONS FOR THIS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF ME?

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PETITIONER IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO COME FORWARD AND ADDRESS US? OKAY, THERE IS NOT.

THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST, THEREFORE, A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLICHEARING .

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES TO THIS ISSUE? SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS?IS

YOUR MOTION TO BE MADE? >> I MOVED TO APPROVE -- --.

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND MULTIPLY SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR THE MOTION SAY AYE. OKAY!

[14. Waivers – Auburn AC Marriott Hotel – PUBLIC HEARING WZ-2022-006 ]

>> TO THE NEXT-TO-LAST IS A REQUEST FOR THREE WAIVERS TO OUR DEVELOPMENT AND (INDISCERNIBLE) THIS WOULD BE FOR THE AUBURN SESE MARRIOTT HOTEL LOCATED AT 100 NORTH GAY STREET. AND THEY ARE REQUESTING WAIVERS TO (INDISCERNIBLE) REQUIREMENTS, CLADDING MATERIALS, AND TO ADJUST THE MOM STORY HEIGHT FROM NINE GROUND FLOORS. THE PROJECT IS A 129 ROOM HOTE . IT WILL HAVE A ROOFTOP RESTAURANT AS WELL AS A LOUNGE. IT'S LOCATED JUST TO THE NORTH OF THE NEW AUBURNBANK BUILDING , ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE GAY STREET SERVICE PARKING, AND TO THE WEST OF THE NEW CITY OF AUBURN PARKING DECK. HERE'S A MAP WITH SURROUNDING

[00:55:02]

THE REQUESTED WAIVERS HERE ARE GOING TO BE TO THE FENESTRATION. PRETTY MINOR.

THE FIRST FLOOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE 50 PERCENT OF FENESTRATION, AND THERE REQUESTING TO REDUCE THAT TO 45 PERCENT. THE SECOND FLOOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE 30 PERCENT, AND THEY ARE REQUESTING TO REDUCE THAT TO 25.4 PERCENT. THERE ALSO ASKING TO BE ALLOWED TO USE (INDISCERNIBLE) PANELS BETWEEN THE FLOORS OF THE UPPER FLOORS. THAT IS NOT A PERMITTED CLADDING MATERIAL IN THE URBAN CORE.

THE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED STUCCO, BUT THE DRC DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PREFERRED THE USE OF THIS.

THERE ALSO ASKING FOR ALUMINUM PANELS UP ON THE ROOFTOP RESTAURANT, AND DOWN ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT, ON THE RIGHT CANOPY THERE. THE STORY HEIGHT FOR FLOORS THROUGH FOUR AND FLOOR SIX OF THE HOTEL, THE REQUIRED MINIMUM STORY HEIGHT FOR UPPER FLOORS IS 10 AND A HALF FEET AND THERE REQUESTING TO REDUCETHAT TO 10 FEET , IN ORDER TO PROVIDE MORE SPACE FOR THE ROOFTOP RESTAURANT.

THE WEST ELEVATIONS, (INDISCERNIBLE) PANELS ARE REQUESTED BETWEEN THE FLOORS. THE FENESTRATION ON THE SECOND FLOOR, THERE REQUESTING TO REDUCE FROM 30 PERCENT TO 25 PERCENT. AND THE DRC MET TWICE TO REVIEW THESE PLANS. AND ON THE APPLICANT'S THIRD SUBMITTAL OF THE PLANTS, ACCEPTED THOSE UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPROVED PLANS WOULD INCLUDE THE WAIVERS. SO WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THESE TO ACHIEVE THE BUILDING DESIGN THAT THE DRC ACCEPTED.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> IS THERE ANYONE REPRESENTING THE HOTEL THAT WISHES TO

ADDRESSTHIS COME FORWARD. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M SCOTT ALLEN, I'M THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT.

WE JUST WANT TO SAY IT'S BEEN A GREAT PROCESS WITH THE DRC.

WE UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE.

