Feb 09, 2023 Planning Commission

[00:00:01]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

I'D LIKE TO WELCOME YOU AND CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER FOR THE FEBRUARY 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION.

[ROLL CALL ]

WARREN MCCORD, BOB WRITTEN, BOB HERE.

WENDY BIRMINGHAM HERE.

DAVID WISDOM HERE.

JOSEPH ASTRUP HERE.

PHIL CHANCELLOR HERE.

THANK YOU. NOW I'D LIKE TO SEND IT OVER TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR COMMENT.

GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

IT'S QUITE UNUSUAL FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO BE SITTING IN THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S SEAT AND IT'S NOT A SEAT I WANTED TO BE SITTING IN THIS EVENING.

I'M JOINING YOU. DUE TO THE UNEXPECTED DEATH OF OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR, STEVE FOOTE.

HE PASSED AWAY MONDAY AFTER A MEDICAL EMERGENCY.

JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT STEVE.

HE JOINED OUR TEAM IN 2021, SO HE'S BEEN WITH US ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF.

AFTER MORE THAN 30 YEARS IN MUNICIPAL PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AS ALL OF YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED, STEVE WAS A TALENTED AND KNOWLEDGEABLE PROFESSIONAL WITH A RARE DEPTH OF EXPERIENCE. HE SPENT HIS CAREER PURSUING PLANNING PRACTICES WITH THE DESIRE TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITIES IN WHICH HE SERVED.

HE MADE AN IMPACT FOR THE BETTER HERE IN AUBURN, NOT ONLY THROUGH HIS WORK, BUT THROUGH HIS KINDNESS AND STRENGTH OF CHARACTER.

THE CITY OF AUBURN EXTENDS ITS SINCERE CONDOLENCES TO HIS WIFE, JANE, AND HIS SONS, TIMOTHY AND DANIEL.

I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE IN STEVE'S HONOR.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

WELL. GO AHEAD TO BUSINESS.

BEFORE WE START, I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS OF PUBLIC MEETING OF THE AUBURN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION WILL BE PRESENTED WITH AGENDA ITEMS BY THE CITY PLANNING STAFF.

THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR EACH AGENDA ITEM WILL THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS OR ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.

I WILL THEN OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING AS APPROPRIATE AS ALL ITEMS DO NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THIS WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE AGENDA ITEM AT HAND.

WE WANT EVERYONE TO BE HEARD, AND I ASK THAT YOU KEEP YOUR TIME OF TALKING TO 5 MINUTES AND PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS RELEVANT TO THE CASE AT HAND.

AFTER EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THE REPRESENTATIVE AND STAFF WILL THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY ONCE AGAIN TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND RESPOND TO ISSUES BROUGHT IT UP BY THE PUBLIC.

I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE MOTIONS, DISCUSSION AND VOTE.

THE COMMISSION WILL VOTE BASED ON STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.

CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2030 AND THE GENERAL GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY.

HAVING SUMMARIZED THE BASICS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING AND VOTING PROCESS, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SUMMARIZE OUR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY RELATED TO THE APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION PLATS BY ALABAMA STATUTE.

A MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION SUCH AS OURS IS THE FINAL APPROVAL BODY FOR SUBDIVISION PLANS.

WITH REGARDS TO SUBDIVISION PLATS.

THE COMMISSION ACTS AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND IS BOUND BY THE LIMITATIONS CONTAINED IN STATE LAWS, CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BY THIS COMMISSION. WHILE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE REQUIRED ON MOST PLATS, WE WELCOME ANY AND ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS CONCERNING THESE.

BUT PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO CONFIRM THAT THE PLAN MEETS OR EXCEEDS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CODIFIED IN LAWS AND REGULATIONS PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED.

I ASK IF YOU INTEND TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

PLEASE KEEP YOUR. COMMENTS TO 5 MINUTES.

SIGN IN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A POINT FOR THE PUBLIC IN ATTENDANCE.

AS YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF SUBDIVISION DECISIONS.

ALL OTHER DECISIONS WILL BE MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO OPEN CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS.

THIS IS ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA.

