[00:00:09]
>>> GOOD EVENING. WE ARE GOING TO WAIT JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES. WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE STILL GETTING THROUGH SECURITY. AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME OUR STUDENTS.
YOU PICKED A GOOD ONE TO JOIN US. WE WILL WAIT JUST A COUPLE MORE MINUTES TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY THAT NEEDS TO BE HERE IS HERE.
[ROLL CALL]
>> GOOD EVENING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. NOW THAT WE HAVE ALL
[00:05:07]
MADE OUR WAY INTO THE ROOM I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.>> THANK YOU. BEFORE WE START THIS EVENING I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW SINCE WE HAVE A FULL ROOM ABOUT THIS PUBLIC MEETING. WE WILL BE PRESENTED WITH ITEMS BY THE CITY STAFF AND THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. IF THE AGENDA ITEM HAS A PUBLIC HEARING IT WILL BE OPENED AND EVERYONE CAN ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE. WE WANT EVERYONE TO BE HEARD AND WE ASK YOU TO KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES. REPRESENTATIVES AND STAFF WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND RESPOND TO ISSUES BROUGHT DURING THE HEARING. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2030 AND THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SUMMARIZE THE RULES AND RESPONSIBILITIES REGARDING SUBDIVISION PLAT. THE MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION PLOTS. WE ACT AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE BODY -- PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED TO THE COMMISSION. PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE REQUIRED ON THE PLOTS AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSION IS LIMITED TO THE PLAT MEETING OR EXCEEDING RULES AND REGULATIONS. PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD WHEN SPEAKING. LET'S GET STARTED. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN FOR CITIZENS COMMUNICATION. THIS IS WHEN YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT SOMETHING NOT ON TWO NIGHTS AGENDA. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD ABOUT
[1. Annexation – Mitchell Farms Update AX-2024-020 ]
SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT BE ON THIS ONE, WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU NOW. SEEING NONE WE MOVE ON TO OLD BUSINESS. AN ANNEXATION FOR MITCHELL FARMS.>> THANK YOU. THIS IS CLEANING UP A PRIOR ANNEXATION THAT WAS APPROVED AND ONE OF THE THINGS IN THE ANNEXATION POLICY IS THERE MUST BE AN ONE FOOT OVERHANG SO, WHAT IS PRESENTED IN THE EXHIBITS IS THE INCLUSION OF A 20 SQUARE FOOT OVERHANG TO MEET THE ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS. WHAT HAPPENS IS THIS IS AN UPDATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT INCLUDES THE OVERHANG. THE ONLY REASON IT IS A SEPARATE VISUAL IS 20 SQUARE FOOT WOULD NOT SHOW UP ON THE SCALE WITHOUT ADDING 127 METERS. THAT IS WHY IT IS DRAWN OUT SEPARATELY. ANOTHER THING WE WANTED TO SHOW YOU WELL IS THE DESCRIPTION HAS BEEN UP DATED AND WHAT YOU APPROVED IS COMPLIANT WITH THE CITY OF
AUBURN ANNEXATION POLICY. >> THANK YOU. ANNEXATION DOES NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS?
>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MITCHELL FARMS ANNEXATION.
