[ROLL CALL]
[00:00:12]
TO CALL THE FEBRUARY 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO
>> HERE. >> BEFORE WE START A BIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS FOR OUR PLANNING COMMISSION. THEY WILL BE PRESENTED WITH AGENDAS BY THE COMMAND -- COMMISSION STAFF. THEY WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS AND ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.
THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING AS APPROPRIATE FOR EACH ITEM, IF IT IS REQUIRED. THIS WILL BE YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION OF CONCERNS YOU MAY HAVE A AGENDA ITEM. WE WANT EVERYONE TO BE HEARD BUT WE DO ASK YOU KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES. AFTER EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED. REPRESENTATIVES AND STAFF WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND RESPONDING TO ISSUES BROUGHT UP BY THE PUBLIC. WE WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR COMMISSIONERS FOR MOTIONS, DISCUSSIONS AND OF VOTE. IT IS BASED ON STATE AND LOCAL LAWS. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, 2030 AND THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES RELATED TO THE APPROVAL OF PLATS IS MANDATED BY THE ALABAMA STATUTE PLANNING COMMISSION, SUCH AS OURS. IT IS THE FINAL APPROVAL FOR THE PLATS. WE WILL LET YOU KNOW OF ANYTHING THAT IS MOVING FORWARD AND BE RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THAT DATE. IF ANYONE IS HERE TONIGHT , WHO DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM BUT HAS A CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
SEE NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THAT. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY OLD BUSINESS THIS EVENING. WE DO HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA. IT HAS THREE ITEMS THIS EVENING. INCLUDING, THE APPROVAL OF PACKET AND REGULAR MEETING MINUTES IN JANUARY. A NEW STATION FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN. ANNEXATION AND A FINAL PLATFOR THE TALMAGE SUBDIVISION. >> MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT
[4. Annexation - Biltmore Commerce Park]
>> THANK YOU. WE MOVED TO NEW BUSINESS.
>> THIS REQUEST IS FOR THE ANNEXATION INTO 92 ACRES INTO AUBURN CITY LIMITS. IT IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE ROAD NINE OF BILTMORE LANE. AND JUST SOUTH OF BEEHIVE ROAD. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED CLOSE TO A LOT OF PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN ANNEXED OVER THE YEARS . TO THE NORTH EAST THE STATE PARK AND THE WESTPARK ANNEX. MORE RECENTLY , IN APRIL OF 2023, THE ANNEXATION OF THE MCALLISTER PROPERTY, WEEK'S PROPERTY AND THE BEEHIVE PROPERTY. THE MOST RECENT REQUEST LAST MONTH ON JANUARY 11TH WAS MADE FOR THE LOWRY PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET IN YELLOW. THAT PROPERTY IS STILL PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL ON THE FEBRUARY 20TH MEETING. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY'S OPTIMAL BOUNDARY AND MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ANNEXATION. WITH THAT BEING STAFF, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS PROPERTY.
>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS NOT
>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ANNEXATION OF THE BILTMORE COMMERCE PARK.
>> SECOND PREMIUM I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BUT ALL
>> ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU FOR BRINGING
>> ANNEXATIONS DO NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. THE NEXT
[5. Rezoning - Biltmore Commerce Park - PUBLIC HEARING ]
AGENDA ITEM IS ON THE SAME PROPERTY, IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK.THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING. >> THIS NEXT REQUEST IS FOR THE
[00:05:09]
REZONING OF THE SAME 92 ACRES THAT WAS JUST PRESENTED FOR ANNEXATION FROM THE RURAL DISTRICT TO THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THE AREA AND THE SURROUNDING AREA FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS SEEN A TRANSITION TO MORE INDUSTRIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES OVER THE YEARS, INCLUDING ALL OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WERE ANNEXED AND REZONED OVER THE YEARS , THAT I PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED. WEST TECH PARK, THE ANNEX, THE BEEHIVE PROPERTY , AND MOST RECENTLY PENDING COUNCIL APPROVAL ON FEBRUARY 20TH , THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET.STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVING THE REZONING REQUEST AS WELL. HOWEVER, WE DID RECEIVE ONE PIECE OF CORRESPONDENCE FROM AN ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER. I WILL HAND IT OVER TO JUSTICE TO GO OVER THE DETAILS.
>> WE DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL. ABOUT A PROPERTY OWNER CONCERN.
I WANT TO ASK, ARE YOU, MR. SULLIVAN, THE ONE WHO SENT THE EMAIL? WE DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL FROM MR. SULLIVAN , ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER ABOUT CONCERNS RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS. A LOT OF THEM WILL BE ADDRESSED AT A LATER DATE WHEN THERE IS CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE. I SENT AN EMAIL RELAYING THAT INFORMATION TO MR. SULLIVAN.
HIS CONCERNS HAVE BEEN PASSED ON TO THE STAFF TO ADDRESS
THEM. >> OKAY. WE ARE GOING FROM RURAL TO INDUSTRIAL. THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING BUT I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ? PLEASE, STEP FORWARD. PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO SIGN IN AFTERWARDS. PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO SIGN IN AFTERWARDS.
>> MY NAME IS TOM TOLL. IF YOU LOOK UP THERE YOU CAN SEE THE RECTANGLE IN BLACK ON THE EAST SIDE OF IT. YOU CAN SEE WHITE, NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS. THAT IS WHERE I LIVE.