SEE NO ONE. I WILL CLOSE CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS.

[CONSENT AGENDA ]

YES, YOU DO. SO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING OR APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE JANUARY 9TH PACKET MEETING AND FOR THE JANUARY 11TH REGULAR MEETING, AS WELL AS A FINAL PLAT FOR WEST PACE VILLAGE.

COMMISSIONERS. IT'S AN AGENDA AS YOU SEE FIT.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED OR IF YOU'RE GOOD WITH IT, CAN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH MOTION TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

HI. THANK YOU.

[2. Subdivision Interlocal Agreement MS-2023-003 ]

MR. ROBINSON, YOU HAVE THE FIRST ITEM.

GOOD EVENING. THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL THAT AMENDS THE EXISTING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE LAKE COUNTY

[00:05:04]

THE STAFF REPORT REFERS TO THE REVISIONS BEING PRIMARILY SEMANTICAL.

THE MAIN CHANGE WAS THE ADDITION OF A TERMINATION CLAUSE FOR LEE COUNTY.

THERE WAS ONE IN THERE FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN TO TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT IF NEEDED, AND LAKE COUNTY FELT APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE ONE AS WELL.

AND THAT IS REALLY THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE.

OF COURSE, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO STATE COUNCIL.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO HELP OUT.

THANK YOU. THIS ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO, COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? I MOVE TO APPROVE MNS 2020 3003.

SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. I THANK YOU, MR.

[Items 3 & 4 ]

THE NEXT TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA THE ROCK HOUSE FARMS ITEMS, THE ANNEXATION AND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO POSTPONE THOSE TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO A DATE CERTAIN, WHICH WOULD BE MARCH 16TH.

SO YOU GUYS WILL NEED TO VOTE SEPARATELY TO POSTPONE THINGS.

SO WE'LL VOTE ON THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS THE ANNEXATION.

THAT PER REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO BE POSTPONED TO A DATE CERTAIN OF MARCH 16TH.

MOVE TO POSTPONE TO DATE CERTAIN MARCH 16 SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT.

ANY POST SECOND AGENDA ITEM FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT IS PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THEY HAVE REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 16TH.

NOW I HAVE A MOTION SO MOVED.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? I OPPOSED.

CHAIRMAN REESE, I WILL RECUSE MYSELF FOR THE NEXT.

K. THANK YOU.

[5. Preliminary Plat – 801 Ogletree (Kent Property) – PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-003 ]

GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLOT APPROVAL OF A 15 LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 801 OGLETREE ROAD.

THE PROPERTY CONTAINS APPROXIMATELY 34.7 ACRES AND WAS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR TWO REZONING REQUESTS, WHICH YOU HEARD AT YOUR JANUARY MEETING.

THOSE REZONING REQUEST OR TO RECOMMEND TO COUNSEL OR REZONING OF THE PROPERTY FROM RURAL TO RD, AND TO APPLY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO THE PROPERTY WHICH YOU RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.

THE CITY COUNCIL ARE SCHEDULED TO HEAR THOSE REZONING REQUESTS AT THEIR FEBRUARY 21ST MEETING.

HERE IS THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT.

IT INCLUDES 15 CONVENTIONAL LOTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOME SITES AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHICH YOU SAW IN JANUARY. THEY DID MAKE ONE MODIFICATION TO THE PROPOSAL, WHICH INCLUDES REMOVING THE OUTLAW THAT WAS AT THE END AND THAT HAS NOW BEEN INCORPORATED INTO 12.

THEREFORE, ALL LOTS ARE AT LEAST 12 TWO ACRES IN SIZE.

THE PRELIMINARY PLAT MEETS THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS, THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

I'LL JUST POINT OUT AND YOUR STAFF REPORT CONDITION NUMBER ONE IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

SO IF YOU SEE FIT TO REMOVE THAT REQUIREMENT, JUST LET THAT BE KNOWN.

AND THEN ALSO ANY APPROVAL OF THE PLOT WOULD BE CONDITIONED ON THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY.

THE PLAT, AS IT'S PRESENTED HERE, WOULD NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT BEING RESUMED.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. SO THERE'S AN APPLICANT IN.

HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE'LL OPEN THAT NOW AT THIS TIME.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND PLEASE SPEAK.

GOOD EVENING. I'M YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

I'M SORRY. DENNIS EVANS 2031 WIND WAY ROAD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AS I SAID, I'M DENNIS EVANS, AND MY WIFE AND I RESIDE AT 2031 WIND WAY ROAD.

ARE A LOT AT THE VERY BACK ADJOINED THE KENT PROPERTY IN THAT FAR NORTHWEST CORNER IN THAT AREA OF THE PARCEL THAT THAT IS SPLIT BY THE CREEK.

[00:10:06]

WE'RE CONCERNED. MY WIFE AND I ARE CONCERNED ABOUT FLOODING GENERALLY AND STORM DAMAGE IN PARTICULAR FROM THE DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT IS UPSTREAM.

OUR HOME IS NOW IN NO SMALL PART, SITS IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND WE WANT ASSURANCES THAT OUR LOT WILL NOT HAVE ADVERSE EFFECTS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE KENT PARCEL.

I WOULD NOTE HERE THAT OUR LOT IS NEXT DOOR TO THE NOW ABANDONED LOT AT 2041 WIND WAY ROAD, WHICH PREVIOUSLY HAD A RESIDENCE ON IT AND IN 2000 WAS FLOODED AND SUBSEQUENTLY CONDEMNED AND BULLDOZED DOWN.

MY WIFE AND I OBVIOUSLY DON'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN TO OUR HOME.

I'M VERY INTERESTED IN LEARNING WHAT THE DEVELOPER ACTUALLY PLANS TO DO ABOUT STORM DAMAGE MITIGATION ON THE PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY ON THAT BACK LOTS WHICH BACK UP TO AND IN ONE CASE NOW CROSSES THE CREEK.

I'M VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN LEARNING TO IN DUE TIME WHAT CITY ENGINEERING WILL ULTIMATELY REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO LIMIT ADDITIONAL FLOODING DOWNSTREAM. I'D NOTE HERE THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, IN MY VIEW, D EMPHASIZES WHAT I CALL THE GULLY, WHICH IS FULLY SEVEN FEET DEEP AT POINTS AND GOES ACROSS THE PROPERTY.

BUT THE PLANT IS NOTED.

IT IS NOTED BY AN INCONSPICUOUS DOTTED LINE AND DASHES CONFIGURATION.

THAT GULLY WILL OF COURSE BE A MAJOR HURDLE FOR ANY DRIVEWAYS THAT CROSS IT.

NOT TO MENTION AND CONSTRUCTION AND NOT TO MENTION THE INACCESSIBILITY OF HOMES IN A SEVERE STORM SITUATION.

AND MY WIFE AND I HAVE BEEN IN A SEVERE STORM SITUATION.

WE WERE THAT WE WERE WITHOUT ACCESS TO OUR HOUSE FOR FOUR MONTHS ACTUALLY BACK IN 92, 80, 82 DUE TO THE BRIDGE.

IRONICALLY, THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CLEARLY SHOWS THE GULLY IN ITS FULL MEASURE.

THE CREEK ITSELF, OF COURSE, HAS ITS OWN CHALLENGE, AS YOU WELL KNOW.

ON THE WETLAND HABITAT.

ESPECIAL 12, AS IT IS NOTED IN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS A SORT OF TROUGH IF YOU HAVE TO STUDY THAT THAT.

SEE IT. BUT IT'S NOT NOTED AT ALL IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND I AND I'M SURE OTHERS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT WETLAND AND AND DEVELOPMENT AROUND IT.

JUST WANT TO REITERATE, REITERATE THAT CONCERN AS WE'RE INTERESTED IN THE PROTECTION OF THAT WILDLIFE, THAT WILDLIFE HABITAT.

HAVING TO DO WITH THE SETBACKS NOW, IT HAS BEEN NOTED WITHIN THIS BODY THAT THE PROPERTY IS UNDER DEED RESTRICTIONS FROM COVENANTS FILED YEARS AGO AND STILL ENFORCE. I RECOGNIZED THAT THIS COMMISSION AND THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE COVENANTS, BUT THE ISSUE OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS MIGHT WELL REAR ITS HEAD IN LITIGATION IF THEY ARE NOT ADHERED TO.