>> WE HAVE A MOVE AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MITCHELL FARMS
[CONSENT AGENDA]
ANNEXATION WITH CONDITIONS. ALL IN FAVOR?>> AYE. >> THE MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE THREE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> I HAVE A MOVE AND A SECOND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL IN
[5. Subdivision Regulations Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING MS-2024-002]
>> THAT PASSES. >> OKAY. NEW BUSINESS.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. THE FIRST ITEM IS OF NEW BUSINESS IS A LONG-AWAITED ITEM WHICH IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. MAINLY THE REVISIONS ARE FOR A NUMBER OF
[00:10:07]
ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN ON THE PLANNING LIST FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND THOSE INCLUDE REVISIONS TO THE DEFINITIONS TO ALIGN WITH THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANUAL, CLARIFICATION OF A FLAG LOT, APPLICATION PROCEDURES REFLECTIVE OF THE CURRENT STAFF PRACTICES. INCORPORATION OF STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVES OR PLAT STREET.EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY PLOTS SO THAT THEY DO NOT EXPIRE WHILE THE PROJECT IS CONSTRUCTING THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE IF THEY HAVE APPROVAL OR ARE CONSTRUCTING THE INFRASTRUCTURE THEN THE PLAT APPROVAL WILL EXTEND ANOTHER 18 MONTHS AND WE HAVE INCREASED A NUMBER OF LOT THAT ALLOW FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM THAT THE STATE ALLOWS. AND, YOU HAD A SUPPLEMENT TO THE STAFF REPORT FOR THIS JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. NOTHING REALLY CHANGED FOR THE PRIVATE ACCESS DRIVES. IT WAS JUST A LITTLE CLEARER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WANT TO DISCUSS ANYTHING FURTHER, WE CAN DO THAT.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. >> PAGE 8, ITEM D7, THE STATEMENT IS PROGRESSING ACCORDINGLY AND THAT IS BROAD , IN MY OPINION AND IT DOES NOT SAY WHO DETERMINES THAT. AS LONG AS IT IS PROGRESSING ACCORDINGLY?
>> THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED BY STAFF.
>> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? >> THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC
>> WE MAY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS AFTER THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENT. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK? SEEING NONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. OH, --
>> THERE ARE CHANGES TO BE MADE WITH REGARD TO FLAG LOTS. ON THE FLAG LOT DEFINITION I KNOW , CAN WE CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE
ON THAT? >> SO, THE INTENT WAS, I THINK IT WAS 30 FEET AT THE FRONTAGE AND IT STARTED YOU HAD TO BE ABLE TO BUY A HOUSE IN THE -- .
>> GREAT. ANYONE ELSE. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> AFTER YOU APPROVE WE WILL START ENFORCING IT AT THE NEXT MEETING. IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO THIS TOMORROW.
>> OKAY. GREAT. COMMISSIONERS.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AMENDMENT.
[6. Preliminary Plat - Mimms Trail 15th Addition - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-034 ]
>> THE MOTION IS APPROVED. >> NEXT ITEM.
>> THIS IS THE PRELIMINARY PLOT , MIMMS TRAIL ROAD. IT IS COMPRISED OF 65.28 ACRES. THERE IS ONE ACCESS POINT ON MIMMS TRAIL ROAD AND IS SURROUNDED BY MULTIPLE SUBDIVISIONS. THIS, SO THE PLAT IN FRONT OF YOU WHILE IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THERE ARE 68 TOWNHOME LOTS AND FIVE OPEN SPACE LOTS. THE PROPOSAL IS -- WHICH IS BELOW THE MAXIMUM GROSS DENSITY WHICH IS 5.5 PER ACRE. THE PROPOSED PLAN PROVIDES 30% OF OPEN SPACE AND THEY PLAT SHOWS 36.2 ACRES OF
[00:15:07]
OPEN SPACE AND IF YOU REMEMBER ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY TALKED ABOUT IN THE PRESENTATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS THEY WOULD NEVER MEET THE MAXIMUM DENSITY.>> IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE HERE?
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING AND I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM. SEEING NO ONE , WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONERS , QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE PP-2024-034.
[7. Preliminary Plat - West Tech Park, Annex II - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-035]
>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE
>> OPPOSED? MOVING ON. >> THIS ITEM IS FOR ELEMENTARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A 10 LOT COMMERCIALS SUBDIVISION ON 282 ACRES ON BEEHIVE ROAD AND EAST OF BILTMORE LANE. A PORTION OF IT IS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS. AS I MENTIONED, 10 PLOTS AND A NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL TAKE PLACE OFF OF BILTMORE LANE AND OFF OF THAT AN ADDITIONAL NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH AND SOUTH TO LOT 10 WHICH HAS ACCESS OFF OF BEEHIVE ROAD.