>> STATE YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE. >> 945 THE ROAD. I AM NOT HERE TO ARGUE AGAINST CHANGING THE BILTMORE COMMERCE PARK, IS THAT WHAT YOU CALL IT? FROM RURAL TO INDUSTRIAL. I AM HERE TO HELP ENSURE THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ALL DOWN THE ROAD EIGHT THERE, 16 HOMES AND WE ARE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT UP CLOSE THE CHANGE FROM RURAL TO INDUSTRIAL . I AM PERSONALLY VERY CLOSE, AS YOU CAN SEE THERE. APPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES WHERE I AM WITH THE 16 HOMES . 16 FAMILIES WILL BE SUBJECTED TO A NEW ENVIRONMENT HERE. HOPEFULLY, YOU CAN SEE WHY OUR COMMUNITY IS SHAKEN BY THE POSSIBILITY OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AT OUR DOORSTEP. FEARS OF CONSISTENT FACTORY NOISES, RANDOM LIGHTS, AIR POLLUTION, TRUCK ENGINES INSTEAD OF HEARING THE USUAL CRICKET THAT MIGHT. WE ARE ALSO AFRAID THAT INDUSTRIALIZATION WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE FINANCIAL IMPACT ON THE VALUE OF OUR HOMES. A LOT OF OUR RESIDENTS OF BORROWED MONEY, AS I'M SURE YOU HAVE, TO BUY A HOME WITH A FIXED INTEREST RATE AND YOU HAVE TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL BACK. IF WE WE'LL HAVE FROM NEGATIVE IMPACT FROM INDUSTRIALIZATION , SWITCHING TO INDUSTRIAL, THAT WILL REDUCE THE VALUE. THAT WILL BE A OUT-OF-POCKET LOSS THAT WILL HURT A LOT OF FAMILIES. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE EFFECTS CHANGING FROM RURAL TO INDUSTRIAL ON OUR COMMUNITY. AS I SAID BEFORE, I AM NOT ARGUING AGAINST CHANGE FROM RURAL TO INDUSTRIAL. I AM ASKING YOU NOW TO LEAVE A SUFFICIENT BUFFER AREA BETWEEN THE PROPERTY WHERE I LIVE AND THE COMMITTEE WHERE I LIVE AND BE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION. I GUESS WHAT I AM ASKING, LOOKING UP THERE ON THE EAST SIDE TO LEAVE SOME BUFFER ROOM IN THEIR SO THAT THE TREES THAT ARE
[00:10:02]
THERE WILL KEEP THE NOISE DOWN. THAT IS THE BIGGEST THING I AM ASKING HERE. I WAS OUT THERE ON BILTMORE LANE LOOKING ACROSS THIS DEVELOPMENT FROM RIGHT TO LEFT, AS YOU SEE UP THERE. ALL THE TREES -- IT USED TO BE FOREST DID . THEY ARE ALL GONE EXCEPT FOR WAY IN THE BACK. I AM ASKING YOU TO MAYBE STOP THERE DON'T GO FURTHER BACK. LEAVE THAT DISTANCE FROM THE TREE LINE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH GOES UP AND DOWN FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY. LEAVE THAT AS A BUFFER AREA. I ALSO NOTICED THAT THERE WAS -- LOSING MY WORDS HERE. WE WILL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. I LOOK BACK AND I SAW THE TREES IN THE BACKGROUND. IF YOU COULD STOP THERE AND JUST MAKE THAT REMAINING RURAL SOMEWHERE IN THERE . AND THAT INDUSTRIAL GOING CLOSER TO THE MAIN ROAD THERE. THAT WOULD HELP US. ANOTHER THING I NOTICED WHEN I WAS WALKING FROM MY PROPERTY BACK INTO WHAT I AM HOPING WILL BE A BUFFER AREA IS THERE ARE IS A LOT OF WHAT WEATHER CREEKS. NOTICE SOMEONE HAS COME IN THERE AND FLAG SOME OF THE TREES RIGHT ON THE CREEKS , THEY MEANDER EVERYWHERE. THEY RED TAPED SOME OF THE TREES. I'M THINKING IT IS BECAUSE THE AREA -- MY SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THERE , YOUR AREA TO BE INCLUDED ON THE WEST SIDE IS PRETTY MOIST AND WET. IT MIGHT NOT EVEN BE GOOD FOR CONSTRUCTING BUT WOULD MAKE A GOOD BUFFER AREA. I REQUEST THAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY BEFORE. THERE IS A LINE, SOME OF YOU MIGHT HAVE SEEN IT. MAYBE FROM THAT POINT GOING TOWARDS THE PROPERTIES.OR AT LEAST FROM WHERE THEY STOP CLEARING THE TALL TREES.
PLEASE, CONSIDER LEAVING THE BUFFER AREA SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION. THANK YOU.
>> PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT ON THIS ITEM?
>> MY NAME IS RICHARD. I AM ONE OF THE 16 PROPERTY OWNERS .
WE MOVED OUT THERE 20 YEARS AGO. WE ARE A RURAL AREA. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE CHOSE THAT SITE WAS TO HAVE SOME PROPERTY. WE HAVE WATCHED THINGS LIKE THIS ALMOST ENVELOP US. TRAILER PARKS, INDUSTRIAL PARKS , QUESTION TO YOU IS -- WHEN DOES IT ALL STOP? DO YOU REALLY WANT TO INDUSTRIALIZE LEE COUNTY OR THE CITY OF AUBURN? I HAVE LIVED IN AUBURN FOR A LONG TIME . I THINK IF YOU LIVED OUT THERE YOU WOULD BE DISTRESSED. WHAT I ASK YOU TO DO IS LOOK UPON THE 16 PROPERTY OWNERS , AND THERE IS MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED . THINK OF HOW YOU WOULD FEEL. IF YOU WERE AFFECTED. I AM LOOKING AT EACH ONE OF YOU AND I HOPE YOU RECONSIDER THE WHOLE THING AND COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL. I WISH THINGS COULD BE UNDONE BUT I AM AFRAID THIS IS GOING ON TOO FAR ALREADY. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO RECONSIDER THE WHOLE ZONING. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? COMMISSIONERS,
QUESTIONS OR THOUGHTS? >> WE HAVE A PROPOSED LAND-USE
[00:15:07]
CLASSIFICATION MAP, USUALLY. WE HAVE ONE FOR THIS AREA?>> WE DO. THIS IS THE AREA THAT WAS WAS ALWAYS INTERNALLY TALKED ABOUT AS BEING INDUSTRIAL. ON THE LAND USE MAP , IT WAS ALWAYS IN THE WIND . I THINK THE INTENT IS WERE ALWAYS GOING TO BE INDUSTRIAL FOR THIS AREA. I GUESS THE OTHER PART OF THIS IS THE DOCUMENT THINGS OUTSIDE THE COUNTY CAN BE WHATEVER THEY WANT TO BE. THINGS THAT ARE INSIDE THE CITY, THE CITY DOES HAVE A LOT MORE OF YOU ON IT.