YOU CAN SEE, IN FACT, THE DEVELOPER HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE COVENANTS IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH THAT 150 FOOT BUILDING SETBACK FROM THE FRONT OF OAK TREE ON THREE LOTS.

BUT NONE OF THE OTHER LOTS ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF FRONT OF.

A FRONT BUILDING SETBACK OR ANY OTHER SETBACK.

SO I WOULD ASK THE DEVELOPER TO TO ABIDE BY THE DAYS OF FRICTIONS AGAIN, INCLUDING ALL THE SETBACKS AS THEY HAD EARLIER BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, THAT THEY WOULD IN THE JANUARY 12TH MEETING SAID THEY WOULD THEY SAID THEY WOULD ABIDE BY ALL THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE SUBJECT OF A PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ALONG THE CREEK AND WETLAND AREA ON THAT SOUTH SIDE OF THE CREEK.

I QUESTION ABOUT HOW IT WILL WORK, GIVEN THAT IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.

I'M JUST KIND OF PERPLEXED BY IT.

INDIVIDUALS WILL BUY THIS PROPERTY WITH AND PAY A PRETTY PENNY PART AND LEARN THAT THEY MUST LET ANYBODY AND HIS BROTHER WALK ON THE TRAILS BEHIND THEIR HOUSE AND HAVE ACCESS TO THE STREET AND THEIR DRIVEWAYS, I SUPPOSE.

AND IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHERE THE TRAIL WOULD START OR WHERE IT WOULD END.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD PLACE FOR A TRAIL.

AND I WOULD URGE YOU AS A COMMISSION TO MAYBE WAIVE THAT CONDITION IF YOU CAN.

FINALLY, A MINOR CONCERN RELATES TO THE NAME OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

THE DEVELOPMENT IS APPARENTLY GOING TO BE CALLED 801 OGLETREE WHICH IS ODD, I THINK, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT'S ENTRANCES ON KENTWOOD.

SORRY. YEAH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

OR ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT ITEM.

[00:15:07]

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION QUESTIONS.

TO THE APPLICANT. DO YOU? MR. BASKIN, DO YOU MIND ADDRESSING THE STORM MITIGATION QUESTION? MM HMM. YEAH, WE'LL WE'LL.

WE'VE PERFORMED A STORMWATER ANALYSIS AND HAVE SUBMITTED THAT TO THE CITY FOR REVIEW, SO WE'RE AWARE OF IT AND.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S.

THERE'S THERE'S THERE'S A THERE'S THERE'S WAYS TO LOOK AT THAT WHEN YOU'RE IN SUCH A BIG BASIN AND YOU'RE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE CREEK.

MOST OF THE TIME, WE WE TYPICALLY DON'T PROVIDE DETENTION RIGHT NEXT TO A MAJOR CREEK OR RIVER.

WHEN YOU DO DETENTION RIGHT NEXT TO THE CREEK OR RIVER, YOU DELAY THE THE DISCHARGE OF THE WATER.

WHEN YOU'RE IN A BIG BASIN LIKE THAT, YOU HAVE ALL THE UPSTREAM WATER COMING DOWN.

AND WHAT WHEN YOU'RE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A CREEK LIKE THAT, WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS RELEASE THE WATER AND GET IT DOWNSTREAM BEFORE THE BIG SLUG OF WATER COMES FROM UPSTREAM. AND IT ACTUALLY, IF YOU DO DETENTION RIGHT ON A CREEK LIKE THAT, IT TYPICALLY MAKES IT WORSE DOWNSTREAM AND NOT BETTER WHEN YOU'RE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE CREEK.

SO WE'VE DONE THAT ANALYSIS.

IT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT'S DONE MAJORITY ALONG MOORES MILL CREEK THERE.

SO WE'VE SUBMITTED THAT TO THE CITY FOR REVIEW AND WE'LL WORK THROUGH WHETHER THEY APPROVE THAT OR NOT.