THIS GREEN AREA HERE IS A 75 FOOT UNDISTURBED BUFFER. IT DOES BACK UP AGAINST THE RESIDENCES AND OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE TO THE WEST. IN ADDITION TO THAT 75 FOOT BUFFER THERE IS A 25 FOOT NO BUILD BERM AND THAT WAS A PART OF THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR -- THAT OCCURRED EARLIER THIS YEAR ON PARTICLE PROPERTY. WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND WE DID RECEIVE SEVERAL CORRESPONDENCE FROM RESIDENTS AND I BELIEVE YOU WERE COPIED ON A NUMBER OF THEM AND IT HAD TO DO WITH , FROM THE RESIDENCE THAT ARE ON THIS AREA HERE.
>> WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE COMMENTS?
>> PRIMARILY, IT WAS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE RESIDENCES AND THE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. BACK MAY I ASK --
>> YES. >> WHY IS THAT LOT OUTSIDE THE
CITY? >> I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE CAN RESPOND TO THAT BUT IT IS PRIMARILY PART OF THE STREAM AND BUFFERS.
>> OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. DOES THE APPLICANT WANT TO SPEAK OR WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY, THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS.
>> I WAS GOING TO ASK ONE QUESTION IF YOU DON'T MIND.
>> TO THE POINT MADE BY MISS CAMP, WHY IS IT OUTSIDE THE
CITY LIMITS? >> THE PORTION THAT HAS NOT BEEN ANNEXED IS TO THE EAST THERE AND IT WAS BOUGHT ON A DIFFERENT DRIVE. AND HAS NOT BEEN ANNEXED YET AND IS MOSTLY
[00:20:02]
WETLANDS AND NOT BUILDABLE. IT IS NOT PART OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT . JUST TO ADD TO PREVIOUS COMMENTS WITH RESPECT TO THE BUILDING SETBACKS , 100 FOOT THERE IN ADDITION TO THAT , THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE BOARD HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE OWNERS THAT HAVE HOUSES THERE IN ADDITION TO 10 TIMES THE REQUIRED BUFFER THAT HAS BEEN AGREED TO AS WELL AS THE VEGETATIVE LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.THERE WILL ALSO BE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE THAT RUNS BEHIND THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE RESIDENCES CLOSE TO -- SO, THEY HAVE AGREED TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE NOT ISSUES. THERE IS A 75 FOOT BUFFER, EIGHT FOOT ON PORTIONS OF THE LOT THAT BACKUP TO THE
INAUDIBLE ]. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS,
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I MOVED TO APPROVE CASE
[8. Preliminary Plat - Reeves Townhomes - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-038]
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> THIS NEXT REQUEST IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A SUBDIVISION AND IT INCLUDES A WAIVER TO SUBDIVIDE OFF OF A PRIVATE STREET. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1287 OGLETREE ROAD AND THE DISTRICT WITH AN OVERLAY OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION. IT IS WITHIN THE INAUDIBLE ] AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DOWN HERE. IT WAS BROUGHT INTO THE BOUNDARY IN OCTOBER 2023. THE SUBDIVISION CONSISTS OF 43 TOWNHOUSE LOTS AND FOUR OPEN SPACE LOTS AND ONE FOR A PRIVATE DRIVE. WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT INTO THE PDD IT WAS CONTEMPLATED AS A MULTI DEVELOPMENT UNIT AND SINCE THAT TIME THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO SUBDIVIDE WHICH REQUIRES THAT THE LOTS FRONT ON A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY HOWEVER THEY WANT THAT STREET TO REMAIN PRIVATE AND THE HOA WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE. THE PLAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PDD AND MAXIMUM DENSITY IS 8.3 AND THEY ARE PROVIDING 33% OF OPEN SPACE. ENGINEERING PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR THE PROJECT AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS UNDER DEVELOPMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS
APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT . >> AND THAT WILL GO BACK TO THE
REGULATIONS WE JUST UPDATED? >> THIS WOULD BE UNDER THE
CURRENT REGULATIONS. >> OKAY. DO YOU WANT US TO VOTE
SEPARATELY ON THE PLAT ? >> YES.