INDUSTRIAL PART OF THE CITY IS UNLIKELY INDUSTRIAL THAT HAPPENED OUTSIDE OF THE CITY. THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF TARGETING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES AND NOT SOME OF THE OTHER HEAVY INTENSITY USES THAT COULD HAPPEN RIGHT NEXT TO YOU IN THE COUNTY. I DO WANT TO STRESS THAT. THAT IS IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND A CONDITION OF USE. THE A LOT OF CONCERNS THAT YOU RAISED WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION , WHEN A SPECIFIC PROJECT COMES IN WITH BUFFERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED THEN. THESE ARE NOT CURRENTLY POSSIBLE IN THE REZONING.
>> THIS PROPERTY EMILY STARTED OFF IN THE COUNTY. THEY CHOSE TO BRING IT INTO THE CITY AT SOME TIME. IT COULD HAVE GONE FOR NO MATTER WHAT AND ACCOUNTING. THEY HAVE CHOSEN TO BRING IT INTO THE CITY , SO THERE IS A LOT MORE PARAMETERS PLACED ON WHAT CAN BE DEVELOPED THERE. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION , PROBABLY FOR MISS FRAZIER. WHAT IS A NORMAL SETBACK ON A DEPARTMENT LIKE THIS? I KNOW WE HAVE HAD ABOUT 100 OR MORE.
>> TYPICALLY, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IN OUR INDUSTRIAL ZONES IS ANYWHERE FROM 50 TO 100 FEET OF SETBACK. THAT IS DEPENDENT ON WHERE THE BUILDINGS ARE LOCATED. THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE SEEN FOR THIS ONLY ARE DEVELOPING THE FRONT DESK I DON'T WANT TO SAY THE FRONT HALF . THERE IS STILL A GOOD BIT OF THE PROPERTY LEFT TO BE DEVELOPED. ONE OF THE THINGS WILL ASK FOR IS A MASTER PLAN SO WE KNOW WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE ON THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT
NOW. >> THIS WILL COME BACK BEFORE US ? IF THIS IS REZONED AS INDUSTRIAL , IT WILL COME BACK
BEFORE US AS CONDITIONAL USE? >> CORRECT.
>> SO THAT WE CAN GO OVER EVERYTHING THEN, BUFFERS AND
EVERYTHING. >> CORRECT. THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I PUT IN MY EMAIL TO ONE OF THE CONCERNED PROPERTY OWNERS. RIGHT NOW, IS NOT THE TIME TO ADDRESS THOSE.
THERE IS MORE CONTROL ONCE IT GOES INTO THE CITY. ONE THERE IS A SPECIFIC PROJECT , THEY'LL BE A TIME TO JUST THESE THINGS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PROCEDURAL COMMENT FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE. THERE WILL BE THREE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT HAPPENED TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT GETS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, WHICH WE JUST DEAD. REZONING TO MAKE IT COMPATIBLE WITH A USE THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. BOTH OF THESE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THERE IS ANOTHER TIME YOU CAN EXPRESS VIEWS OF THE CITY COUNCIL IF THEY VOTE FOR BOTH OF THESE AND TAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE WILL HAVE THIS HEARING . THAT IS WHEN WE CAN ADDRESS, AS I MENTIONED, ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT GO ON. THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE IT BETTER.
>> THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSE, I AM SORRY BUT YOU CAN CALL STAFF IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONERS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO APPROVE RC-2024-00 .
>> SECOND >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE
[6. Rezoning - Arborwoods - PUBLIC HEARING ]
>> THE MOTION CARRIES. THE CITY COUNCIL DATE IS MARCH THE 19TH.
NEXT ONE. THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST FOR ARBORWOODS. THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN SOME OF THE OTHER REQUEST THAT WE DO. THIS IS REZONED FROM RURAL TO EIGHT CONSERVATION DISTRICT. PLEASE, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. 59 ACRES ABOUT
[00:20:02]
HAVE A DEDICATED FOR PERPETUITY AS A CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE REZONING HAS TO BE APPROVED FOR THE PULMONARY PLAT TO BE APPROVED AS WELL. IT HAS TO BE A PART OF A MOTION WITH THE PULMONARY PLAT. I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING ARBORWOODS REZONING REQUEST.>> IT IS A REZONING BUT THEY'RE NOT TECHNICALLY REZONING? IT
IS AN OVERLAY ON? >> IT IS CURRENTLY RURAL.