SO IF THEY DON'T APPROVE IT, THEN WE'LL PROVIDE DETENTION SO WE CAN DO IT EITHER WAY.

I THINK THERE'S A QUESTION ON WETLANDS.

WE'VE HAD A WETLANDS MITIGATION OR WE'VE HAD A WETLANDS STREAM AND WETLANDS REPORT DONE.

WE STILL PLAN ON LEAVING THE WETLANDS.

WE'RE NOT MESSING WITH ANYTHING THERE.

THOSE ARE PROTECTED BY THE CITY ANYWAYS.

I THINK THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT DEED RESTRICTIONS.

WE'RE STILL PLANNING ON ABIDING BY THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.

THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT LIKE THE PLATTING AND THAT KIND OF STUFF.

JUST SO WE'RE ALL CLEAR, THE PLAT IS FOR THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY.

IT'S NOT TO PUT ALL THE STIPULATIONS OF WHAT'S REQUIRED.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS THAT GOVERN WHAT CAN BE BUILT ON THESE LOTS IN REGARDS TO SETBACKS AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF.

SO WE'LL ADHERE TO CITY REGULATIONS, WE'LL HEAR TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.

WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE SAID THAT WE PREVIOUSLY WERE GOING TO DO.

NOTHING'S CHANGED.

HOPEFULLY THIS PLAT REINFORCES THAT WE'RE DOING EXACTLY WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO IN REGARDS TO THE TRAIL.

HEY, WE'RE FINE ON BOARD.

WE DON'T REALLY WANT THE TRAIL THROUGH THERE.

IT'S REALLY CAN'T BE CONNECTED.

YOU'VE GOT MORE SMALL GOLF COURSE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, GOLF COURSE IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE WALKING UP AND DOWN A GREENWAY ALONG THE GOLF COURSE EITHER.

SO IF Y'ALL WANT TO GET RID OF THAT REQUIREMENT, WE'LL BE FINE ON BOARD.

BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS IF YOU GOT THEM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NOT FOR THE APPLICANT. I THINK I HAVE ONE FOR I THINK ENGINEERING.

CAN YOU ADDRESS GREENWAY, THE GREENWAY BUSINESS HERE? BECAUSE I'M FIRMLY IN SUPPORT OF GREENWAYS.

THE WHOLE GREENWAY PLAN THAT YOU HAVE HERE IN THE CITY.

AND I WAS MADE IT WAS I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION AFTER A COUPLE OF THE MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD THAT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS PLUGS INTO THAT. NOW IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY WAY TO ACCESS IT, YOU KNOW, NOW WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO A PIECE OF THE GREENWAY THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT WE PLANNED FOR.

SO CAN YOU GIVE US A LITTLE ENLIGHTENMENT ON THAT SORT OF THING? YES. I ACTUALLY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH MR. EVANS AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS YESTERDAY, AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS THE GREENWAY.

THE GREENWAY HAS BEEN ON THE AUBURN GREEN SPACE PLAN OR GREENWAY PLAN EXCUSE ME, SINCE 2011.

PART OF THAT PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT PLAN COMES THROUGH OUR BUDGETING PROCESS.

IF THE CITY WANTED TO UNDERTAKE A SECTION OF THE GREENWAY OR ANY PART OF IT, WE WOULD HAVE TO BUDGET IT, ACQUIRE EASEMENTS OR PROPERTY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN AND THEN WE WOULD BUILD IT. BUT THAT HAPPENS THROUGH REALLY THROUGH OUR CITY COUNCIL AND BUDGETING PROCESS.

THE GREENWAY LANGUAGE THAT'S CURRENTLY IN OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WAS CHANGED A FEW YEARS AGO TO ALLOW US TO SET ASIDE EASEMENTS AS PROPERTY IS BEING DEVELOPED CURRENTLY SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK, IF YOU WILL, AND GET EASEMENTS FROM PROPERTY SO THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD BUY THESE PROPERTIES KNOW THAT THERE IS A GREENWAY EASEMENT ON IT. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? IN PART THOUGH, IF I MAY, IS THERE ALSO A QUESTION ABOUT THERE'S AN EASEMENT TO IT AND ACCESSING FROM A SUBDIVISION BECAUSE ARE YOU ON DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE CREEK? I'M SORRY, WHICH SIDE OF THE CREEK IS THE GREENWAY ON? IT IS ON.