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR REEVES TOWNHOMES.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK , PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS , WE DO
NEED TO DO THIS IN TWO VOTES. >> CAN OCCUR FROM THE APPLICANT ABOUT WHY WE WANT TO KEEP THESE PRIVATE STREETS?
>> SURE. >> I THINK A PUBLIC STREET HAS
[00:25:01]
TO HAVE A 50 FOOT RIGHT AWAY -- RIGHT-OF-WAY SO IF WE HAD TO DO IT AS A PUBLIC STREET WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SUBDIVIDE IT AS A PUBLIC STREET . THAT IS THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE. EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME. WHEN WE GOT THE PUD APPROVED IT WAS FOR 12 MORE YEARS THAN WE ARE DOING SO WE ARE DOING LESS UNIT THAN APPROVED -- THEN APPROVED BUT THERE HAVE BEEN CHANGES IN THE MARKET AND IT IS MUCH EASIER TO DO THESE -- AS OPPOSED TO MULTIPLE UNITS THAT ARE CONSIDERED CONDOS. THERE IS A BUNCH OF STUFF LIKE THAT THAT HAS CREATED THIS ISSUE.>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS OR A MOTION?
>> WHAT DO YOU WANT TO VOTE ON FIRST?
>> YOU READ THE MOTION. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO GRANT THE WAIVER TO THE FRONTAGE.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND. THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE .
>> THAT IS APPROVED. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT.
[9. Final Plat - Reeves Townhomes FP-2024-015 ]
>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE PP-2024-038.
>> THE NEXT IS THE PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE ONE THAT YOU JUST CONSIDERED IT. IT IS 43 TOWNHOUSE SPOTS, AND ONE LOT
FOR A PRIVATE DRIVE. >> THANK YOU. THIS DOES NOT
REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVED TO APPROVE
FP-2024-015 WITH CONDITIONS. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
[10. Preliminary Plat - Northgate Phase 2 - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-039]
>> AYE >> THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A 73 LOT PERFORMANCE SUBDIVISION LOCATED WEST OF NORTH COLLEGE STREET AT ITS INTERSECTION WITH HIGHWAY 280. IT IS THE BOTTLE WAY AND IS SPLIT THE OWN DD H AND PDD.
PHASE 1 WAS APPROVED HERE IN DECEMBER 2023 AND THIS PLAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE PDD EIGHT ACRES OF COMMERCIAL SPACE AND AFTER THIS THERE WILL BE 189 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THERE WAS AN INCENTIVE WITH THE PDD TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT FROM 50 DOWN TO 40 FEET AND THIS PLAT REPRESENTS THAT. THEY OFFER REAR LOADING GARAGES AND ENTRIES FOR TOWNHOUSE LOTS AND COMMERCIAL SPACE. WE RECOMMEND
APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT
HERE? >> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING WE OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS ?
>> MOVED TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT PP-2024-039.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
[11. Final Plat - Northgate Phase 2 FP-2024-016]
>> AYE . >> THE MOTION CARRIES.
>> NEXT IS THE FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED SUBDIVISION. I THINK I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THIS IS 30 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS , THREE OPEN SPACE LOTS, ONE
[00:30:04]
OUTLAW AND THEN A LOT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND WERECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> COMMISSIONERS, THIS DOES NOT
REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOVED TO APPROVE FINAL PLAT
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
>> AYE >> THE MOTION IS APPROVED.
[12. Preliminary Plat – East Glenn Townhomes - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-040]
>> THIS REQUEST IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 544 AND 556 EAST GLEN AVENUE IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. THIS IS A REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND THERE IS CURRENTLY AN OFFICE ON ONE OF THESE LOTS AND RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON THE OTHER.