REZONING TO CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT. FOR THE SUBSEQUENT PULMONARY , WHICH IS NEXT IT HAS TO BE REZONED
>> GOT IT. I JUST WANTED TO ARTICULATE THAT. IT CANNOT BE IMPROVED UNLESS THE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT IS APPROVED. WE RECEIVED A COUPLE CALLS ABOUT THIS ONE THIS IS THE MAP THAT IS ORIENTED TO THE NORTH. WE HAD CONCERNS THAT THE NORTH WAS GOING TO ASK YOU. YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE WHERE IT SHOWS WHAT IS CONSERVED AND THE OUTLINE OF
THE PROPERTY. >> OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE
AND WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? >> HOW ARE YOU ALL?
>> GOOD. >> ESSENTIALLY, THIS DOES NOT INCREASE THE DENSITY OF THE PROPERTY. IT ALLOWS US TO PUT 50% OF THE PROPERTY IN A CONSERVATION, EASEMENT AND PERPETUITY. THAT WILL CORRECT THE CREEK ALONG THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY. IT WILL BE A MASSIVE BUFFER BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT IN THE CREEK. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO DO ANY MASQUERADING HERE. WERE GOING FOR A NICE PRODUCT WITH WHAT IT LINES FROM AN ACRE OR TWO ACRES. NO INCREASE IN DENSITY.
JUST GOING TO PUT THAT EASEMENT WITH PERPETUITY IT WOULD BE THE SAME 19 LOTS IT WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER RURAL ZONING.
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMPORT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONERS , MOVED TO APPROVE RZ-2024-002 ?
>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
[7. Preliminary Plat - Arborwoods- PUBLIC HEARING ]
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.>> . ANY OPPOSED? NEXT ITEM. >> THIS IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ASSOCIATED FOR ARBORWOODS. WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? AS YOU CAN SEE, THE LARGE LOT TO THE NORTH IS WHAT WILL BE CONSERVED IN PERPETUITY. I KNOW IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS TREND RATE ON DESPERATE BY RULE AND TECHNICALITY THE DRIVEWAYS ARE WIDE ENOUGH THAT THEY ARE NOT A LARGE LOT SUBDIVISION. THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE DENSITY.
WE ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
>> THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THAT NOW IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ARBORWOODS. SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, COMETS,
QUESTIONS , MOTIONS? >> MOVED TO APPROVE THE
>> SECOND. >> THIS NEEDS TO BE -- THE MOTION NEEDS TO HAVE THE CONDITION OF THE REZONING. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT CANNOT BE APPROVED. IT IS A CONDITION.
>> OKAY, SUBJECT TO -- MOVED TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT PP-2024-001 ARBORWOODS SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF RZ- 2024-002 CONSERVATION OVERLOOK.
>> EMOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
[8. Preliminary Plat - Asbury Hills Redivision of Lots 3A & 3B - PUBLIC HEARING]
>> AYE . >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
[00:25:02]
ARE REQUESTING REVISED PLAT APPROVAL FOR LOTS , 38 LOT . INAUDIBLE ] THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF SHELTON MILL ROAD IN THE CDD DISTRICT. THE ORIGINAL PRELIMINARY PLAT CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION AT THE SEPTEMBER 2023 MEETING UNDER PP DASH 2020 23 -016. I HAVE DONE THIS SIDE-BY-SIDE OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND WHAT IS NEWLY PROPOSED. THE LOTS INCREASE FROM 31 TO 38 . UNITS INCREASE FROM 27 TO 36.THE DENSITY INCREASES FROM 4.82 7.4 . THE OPEN SPACE DECREASES BY 39% TO 30%. THE DENSITY AND OPEN SPACE IS STILL WITHIN THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE DISTRICT . THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL NINE LOTS IF APPROVED. STAFF HAS NO MAJOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THE APPLICANT IN-HOUSE? IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO US --
>> I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY THIS ONE BUT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS?
>> MOVED TO APPROVE PP-2024-002.
>> SECOND. >> EMOTION AND A SECOND BUT ALL
>> ANY OPPOSED? >> MOTION CARRIES. WELCOME
[9. Conditional Use - West Veterans Storage - PUBLIC HEARING]
BACK. >> FOR THIS ITEM THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF TWO COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USES.
ONE BEING CLIMATE CONTROLLED SELF STORAGE FACILITY AND THE OTHER ONE BEING A WAREHOUSE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF WEST VETERANS BOULEVARD IN ACD THE DISTRICT . THERE IS AN INITIAL SITE PLAN SHOWING PLOT. THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY WOULD BE ON THE REAR BUILDING . AND THE OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE WOULD BE RIGHT OFF OF WEST VETERANS IN THE FRONT. IT IS IN LINE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP A MASTER PLAN MIXED-USE. THERE WERE SEVERAL OTHER CONDITIONAL USES IN THE CDD DISTRICT IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. THAT WAS ALSO COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. TALK TO
ME ABOUT THE WAIVER REQUEST. >> I KNOW THAT THE STAFF REPORT AND PACKET , ON ONE ITEM . THE WAIVER REQUEST IS SEPARATE. I DO NOT MEAN TO CONFUSE YOU.
>> I WOULD PROPOSE WE SEPARATE THEM AS WELL.
>> WHILE I AM UP HERE -- >> IT IS ONE IN THE PACKET.
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. WHILE I AM APPEAR TO BE WAIVER REQUEST IS A WAIVER FOR THE STANDARDS FOR SELF STORAGE FACILITIES AND REGULATIONS TO ALLOW BUILDING MATERIAL ALONG THE STREET. IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, IT IS JUST SAYING THAT THE BUILDING MATERIAL SHOULD BE OF NATURAL MATERIALS, WHICH IS BRICK OR STUCCO . THIS IS FROM COURT ORDERED REGULATIONS. WHAT THE APPLICANT IS INITIALLY PROPOSING AN EXAMPLE OF IS THIS BUILDING RIGHT HERE WITH THE METAL INDICATES TO ME . THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE CONDITIONAL
[00:30:01]
USE FOR THE ARBOR DISTRIBUTION FACILITY AND CU-24-008.>> WHERE IS THAT LOCATED? >> THAT WAS LOCATED EXACTLY OR DIRECTLY TO THE EAST. I THINK, THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.