THIS BUILDING, WHILE THE RENDERINGS, THE BRICK IS PRETTY RED, THE INTENT ALSO IS THE BRICK WILL MATCH THE (INDISCERNIBLE) BUILDING JUST TO THE SOUTH .

AND THE METAL PANELS REFERENCE, THE (INDISCERNIBLE) WILL ALSO MATCH THE AUBURN BANK BUILDING. IN THE WINDOW SYSTEMS. WE UNDERSTAND THESE ARE TWO RATHER LARGE STRUCTURES RIGHT THERE. AND WE WANT THOSE BUILDINGS TO BE FRIENDS. AND WE APPRECIATE BEING HERE THIS EVENING. I ALSO HAVE MARK ROBBINS WITH RIMC RE: FOR THE REPRESENTATION OF OWNERSHIP.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

OKAY WILL STOP DOING NORMALLY HAVE PUBLIC HEARING (INDISCERNIBLE)? I DON'T MIND HAVING ONE.

WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES OF WAIVERS THAT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED? I SEE NO ONE, SO I WILL CLOSE AT PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE ANY DISCUSSION -- ANYBODY WANT TO DISCUSS OR ASK ANY MORE

QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS? >> I'LL SAY THAT I'M VERY PLEASED TO SEE -- MARRIOTT GOING THROUGH THE D DRC AND WORKING WITH THEM. THAT'S VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

IT IS A BIG PROJECT AND IT IS IN A PROMINENT LOCATION.

IT'S A LOVELY HOTEL (INDISCERNIBLE) SO I THINK IT'LL BE A NICE ADDITION TO THE CITY.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, IF THERE'S NO MORE COMMENTS, I

WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO TO MAKE IT NEAT, TIDY, LET'S HAVE THREE DIFFERENT MOTIONS.

APPROVE THE FENESTRATION. AND THEN, THE WAIVER FOR THE CLADDING. AND THEN THE STORY HEIGHT.

>> I'LL START WORTH THE FIRST ONE WAS UP.

>> I'LL SECOND IT. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED (INDISCERNIBLE). ALL IN FAVOR, STATE AYE.

ANYONE OPPOSED, SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES.

NOW THE WAIVER FOR THE CLADDING MATERIALS.

[01:00:01]

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE WAIVER NUMBER TWO

20. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE, SAY NO.

IN THE THIRD WAIVER REGARDING THE MINIMUM STORY HEIGHT.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WAIVER NUMBER THREE,

2022- 006.> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> YES. >> ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE, SAY NO.

THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY ON ALL THREE.

[15. Waiver – Long Subdivision – PUBLIC HEARING WZ-2022-007 ]

OKAY. >> NEXT UP IS A WAIVER TO OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, FOR (INDISCERNIBLE) TO ALLOW LESS THAN 500 FEET TO A NONADJACENT FLAG LOTS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS 10812 ALABAMA HIGHWAY 51, WHICH IS OUTSIDE THE OPTIMAL BOUNDARY. IT'S PRETTY FAR SOUTHWEST FROM THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS, 2.8 MILES.

IT IS JUST WITHIN OUR PLAN JURISDICTION -- .2 MILES FURTHER TO THE EAST AND WE WOULD NOT BE REVIEWING THIS SUBDIVISION. THAT'S CHAPEL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, UP TO THE NORTHWEST.

HERE'S A PLAT MAP SHOWING THE DISTANCE OF THESUBDIVISION FROM THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS . AND HERE IS THE SUBDIVISION PLAT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO SUBDIVIDE TO EXISTING LOTS TO THREE.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY SIX ACRES.LIKE I MENTIONED, THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW LESS THAN 500 FEET BETWEEN NON-ADJACENT FLAG LOTS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET.