IT WOULD BE DIVIDED INTO EIGHT TOWNHOME LOTS. THE ALLOWED DENSITY FOR THIS ZONE IS 16 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AND THIS IS LESS THAN THAT AT NINE UNITS PER ACRE. STAFF HAS NO MAJOR CONCERNS WITH THE REQUEST AND WE DO HAVE SOME NOTES REGARDING CROSS ACCESS. THEY PLAN ON ONLY HAVING ONE ACCESS ALONG EAST GLENN AVENUE. IT WILL BE A SHARED ACCESS DRIVE AND THERE WILL BE CROSS ACCESS CONNECTION FOR FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT. >> IS THERE PARKING IN THE
>> WHERE IS THE ACCESS TO GLENN?
>> IT WILL BE BETWEEN LOTS FOUR AND FIVE.
>> TOWNHOUSES ARE UPFRONT? >> I BELIEVE THE TOWNHOUSES WILL BE UPFRONT AND THE DEVELOPER CAN CONFIRM THAT BUT THIS CROSS ACCESS WILL BE EXTENDED TO SERVE ALL OF THE
LOTS. >> OKAY. AND I HAVE RECEIVED NO CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THIS.
>> THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THIS.
WE HAVE THE ACCESS ROAD IN THE BACK THAT WILL PROVIDE EAST-WEST ACCESS AND IT WILL SERVE ALL OF THESE LOTS AND WE WILL PROVIDE CROSS ACCESS TO THE WEST. TO THE EAST THERE IS ABOUT 12 FEET OF GRADE CHANGE AND WE WILL DO OUR BEST BUT WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE A RETAINING WALL THERE THAT WILL PREVENT CARS FROM CROSSING THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE ONE NEXT DOOR. THIS WILL SERVE ALL OF US AND THE GUYS NEXT-DOOR TO THE WEST WILL BE ABLE TO CONNECT BUT TO THE EAST IT IS NOT LIKELY THAT IT WILL TAKE PLACE BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH GRADE CHANGE. WE WILL DO THE BEST TO MITIGATE IT. SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS CLEAR ON THAT.
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME FOR THE EAST GLENN TOWNHOMES. SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS?
>> MOVED TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT PP-2024-040 .
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
>> THE MOTION PASSES. >> THE NEXT REQUEST IS A
[13. Preliminary Plat - H&G Stables - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-041 (Part 1 of 2)]
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A 20 LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION. IT IS LOCATED AT 943 LEE ROAD 57, ALSO KNOWN AS WILLIS TURK ROAD . THE CURRENT PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 107 .88 ACRES AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO DIVIDE THAT TO 20 LOTS FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED USE. ALL LOTS ARE ANYWHERE FROM THREE -- 38 ACRES INSIDE AND LOT 26 IS THE[00:35:11]
LARGEST WHICH IS AN OUT LOT THAT IS 26 ACRES. THIS PLAT SHOWS A CONFIGURATION OF LOTS RESEMBLING FLAT LOTS BUT THESE MEET THE MINIMUM FRONTAGE AT BOTH THE NEW ROAD BEING CREATED HERE TO 60 FEET AS WELL AS THE CUL-DE-SAC WHERE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR FOOT FRONTAGE IS 25 FEET. THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAT WAS RECENTLY APPROVED WOULD BROADEN THE CLASSIFICATION WHICH MAY HAVE IMPACTED THIS SUBDIVISION.NONETHELESS THIS WAS SUBMITTED AT THE TIME WHERE THE PRIOR REGULATIONS WERE IN PLACE. THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMENTS FOR THE PLAT MAINLY, NOTATIONAL. HOWEVER, ENGINEERING HAS A COMMENT THAT THE PROPOSED READ -- ROAD EXCEEDS THE -- CUL-DE-SAC. IT IS 1000 FEET FOR ROADS WITH MORE THAN 20 LOTS AND THEY ARE SHOWING 100 ALONG THE CUL-DE-SAC. THE PROCESS IS TO MOVE APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS. BUT, THERE
COULD BE QUESTION. >> IF IT IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS WE COULD JUST DO THAT.