>> WHAT BUSINESS IS THAT? >> COCA-COLA.
>> COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION. >> I BELIEVE IT IS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY RIGHT THERE. SIMILAR TO THE THIS REQUEST IS GOING TO BE WELL OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE . STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER FOR THE BUILDING TO THE
REAR BUT NOT TO THE FRONT. >> ONE QUESTION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> APPLICANT, WOULD YOU CARE TO
-- >> ON THE CONDITIONAL USE IT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. IN REGARDS TO THE WAIVER , HERE IS A MAP . THE PROPERTY OUTLINED IN RED IS BEGINNING OF THE INDUSTRIAL PART. THE BLUE SITE YOU CAN SEE IS ADJACENT TO THE INDUSTRIAL PART. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF OUR SITE IS THE NEW COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION FACILITY. THE LOT CHEMICALS NEXT DOOR TO US, THIS IS A PICTURE OF THEIR BUILDING.
THEY HAVE METAL SIDING INSIDE THE INDUSTRIAL PARK, THE OTHER SIDE OF US IS THE COCA-COLA DISTRIBUTION FACILITY WHERE A WAIVER WAS APPROVED FOR METAL SIDING. WE HAVE METAL SIDING ON BOTH SIDES OF US. ALL WE ARE DOING IS ASKING FOR IT TO MATCH AND BE SIMILAR TO WHAT IS ON BOTH SIDES OF US. I DON'T SEE WHAT IS GAINED. WE HAVE AN INDUSTRIAL BOOK. WE JUST KEEP THE INDUSTRIAL LOOK GOING . NOT SURE WHY WE NEED TO GO AND JAZZ UP IN BETWEEN. THAT IS THE REASON WHY. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS GOING ON THERE. THE OWNER IS LOCAL. IT IS A LOCAL INVESTMENT . THEY WILL WANT IT TO BE ATTRACTIVE FOR WHAT THEY ARE WANTING TO DO ANYWAY. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BUT THAT MAP GIVES YOU A LITTLE BETTER LOOK OF WHAT IS GOING ON.
>> WHAT ABOUT THE FACADE? SORRY -- THE FACADE ITSELF?
WOULD IT BE METAL AS WELL? >> ON THE STORAGE, YES. ON THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING -- ON THE FRONT, WE DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR USER RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THE STORAGE IS DEFINITELY THE FIRST PART OF THIS. WE NEED TO COME BACK FOR THAT WHEN WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON.
ON THE STORAGE BUILDING, IT WILL JUST BE METAL.
>> RIGHT. WE ARE REALLY CONCERNED WITH THE FRONT
BUILDING. >> I THINK THAT IS ONE THAT STAFF IS CONCERNED WITH. I DON'T HAVE A USER WITH THAT PARTICULAR YET. IF YOU WANT TO DO ONE WITH THE STORAGE, THE PHASE ONE OF THIS PROJECT . WE CAN DEAL WITH WHAT IS LEFT OVER AT A LATER TIME. THAT KEEPS US MOVING. THAT IS FINE.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THERE IS ALSO THE OPTIONS OF APPROVING THIS WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT MEETS STAFF STANDARDS. REGARDING WHAT THE FACADE WOULD BE. THAT WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE THEY CONCERN WHAT WAS FACING VETERANS. AND THEN COME INTO COMPLIANCE FROM A STANDARD LEVEL. WHAT IS SHOWN HERE , I THINK, WOULD BE NICE. LIKE YOU MENTIONED, IF IT WILL BE AN ENTIRELY METAL BUILDING , THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS.
IF YOU WOULD ALL LIKE TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS , IT IS UP TO YOU ALL. I WAS JUST GIVING OPTIONS.
>> THE WAIVER IS ONLY FOR THE CLIMATE CONTROL IN THE BACK.
IT DOES NOT SPECIFY THE FRONT BUILDING.
>> THAT IS THE WAY IT READS. >> ESSENTIALLY, IT WOULD BE JUST FOR THAT ANYWAY. IF APPROVED.
[00:35:03]
>> YOU WANT US TO PUT A CONDITION ON THAT THE EXTERIOR
MEETS STAFF APPROVAL? >> IT HAS TO COME BACK.
>> THE WAIVER IS FOR BOTH USES.
>> IT DOES NOT SAY THAT. >> IT IS A WAIVER FOR THE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT FOR CLIMATE CONTROLLED STORAGE.
THAT IS ONE ASPECT OF IT. AND THE QUARTER OVERLAY REGULATIONS ALSO SAY THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SPECIFIC BUILDING MATERIALS WHEN VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT AWAY ON THE QUARTER STREET.
THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS BOTH USES.
>> HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO . EXCUSE ME, THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. I APOLOGIZE. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE, COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE , I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS . HOW WOULD YOU LIKE US TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THIS? >> THANK YOU. IF YOU ALL WOULD VOTE ON THE CONDITIONAL USE AND VOTE ON THE WAIVER. IF IT IS GOING TO BE SPLIT ON GRANTING THE WAIVER FOR THE BUILDING IN THE BACK, BUT MAC FOR THAT. AND THEN VOTE ON THE WAIVER IN THE FRONT. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SPLIT ON
THOSE. >> GREAT. WE WILL VOTE ON CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FIRST.
>> I MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE OF A CLIMATE CONTROLLED SELF STORAGE
[10. Waiver - West Veterans Storage ]
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSED ? GREAT, CONDITIONAL USE. DONE. WAIVER NUMBER ONE IS TO ALLOW METAL BUILDING WITH YOUR VISIBLE ON THE STREET FOR CLIMATE CONTROLLED STORAGE USE.