[00:20:02]

RIGHT. TYPICALLY LOOK AT THAT WHEN WE GET THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SO WE CAN MAKE SURE THE TOPOGRAPHY BECAUSE THE GREENWAY PLAN AGAIN IS FROM 2011 AND IT'S NOT AS REFINED IN OUR GIS AS WE USE NOW.

SO IT'S SOMETHING WE TYPICALLY TRY TO DETERMINE WHEN WE GET THE ENGINEERING PLANS.

YEAH, IT WOULD BE OPPOSITE MOST OF THE REST OF THE SUBDIVISION.

AND IF, IF MY UNDERSTANDING.

LOGAN YOU WERE HIGHLIGHTING THAT.

YEAH, IT'S ON THIS THIS SIDE OF THE CREEK.

ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS ABOUT ACCESS THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE CROSSING AS WELL VERSUS COMING OFF THE STREET BELOW.

YEAH. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S ON THE LOT SIDE, THE LOT 12 SIDE IT IS ON LOT 12, BUT IT IS NOT ACCESSIBLE FROM ABOUT 12 BECAUSE OF THE CREEK.

RIGHT. WE PUT IT ON THAT SIDE BECAUSE THERE'S A SEWER EASEMENT.

SO IF THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EASEMENT, WE'RE PUTTING THE GREENWAY ALONG THE SEWER EASEMENT.

RIGHT. SO BUT IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CREEK.

THERE'S NO WAY TO GET ACROSS THERE UNLESS YOU SWIM OR YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN? YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT A BRIDGE ACROSS THERE FOR A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE.

RIGHT. BUT PART OF THIS CONNECTS TO OTHER PROPERTIES NORTH AND SOUTH OF YOU.

SO, YEAH, TO YOUR POINT IS WE MAY HAVE TO ACCESS THE GREENWAY FROM FROM SOMEWHERE.

THANK YOU. FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO IN THE CASE OF MORRIS MILL ROAD RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S IN THE TWO LANE SECTION NEAR SHERWOOD AND BACK IN THERE WERE ACTUALLY CURRENTLY BUDGETED TO BUILD THE GREENWAY AND WE FINALLY ACQUIRED ALL THE EASEMENTS THAT WILL GO FROM THERE AND ACROSS HEARD AND BEHIND THE BOY SCOUT HUT AND RIGHT SMELL ELEMENTARY AND FINALLY TIE INTO TOWN CREEK PARK BUT WE ACTUALLY THOUSANDS POINT THAT'S RECENTLY BEEN BUDGETED AND IT TOOK A WHILE TO ACQUIRE EASEMENTS AND SO ON AND SO THOSE THINGS EVENTUALLY HAPPEN.

BUT WHERE YOU ACCESS THAT IS NOT THROUGH PEOPLE'S BACKYARD.

AND THE FOLKS THAT LIVE ABUTTING LAKE WILLMORE HAVE HAD MUCH TO SAY ABOUT HOW SOME FOLKS GET IN THERE.

NOW THE GOAL IS TO PROVIDE VERY OBVIOUS PUBLIC ACCESS FROM FROM PLACES THAT MAKE SENSE FROM THE PLANNING PERSPECTIVE.

IT'S ALWAYS ASKED THAT FROM INTERNAL TO A SUBDIVISION.

JUST TRYING TO BE LOGICAL THAT IF THAT AMENITY DOES APPEAR, PEOPLE WOULD WANT ACCESS TO IT.

SO IT'S BUT IN THIS INSTANCE, IT'S ACROSS THE CREEK.

AND GETTING ACCESS ALSO MEANS SOME FORM OF FOOTBRIDGE WOULD NEED TO BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT JUST I WANT YOU TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

SO SO WITHOUT WITHOUT THE CONDITION FOR SOME KIND OF ACCESS, WE'RE NOT PRECLUDING THE USE OF THAT GREENWAY PIECE OF GREENWAY SPACE BECAUSE IT WILL BE ACCESSIBLE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SOUNDS GOOD TO ME, COMMISSIONERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DISCUSSIONS AND MOTIONS, PLEASE.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE TWO 2020 300381.