>> IF IT IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, WHAT ARE THEY TO DO
WITH THAT? >> DO YOU MEAN TO INCLUDE A
CONDITION TO ? >> TO SHORTEN IT, TO
RECONFIGURE. >> FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS THESE WOULD BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO FINAL PLATS AND THEN WE CAN MAKE A CONDITION AT THAT TIME.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE .
IS THAT CONTIGUOUS ? SHOULD THEY ANNEX SOMEDAY ?
>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PROPERTY HAS INTENTIONS TO ANNEX THIS PROPERTY INTO THE CITY AND THEY WILL BE WORKING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG WILLIS TURK ROAD TO PROVIDE
>> EXACTLY. >> AS IT STANDS NOW?
>> AS IT STANDS NOW, THERE IS NOT. AND THERE WAS SEVERAL CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PUBLIC JUST INQUIRING ABOUT THIS REQUEST AND IT IS CURRENTLY AGRICULTURAL USE SO THEY WERE JUST CURIOUS AND I DID NOT SEE TOO MANY OPINIONS.
>> I WANT TO ASK, I WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT WAS DISCUSSED HERE BEFORE, THE WAY THAT THIS IS CONFIGURED, DOES IT MEET
CURRENT CITY GUIDELINES? >> IN RELATION TO FIVE LOTS?
>> IS THERE ANYTHING THAT DOES NOT MEET?
>> THAT WOULD BE THE CUL-DE-SAC. THE MAXIMUM LENGTH FOR CUL-DE-SAC STREETS IS 1000 FEET SO THAT IS A NOTE THAT ENGINEERING ADDRESSED OR THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ADDRESSED
DURING FINAL PLAT. >> SO, IF WE WOULD ANNEX THAT IN THE FUTURE WE WOULD BE ANNEXING A NONCONFORMING --
>> IF IT WAS APPROVED AS IS. >> JUST TO CLARIFY IF THIS PROPERTY WERE TO BE DEVELOPED IN THE COUNTY WE STILL HAVE PURVIEW OVER THE DESIGN REVIEW ALONG WITH THE COUNTY SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE STRINGENT OF THOSE IN WHICH JURISDICTION IT STAYS IN. IT WOULD LIKELY BE HOURS.
>> OKAY. >> BUT AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW, IT IS STILL A THREE ACRE LOT MINIMUM?
[00:40:01]
>> CORRECT. >> THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
>> WE SHOULD DO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> WE CAN DO THAT FIRST. >> IOWA LED LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR H&G STABLES PRELIMINARY PLAT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND SIGN YOUR NAME AFTERWARDS.
>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS NICK -- I LIVE AT 798 LEE ROAD 57. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS TRAFFIC AND PUBLIC SAFETY. WITH THIS BEING A 20 LOT SUBDIVISION PRIMARILY -- I HAVE LIVED HERE ALL MY LIFE. I AM THIRD-GENERATION -- AND WE HAVE A TRAILER PARK UP THE STREET WHERE TRAFFIC HAS REALLY BECOME A NUISANCE. WITH 28 HOMES COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PRIMARILY ON A TWO MILE ROAD . I HAVE KIDS. AGES THREE, 11, AND 12. MY KIDS, HAVING TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OUT UP AND DOWN ALL DAY AND ALL NIGHT, THEY CAN BARELY SLEEP AT NIGHT AND THEN THE ADDITION OF THE TRAFFIC WITH THE TRAILER PARK. AND WE ARE LOOKING AT ANOTHER 100 PEOPLE COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY. THAT IS MY BIGGEST THING. I BUILT MY HOME AND WITH THIS COMING IN, WHAT WOULD MY HOME LOOK LIKE AS OPPOSED TO THESE HOMES? WILL IT GO UP OR DOWN IN VALUE WITH THIS SUBDIVISION COMING IN. THOSE ARE MY BIG CONCERNS. I WILL
LEAVE IT AT THAT. >> THANK YOU.