>> THAT WOULD BE THE BUILDING IN THE BACK.
>> I MOTION TO APPROVE THE WAIVER AS DESCRIBED BY THE
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> THANK ME FOR. >> ANY OPPOSED?
>> WAIVER FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE WAREHOUSE FACING WEST VETERANS TO ALLOW METAL BUILDING MATERIALS ALONG THE CORRIDOR STREET.
>> I MOVED TO DENY THE WAIVER. >> I SECOND.
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DENY THE WAIVER WITH
REQUIRED MATERIALS. >> I HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION OR A QUESTION DOES THAT PROHIBIT THEM FROM RETURNING TO ASK FOR THAT LATER KEEP -- WITHIN THE YEAR ARE
HOW WE DO THAT? >> WAIVERS ARE PERMANENT. CAN
>> THEY CAN COME BACK. >> BUT THEY CANNOT COME BACK
WITH IN THE YEAR TWO -- >> I CAN REPORT BACK. THEY WOULD PROBABLY JUST BE ABLE TO COME BACK.
>> I DO HAVE A MOTION AND THE SECOND ON THE FLOOR.
>> THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE . YOU CAN APPROVE IT WITH CONDITIONS THAT THE BUILDING MATERIALS MUST MEET -- THE ALTERNATIVES THAT THEY SUPPLY MUST MEET STAFF CONDITIONS.
YOU CAN GRANT THE WAIVER WITH THOSE CONDITIONS. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED WITH COKE. THEY HAVE THE WAIVER AS WELL BUT THEY MET STAFF STANDARDS FOR WHAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. THAT WAS IN THE QUESTION WITH THIS ONE. THEY DO NOT HAVE A USER YET. THE BUILDING DESIGN HAS NOT BEEN DONE. WHAT THEY ARE THINKING IS THEY WOULD HAVE METAL IN ITS ENTIRETY AND THAT IS NOT WHAT
STAFF WANTS. >> DO YOU WANT TO AMEND YOUR
MOTION OR READ RIGHT? >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, SO I HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I WOULD AMEND THE MOTION TO SAY DENY THE WAIVER TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE WAREHOUSE . AND TO MEET STAFF
REQUIREMENTS . >> WE WOULD APPROVE IT WITH A
[00:40:02]
CONDITION THAT IT HAS TO BE -->> IT WOULD BE APPROVED AND THE CONDITIONS WOULD BE THAT THEY HAVE TO PRESENT ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE TO STAFF FOR THE QUARTER OVERLAY DISTRICT. THAT IS SIMILAR TO WHAT HAPPENED WITH COCA-COLA.
>> YOU NEED TO REWORD IT IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT.
>> I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND THE SECOND ON THE TABLE THAT MUST BE MOVE FORWARD ON, EITHER
DENIED OR APPROVED. >> I AM WITHDRAWING IT.
>> PERFECT AND NOTED. >> LET US START OVER.
>> I WILL MOVED TO APPROVE WAIVER NUMBER TWO TO THE QUARTER OVER LOW REGULATIONS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT ALL MATERIALS MEET WITH STAFF APPROVAL BEFORE MOVING FORWARD.
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE ANY
NEED FOR CLARIFICATION? >> WELL SAID.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION?
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, ALL. PUT US TO THE TEST. KEEP US ON OUR
[11. Conditional Use - Ridgecrest Bedell - PUBLIC HEARING]
TOES. >> REQUEST THAT YOU ARE PROBABLY FAMILIAR WITH. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE FOR INSTITUTIONAL USE ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON NORTH DONIHOO DRIVE ZONE RDD. THE REQUEST HAS NOT CHANGED MUCH . STILL 106 UNITS ON APPROXIMATELY 21 ACRES. WITH THE DAY CARE USE THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE AS WELL AS WITH OFFICES. I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE ON THE PROPOSAL. THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST NOW -- BECAUSE YOU HEARD IT IN MAY OF LAST YEAR . THIS USE WOULD EXPIRE IN SEPTEMBER. HOWEVER, THE TAX CREDIT APPLICATION PROCESS IS PRETTY LENGTHY. THEY JUST WANT TO COVER THEIR BASES AND MAKE SURE THE ONE THAT WAS APPROVED LAST MAY DOES NOT EXPIRE IN IN THAT TIMEFRAME. WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. AND THE APPLICANT AND THE REPRESENTATIVE ARE HERE THIS EVENING.
>> WITH THE APPLICANT LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING?
>> WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. IT IS THE SAME THING. WE HAVE RAN INTO A FEW HURDLES AND OVERCOME THE HURDLES. WE ARE JUST GETTING THIS BACK APPROVED IT CANNOT EXPIRE DURING THE APPROVAL PROCESS.
>> I AM SORRY. ARE WE TAKING DOWN WHAT IS THERE CURRENTLY?
>> YES. >> AND THOSE PEOPLE WILL GO WHERE? I'M SORRY IF WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THIS BUT I DO NOT
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS THAT ARE AT THE UNITS WILL BE RELOCATED. WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON A RELOCATION PLAN WITH OUR DEVELOPER OUR INTENT IS TO CREATE VACANCIES ON OUR CURRENT PROPERTIES BUT WE DO NOT WANT TO DO THAT TOO EARLY AND TELL WE ARE FUNDED. OUR INTENT IS TO RELOCATE FAMILIES AT OTHER PROPERTIES WE HAVE.
WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 104 . FOR THOSE THAT REMAIN WE HOPE TO WORK WITH IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF VOUCHER, IF THEY CHOOSE , TO GO INTO OTHER HOUSING THAT IS OUR PRIORITY. TO RELOCATE OUR FAMILIES WITH DECENCY. WE ARE STARTING THE NOTICE PROCESS TOMORROW. WE ARE HAVING TO START THE PROCESS EARLY DUE TO VARIOUS FUNDING SOURCES THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT USING INITIALLY, WITH THE DEVELOPMENT, THE INTENT WAS TO REDEVELOP TWO PARCELS, PARCEL B AND PARCEL C, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN 62 UNITS. DURING THE INCREASE OF CONSTRUCTION COST WITH INTEREST RATES, WE HAD TO FIND WAYS TO SHRINK THE FUNDING GAP . WHAT WE OPTED TO
[00:45:03]
DO WAS TO FOCUS ON PARCEL B, 56 UNITS. THAT WILL GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO QUALIFY FOR 2.6 ADDITIONAL DOLLARS IN FEDERAL FUNDING. THAT TOOK AWAY FROM 62 UNITS TO 56. WE HOPE TO BE ABLE TO RELOCATE WITH IN OUR OWN PROPERTIES . IF NOT, WE WILL GO FROM THERE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. >> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ABOUT THIS ITEM . SEEING NO ONE , I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONERS? >> I MOVED TO APPROVE
[12. Café Racer]
>> ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVED TO OTHER BUSINESS .
REQUEST FOR A REHEARING FOR CAFE RACER AT THE CORNER OF OPELIKA . THERE IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF. THIS IS MORE OF A RECOUNTING OF WHAT WAS SUBMITTED AND AN OBJECTIVE OBSERVATION OF WHAT WAS RESUBMITTED FOR THE REQUEST FOR THE REHEARING. BEFORE I GET INTO, I THINK, OUTLINING WHAT WAS OMITTED AND CURRENTLY SUBMITTED , I WANT TO OUTLINE THE DISCUSSION AND THE DECISION FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT. YOU ARE DECIDING IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN WHAT WAS SUBMITTED AND WHAT IS CURRENTLY SUBMITTED. SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE DOES NOT LOOK AT THE USE. THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE LOOKS AT, DID THEY ADDRESS THE CONCERNS FROM STAFF IN A MEETING SESSION MEANINGFUL WAY ? I WILL OUTLINE THE CONCERNS FROM STAFF. WE WILL PRESENT YOU WITH THE FIRST EDITION AND SECOND. YOU CAN GO TO THE FIRST ONE. THIS IS OUR FIRST SUBMISSION. STAFF WAS -- THERE ARE SEVERAL CONCERNS WITH THE SITE. THE MAIN ONE THAT IT IS A DRIVE-THROUGH USE. IT IS CONDITIONAL USE. STAFF WAS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF A DRIVE-THROUGH USE AND WAS VERY UP FRONT ABOUT THAT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS AND RECOMMEND -- THERE IS ALSO CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC FLOW OF THE SITE .
INTERNALLY AND INGRESS AND EGRESS GOING TO THE SITE.
THERE IS NO WAY TO GET FROM THE OPELIKA ROAD ENTRANCE INTO THE DRIVE-THROUGH. IT IS SHOWING AN ENTRANCE ON K STREET, THERE WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT STACKING OF THE LECTERN GOING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION. FOR THOSE REASONS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS, THE INTERNAL FLOW AND THE USE OF THE DRIVE-THROUGH, STAFF IS NOT SUPPORTIVE. GO TO THE NEXT ONE. ON THIS ONE, THEY MOVE THE ENTIRE SITE MORE TO THE EAST TO ACCOMMODATE FOR MORE STACKING ON SITE. AND THEN THEY MOVED THE ENTRANCE ON OPELIKA ROAD AND THEY ARE SHOWING A FULL INGRESS ON K STREET. THERE IS NO RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF AND STAFF WILL NOT PROVIDE ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THIS SUBMISSION.
PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS BRAD GALLANT. I AM HERE REPRESENTING CAFE RACER.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU KNOW THE PLAN YOU KNOW WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED. I DO WANT TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS. I INCLUDED THIS IN OUR FORMAL REQUEST FOR REHEARING. WE DO INTEND TO LIMIT MOVEMENT TO RIDE IN, RIDE OUT. THAT PORK CHOP WAS NOT ADDED TO THE SIDE DRYING. OUR INTENT WAS WITH THE STREET ACCESS TO RIDE IN AND RIDE OUT. OUR INTENT IS LIMITING OPELIKA ROAD TO WRITE END -- TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT A MOVEMENT IS FEASIBLE . WE WILL ABIDE BY THAT WE ARE HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE WE HEARD YOU LOUD AND CLEAR THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT STACKING ON THE SURFACE STREETS. AS I MENTIONED THE LAST TIME, THE USE IS PARAMOUNT TO OUR BUSINESS. A DRIVE-THROUGH IS SOMETHING THAT IS REQUIRED TO MAKE THE ECONOMICS WORK FOR US. THAT IS
[00:50:03]
THE REALITY OF OUR BUSINESS. WE DID TRY TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS TO THE EXTENT THAT WE COULD BY SHIFTING THE PARCELS ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE 220 PARCEL, WHICH WAS A BREEZE DRIVE-THROUGH AT ONE POINT. WE BELIEVE THAT ANY STACKING THAT MAY HAVE OCCURRED AND REALLY BEING MINDFUL AND COGNIZANT OF THAT. THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF THE PITCH THERE BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE WERE HERE IN NOVEMBER. WE HEARD THE RIGHT RECOMMENDATION AND IT WAS A DENIAL. WE NEED TO CLEARLY GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. AT NO POINT DURING THAT PROCESS WERE WE MADE AWARE THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE A REQUEST FOR REHEARING. SORRY, MAKING SURE I AM NOT IN TROUBLE HERE. WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND ENERGY WITH THE IMPRESSION WE WOULD NOT HAVE AN ISSUE RECENT FEBRUARY HEARINGS. SOUNDS LIKEA REPLAY >> SOUND LIKE A REPLAY OF OUR
MEETING. >> SORRY. IS ANYONE GOING TO GET UP AND SEE IF WE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? I WILL TALK OVER IT. I AM NOT AFRAID. I BELIEVE, IF MEMORY SERVES, YOU DID NOT WANT TO RECONFIGURE, AT LEAST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS LOT BECAUSE OF SITE ISSUES. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROPER TERMINOLOGY IS. YOU HAVE DECIDED THAT YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS STRONG ON THE OTHER SIDE. DO YOU INTEND FOR THAT OTHER PARCEL TO STAY GREEN SPACE?