THE TOTAL DISTANCE -- OR THE FRONTAGE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 218 FEET. THE PROPOSED DISTANCE BETWEEN THOSE FLAG LOTS IS 155 FEET. L. IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS SECTION OF HIGHWAY 51. THEY HAVE GRANTED PERMISSION FOR THE ACCESS POINTS AS PROPOSED.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL JUST BASED ON APPLICATION OF THE REGULATIONS, BUT WE DON'T FEEL THAT THERE WOULD BE ANY HARM TO THE CITY BY APPROVING THE REQUEST.

>> THANK YOU, AMBER. >> X.

>> IS THERE ANYONE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO WISHES

TO COMMENT? >> IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME! I'M JIM MILLER. IT'S BEEN 1983 SINCE LAST TIME I CAME BEFORE THIS COUNCIL! I JUST GOT OUT OF AUBURN.

PROBLEM IS THIS WAS DONE OVER 50 YEARS AGO, AND NOBODY THOUGHT ABOUT AUBURN BACK THAT FAR OUT.

I POLITELY REQUEST THAT WE DO THIS BECAUSE AS THE ONLY PRACTICAL WAY I CAN SEE -- THE OWNER OF THE BIG PIECE HERE THAT HAS EXISTING SHOP ON IT? IT'S HIS BROTHER.

AND HE JUST WANTS TO PUT A HOUSE BACK THERE -- IS GOING THROUGH A DIVORCE THAT MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE! [LAUGHTER] ANYWAY, HE'S A TRUCK DRIVER.

THEY'RE JUST GONNA PUT A TRAILER BACK THERE FOR THEM TO LIVE IN WHEN HE'S HOME FROM THE ROAD.

SO THAT'S THE REASON BEHIND IT. I JUST REQUEST YOU ALLOW US THIS THING. BECAUSE MY NEWER LOTS WILL HAVE A LOT MORE ROOM IN FRONT! THAT'S THE ONLY THING.

THIS IS AN OF ANY THOUGHT. THAT'S THE ONLY PRACTICAL WAY TO DO IT. I LIKE TO HAVE COME DOWN THE SOUTH SIDE DID A DOUBLE ONE. BUT IF YOU'D SEE THE DIMENSION BETWEEN THE HOUSE, THAT'S JUST NOT PRACTICAL OR I WOULD'VE MADE A DOUBLE LIKE I NORMALLY WOULD HAVE.

I'LL PROBABLY HAVE ONE HERE IN A FEW WEEKS THAT HAS ONE, BUT (INDISCERNIBLE). THERE IS NO PRACTICAL WAY TO DO IT. THE STATE IS HAPPY BECAUSE WE ARE ADDING ANY ADDITIONAL -- WERE ALL GONNA USE THE SAME -- BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY A SWAMP IN FRONT OF THE THING.

SO WE ARE ALL USING THE SAME DRAINAGE AND EVERYTHING INTO THAT PROJECT. SO WE AREN'T ADDING ANY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC TO IT.HANK YOU!

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING ALSO. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO ADDRESS HIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL?NOT BEING ANYONE, WE WILL CLOSE AT PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY DISCUSSION AMONGST STAFF QUESTIONS OF THE BOARD?

[01:05:01]

>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE -- I MOVED TO APPROVE 2022 007.

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO APPROVE THE WAIVER REQUEST AND SUBDIVISION.

ALL IN FAVOR THAT MOTION, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES.

AND I BELIEVE THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

[CHAIRMAN’S COMMUNICATION]

I SEE YOU'VE ALREADY GOT THE SLIDES.

SO WE CAN SLEEP DURING THE PRESENTATION!

[LAUGHTER] >> THOSE ARE FOR YOU TO TAKE

[STAFF COMMUNICATION]

[LAUGHTER] >> I APPRECIATE YOU SETTING THAT UP. ANY STAFF COMMUNICATIONS?

>> YES SIR JUST TWO ITEMS. JUST REMINDER.

NEXT MONTH IN SEPTEMBER THE PACKET MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAY ON MONDAY.

BE AWARE OF THAT ON THE SIXTH. IN ABOUT THE TRAINING.

(INDISCERNIBLE) I THINK TH

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.