>> MR. WILLIS, WILL YOU SIGN IN? WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF THE APPLICANT CAN HELP US ANSWER
SOME QUESTIONS. >> IN REGARDS TO ROAD LENGTH, WE TALKED ABOUT A WAIVER . WE HAVE A LOT LESS ON THIS ROAD SO WE DID NOT ASK FOR A WAIVER BUT IF WE DON'T GET THE WAIVER WE WILL HAVE TO SHORTEN THE ROAD. THE ANNEXATION WILL BE NEXT MONTH. WE HAD TO GET SUBDIVISION APPROVAL BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE ARE IN THE COUNTY WITHIN THE JURISDICTION AND WE ARE SUBDIVIDING THE LOTS SO ON THE ANNEX INTO THE CITY, WE ARE WORLD ZONE JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE. IN REGARDS TO THE PROPERTY OWNER ACROSS THE STREET WE ANTICIPATE THAT THESE HOMES WILL BE IN THE $1 MILLION PLUS FRAME SO, I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PROPERTY VALUES GOING DOWN. IN REGARDS TO THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS. WE HAVE ABOUT 20 LOTS THAT WILL BE HOMES. THERE IS NOT MUCH THERE. THERE IS A BIG BLAKE THAT WILL BE UTILIZED IN THE BACK AS PUBLIC SPACE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE
COMMISSIONERS MAY HAVE. >> COMMISSIONERS?
>> WILL THERE BE A TRAFFIC STUDY REQUIRED? MAYBE THAT WILL
GIVE US SOME INSIGHT. >> THIS IS A COUNTY ROAD.
TYPICALLY TRAFFIC STUDIES --. UNLESS THE COUNTY WANTS TO DO
[00:45:04]
>> WE WILL HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNTY BECAUSE IT IS A COUNTY MAINTAINED ROAD. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PERMIT BOTH EITHER
>> COMMISSIONERS? >> I AM TRYING TO IMAGINE WHAT THE CUL-DE-SAC WOULD LOOK LIKE AND ALL OF THE FLAG LOTS WOULD LOOK LIKE. I DON'T SEE IT HAPPENING. THEY DREW IT AT 1100 FEET FOR A REASON. THERE IS A GOOD REASON WHY WE ARE NOT
MAKING THESE THINGS LEGAL. >> DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A
>> ANYONE ELSE? >> MOVE TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY
PLAT 2024-041. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. I DO NOT HAVE A SECOND. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE
TO MAKE A MOTION? >> YOU DO HAVE A MOTION TO
APPROVE. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY
PRELIMINARY PLAT 2024-041. >> SECOND.
>> I HAVE A MOTION TO DENY PRELIMINARY PLAT 2024-041. ROLL
>> NO IS DISAGREEING WITH DENIAL.
>> WHAT WAS THE COUNT? >> 3-5.
>> SO, SINCE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS NOT APPROVED --
>> WE DENIED THE MOTION TO DENY.
>> DO WE NEED TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> THE MOTION TO DENY FAILED. >> SO, THE MOTION PASSED. IT WILL GO ON THE AGENDA LATER THIS MONTH AND THEY CAN SORT IT
[14. Preliminary Plat - Arbors Phase II - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-042]
>> IF YOU CAN JUST WAIT ONE SECOND.
>> SURE. >> THIS REQUEST IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF ARBOR DRIVE, NORTH OF WEST DRAKE AVENUE. THIS IS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. THEY ARE ON 2.29 ACRES. THE LOTS ARE COMPLIANT WITH DENSITY FOR THE ZONE AND AT LEAST 9000 SQUARE FEET LOT. THE DEVELOPMENTS . THERE IS AN
[00:50:08]
ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION IN STAFF REVIEW CURRENTLY TO CONSOLIDATE THE LOTS ALONG THE AVENUE AND THEY GO QUITE A WAYS AND THERE IS A LARGER LOTS AS YOU SEE HERE AND THIS PLAT WOULD BE RECORDED AFTER THE ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION IS RECORDED . STAFF HAS NO CONCERNS WITH THIS REQUEST AND WE DID RECEIVE CORRESPONDENCE FROM NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS AND THEY WERE JUST CONCERNED ABOUT A NEW DEVELOPMENT NEAR THEIR PROPERTY AND THE POTENTIALIMPLICATIONS OF THAT. >> OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ARBORS PHASE II. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS A NEW SUBDIVISION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE JOINING. IT SAYS PHASE 2 I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE ISN'T A WHOLE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
>> I AM NOT SURE. AND YOUR NAME? WILL YOU PLEASE SIGN IN? WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD? YES, SIR.