>> OUR INTENT IS THAT WILL BE GREEN SPACE FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME. IN ORDER TO MAKE THE ECONOMICS WORK, THESE ARE TWO INDEPENDENT PARCEL PROPERTIES. WE WENT INTEND TO SELL THIS TO SOME OTHER USE AT SOME POINT DOWN THE ROAD. WE KNOW THAT GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION ON THIS PROPERTY, IT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE A COMMERCIAL USE OF SOME SORT.
THERE WILL BE LIMITATIONS ON THAT BECAUSE OF REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT IS ON THAT PROPERTY. THE SHORT ANSWER IS, WE INTEND TO SELL IT AT SOME POINT. IT WILL NOT BE A CONCERN FOR US.
OUR BUSINESS, WE LIKE THE GREEN SPACE. YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THE DRAWING. OUR APPLICATION -- WE HAVE LAWN CHAIRS AND FOLK SITTING OUT THERE. WE WELCOME BACK.
>> DO YOU HAVE IT IN ATHENS IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT?
>> YES, SIR. >> ARE THE ONLY VOTING --
>> YEAH. >> THANK YOU. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE OTHER DRAWING REAL QUICK? THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONERS ? REQUEST FOR REHEARING.
>> WITHOUT ANY COMMITMENT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, IT IS JUST A
REHEARING. >> I AM GLAD THAT THIS WAS DONE. I'M GLAD THAT YOU ALL LISTENED , WENT BACK AND TRY TO REDO THIS. I NEVER VOTED , NO, BECAUSE OF THE DRIVE-THROUGH.
YOU ARE SURROUNDED BY DRIVE-THROUGH'S. THERE IS A DRIVE-THROUGH ACROSS THE STREET. I THINK IT IS UNREALISTIC TO EXPECT THAT STUDENTS ARE GOING TO WALK. I HAVE WATCHED THEM PARK AT MAX AND WALKED DOWN THE BLOCK TO LULU LEMON . THEY WILL NOT DO IT. THEY WANT TO DRIVE. I AM ALL FOR A REHEARING. I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT YOU PUT INTO TRYING TO RESPOND TO OUR PROBLEMS, ISSUES, CONCERNS.
MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE REHEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> DISCUSSION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND? >> A MOTION TO REHEAR.
>> THE GROUND RULES WHEN WE STARTED OFF WAS, DID THEY HAVE ENOUGH CHANGE WHAT THE STAFF ASKED THEM TO DO ? COME BACK
[00:55:05]
WITH WHAT WAS SUFFICIENTLY DIFFERENT , THAT IS WHY I AM INTERPRETING IT. THEY TALK ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT PERIODS.WHAT IS THE DRIVE-THROUGH ITSELF, INGRESS AND EGRESS AND INTERNAL FLOW. WHILE I BELIEVE THERE IS SOME IMPROVEMENT ON TWO OF THE THREE, THERE IS STILL A DRIVE-THROUGH. THIS IS A DRIVE-THROUGH IN AN URBAN ZONE AREA. WHILE I DO ACKNOWLEDGE AND RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE OTHER DRIVE-THROUGH' S AROUND HERE I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE REDEVELOPED OUT OF THE AREA AND TRY TO MAKE THIS MORE WALKABLE BECAUSE IT IS AN URBAN ZONE AREA. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR
BEST REHEARING. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVING THE REHEARING.
>> QUESTION. . >> I WOULD LIKE TO DO A ROLL
[Additional Item]
>> YES. >> THANK YOU, ALL. WE DID HAVE ONE LAST AGENDA ITEM. IT WAS ADDED.
>> THIS IS FOR THE EXTENSION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT AS YOU KNOW THERE IS AN 18 MONTH EXPIRATION PERIOD ON PRELIMINARY PLAT SPREAD THIS ACTUALLY EXPIRES TWO DAYS BEFORE A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. WE ARE THOUGHTFUL ENOUGH TO CALL AND ASK FOR AN EXTENSION PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. THAT WAY YOU DON'T GET A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL ON THE SAME AGENDA. THEY ARE ASKING FOR AN A 12 MONTH EXTENSION. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE ALREADY APPROVED . I TURN IT TO YOU FOR ANY QUESTIONS. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPROVAL FOR THE EXTENSION.
>> THE EXTENDED DOES NOT HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, CORRECT?
>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF EXTENSION FOR A 12 MONTH
PERIOD. >> SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
[STAFF COMMUNICATION ]
>> AND HE OPPOSED? TONIC. DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF
COMMUNICATION? >> I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK WE'LL PROBABLY -- FOR THE GOOD OF THE BODY, I WILL MAKE SURE I GET AN ANSWER WITH DENIALS AND WAIVERS BEING
TABLED. OTHER >>, I DON'T DIG WE HAVE
ANYTHING. >> I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING OTHER THEN, THANK YOU. WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.