OGLETREE AND THEN WITH WITH THE CONDITION NUMBER ONE REMOVED THE ACCESS.

SECOND, THAT I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

LET'S GET ONE OF OUR PERSONAL PEOPLE BACK.

SHOULD I GO THIS? WISDOM RECUSED HIMSELF.

THOSE GUYS THAT COME BACK. DON'T. ENGLISH.

[6. Preliminary Plat & Waiver – Woodward Oaks PH 5 – PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-004 ]

I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT MISTAKE.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE WOODWARD OAKS P.D.

P.D. IT'S AT THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE P.D.

AT FARMVILLE ROAD AND WHAT IS CURRENTLY SHOWN AS MIRACLE ROAD.

AND IT COMPRISES ABOUT 21 ACRES OF THE TOTAL P.D..

HERE IS THE MAP THAT SHOWS THE ENTIRE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND AGAIN, IT'S AT THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PDB.

THE PLAT IS COMPRISED OF 67 TOWNHOME LOTS, EIGHT SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, FOUR OPEN SPACE LOTS, ONE COMMERCIAL LOT AND ONE LOT FOR THE PRIVATE DRIVE.

SHOWN AS MIRACLE GREEN DRIVE.

THE. REQUEST ALSO INCLUDES A WAIVER TO ALLOW MIRACLE GREEN DRIVE, WHICH IS SHOWN AS A PRIVATE DRIVE TO CONSTITUTE MANDATORY STREET FRONTAGE FOR THE SUBDIVISION OR FOR THE TOWNHOME LOTS FACING THE EAST.

THESE HERE ARE FACING THE AMENITY SITE, THE TOWNHOMES ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY FACING

[00:25:10]

AND STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

OF THE SUBDIVISION.

AND IF THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE WAIVER MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THAT AS WELL.

OKAY. RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE HERE.

BRETT BASKIN WITH THE FORESIGHT GROUP REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

I THINK STEVE DID A GOOD JOB OF EXPLAINING THIS ONE AT PACKET.

FOR THE MOST PART, I JUST WANTED IF ANYBODY'S GOT QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, ASK THEM.

BUT I WAS JUST GOING TO. THERE WAS A COUPLE QUESTIONS I THINK THAT WERE ASKED KIND OF AT PACKET I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS.

BUT IF SOMEBODY WAS MISSING FROM PACKET ONE TO KNOW SOME OF THAT STUFF, I DON'T MIND REPEATING IT, BUT THERE WAS A QUESTION ON HOW THAT ROAD WAS GOING TO BE BUILT.

WE PLAN ON BUILDING IT TO LOOK, FEEL.

IT'S GOING TO BE A CITY, IT'S GOING TO LOOK AND BE BUILT JUST LIKE A CITY STREET THERE.

IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A PRIVATE STREET.

IN REGARDS TO THAT MIRACLE GREEN DRIVE.

THERE WAS SOME QUESTION THAT YOU COULD SQUEEZE IT DOWN.

IT DIDN'T HAVE TO BE AS WIDE AND ALL THAT STUFF.

WE'RE GOING TO BUILD IT JUST LIKE A CITY STREET.

SO, YOU KNOW, LANE WIDTHS, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF IS GOING TO BE BUILT JUST LIKE THAT.

WE WERE PLANNING ON CURVING GUTTER AND ALL THAT KIND OF GOOD STUFF.

THE OTHER THING IS, IN THE CITY'S ORDINANCE, EVEN IF WE BUILD A PRIVATE STREET, IT'S GOT TO BE BUILT TO PUBLIC STREET STANDARDS.

SO THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE IN WHETHER IT'S A PRIVATE STREET OR A PUBLIC STREET.

IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME PAVEMENT BUILD UP AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

I KNOW STEVE MENTIONED THAT SIDEWALKS AREN'T REQUIRED ON PRIVATE STREETS.

WE WERE PLANNING ON DOING SIDEWALKS ANYWAYS.

WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE SIDEWALKS ON THE OUTSIDE PORTION OF THESE UNITS BECAUSE THAT'S THE LOOK AND FEEL WE WERE GOING FOR.

BUT WE'LL HAVE AN INTERNAL SIDEWALK THERE OFF OF THE STREET AS WELL.

BUT THEN AGAIN, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE GOAL HERE IS TO HAVE FEE SIMPLE LOTS.

THERE'S A LOT OF COMPLICATIONS IF WE HAVE PART OF THESE LOTS IS TOWNHOMES AND PART OF THESE LOTS AS CONDOS.

AND THERE'S THERE'S THERE'S ISSUES WITH WITH WE'RE TRYING TO DO THEM AS CONDOS AS WELL.

SO OUR PREFERENCE IS TO TO DO IT THIS WAY, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU GOT ANY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING.

I'D LIKE TO OPEN THAT NOW.

ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.

SEEING NO ONE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS.

QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT STAFF.

MOTIONS DISCUSSIONS MOVED TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND WAIVER ON P TO 2020 300 FOR SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? I'M CURIOUS.

THANK YOU. AND THE LAST AGENDA ITEM, THIS ENGLISH.

[7. Conditional Use – Lawn Golf – PUBLIC HEARING CU-2023-001 ]

PICKLEBALL COURTS AND A MINIATURE GOLF COURSE LOCATED AT 2601 EAST UNIVERSITY DRIVE.

AND THAT CONDITIONAL USE WAS APPROVED OR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN APRIL OF 2020 AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN MAY OF 2020.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, LIKE I MENTIONED, AT 2601 EAST UNIVERSITY, WHICH IS AT THE CORNER OF RD AND DEKALB STREET.

IT IS APPROXIMATELY THREE ACRES, AND THE MINIATURE GOLF COURSE IS LOCATED ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE.

ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AT THAT TIME WAS THAT THE.

EASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WOULD REMAIN UNDISTURBED.

IT COMPRISES ABOUT 22,000 SQUARE FEET, ABOUT HALF AN ACRE.

AND AT THE TIME OF THE INITIAL REQUEST, THE APPLICANT HAD INDICATED PLANS FOR POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. SO IN LIGHT OF THE CONDITION THAT THE PROPERTY MUST REMAIN UNDISTURBED IN ORDER FOR THE APPLICANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEY WOULD NEED OR REQUEST YOU TO REMOVE THAT CONDITION OF APPROVAL

[00:30:05]

AND STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

OKAY. THIS DOES REQUIRE.

IS THERE AN APPLICANT? YOU HAVE ANY THING TO SAY OR I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME FOR LONG GOLF. SEEING NO ONE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONERS DO HAVE QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT OR STAFF. MIGHT BE AN APPLICANT KIND OF QUESTION.

WHAT SORT OF.

PROTECTION OR WHATEVER DO YOU HAVE? BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD HOMES OVER HERE ON THE ONE SIDE, IS THERE SOME KIND OF A WHAT KIND OF BOUNDARY DO YOU HAVE THERE? I MEAN, IS IT OR IS THERE ONE NECESSARY? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF YOUR.

YOU MEAN A NET FILL OR ARE YOU REFERRING TO A FENCE, MAYBE? YES. WILL YOU PLEASE COME TO THE MIC, PLEASE? THANK YOU. YEAH, WE'RE.

WE'RE PLANNING TO DO SOME GARDEN HOMES THERE.

RIGHT. AND THEN WE HAVE A A LIVING FENCE PLAN FOR.

THIS BACK PORTION.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO IN 2020 OF SOME KIND THAT GROWS FAST.

YES, SOUNDS GOOD.

THANK YOU. THANKS.

WAS RESIDENTIAL ORIGINALLY A PART OF THIS.

DEVELOPMENT. IT WAS NOT, BUT IT WAS DISCUSSED AS A POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONERS MOVE TO APPROVE C 2020 3001 SECOND HAVE A MOTION IN THE SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU EVERYONE.

COMMUNICATION STAFF HAS NO FURTHER COMMUNICATION THIS EVENING.

THANK YOU. WE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.