>> I AM ROBIN JAFFE AND I AM HERE FOR MY WIFE AND MYSELF AND WE LIVE AT 562 FOREST PARK CIRCLE THAT BACKS UP TO THIS EDITION. WE ARE HOPING THAT THESE ARE NICE CONSTRUCTION AND WE DO APPRECIATE THE CUL-DE-SAC AS A SAFETY CONCERN. AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A TRAFFIC STUDY AND A DRAINAGE STUDY OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION BECAUSE OF THE IMPERVIOUS AREAS THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THE PROPERTY. JUST AS AN ADDED NOTE, I AM SURE YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A WHILE AND WE HAVE THESE PRELIMINARY APPROVALS AND THEN WE GO BACK AND DO THE FINAL APPROVAL AND IT'S A LOT OF EXTRA WORK AND I UNDERSTAND WHY. IT SO THEY CAN GO FIX THINGS BEFORE THEY COME BACK. THAT'S ALL.
>> THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MISS FRAZIER , WILL YOU RESPOND TO HIS REQUEST?
>> BASED ON THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE SUBDIVISION, THE ARBORS PHASE II WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 40 LOTS AND THE DRAINAGE WILL BE EVALUATED DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
. >> THANK YOU. AND WE DO FEEL LIKE THIS IS A PHASE 2 OF AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION?
>> YES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS?
>> MOVED TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT 2024-042, THE ARBORS PHASE
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
[15. Preliminary Plat - Maddox Street - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-043 ]
>> THIS IS THE MADDOX STREET PRELIMINARY PLAT 2024-043. THIS IS LOCATED BETWEEN 608 THROUGH 630 NORTH ROSS STREET . THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR AN EIGHT LOT PERFORMANCE SUBDIVISION. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING APPROVAL FOR EIGHT PERFORMANCE LOTS. THE PERFORMANCE SUBDIVISION AT --
[00:55:08]
PER ACRE. THERE IS A CLAUSE THAT EXEMPTS DEVELOPMENTS FROM EXTRA SPACE SO THIS IS THE DETAILS THAT WERE PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT -- AND NOT ALLOW THEM TO PLAT THAT OPEN SPACE TO PROVIDE MORE OPEN AND GREEN SPACE. THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT COMMENT IN THE COMMENTS IS THAT THEY PROVIDE THE DESIGNATION FOR WHICH LOTS WILL BE ADDU'S AND -- ALLOWS THEM TO PROVIDE THE DISTINCTION. THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.>> MOVED TO APPROVE -- >> THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. -- THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING . IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO MADDOX STREET PRELIMINARY PLAT, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS
THE APPLICANT HERE? >> I AM HERE.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. IT IS ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE AND IT IS REALLY HARD TO READ THIS PLAT.
>> IT IS BETTER SEEN ON THE SITE PLAN.
>> THE QUESTION IS WHAT? >> SO, NO OPEN SPACE WILL BE ON
OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> WE HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE THAN
IS REQUIRED. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT NOW. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY.
COMMISSIONERS? >> MOVED TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT 2024-043 WITH STAFF COMMENTS.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
>> OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> SO, 606 PITTS STREET IS
[16. Rezoning - 606 Pitts Steet - PUBLIC HEARING RZ-2024-007]
REZONING. THERE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO REZONE .17 ACRES FROM DDH TO RDD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SLIGHTLY SMALLER THAN 1/5 OF AN ACRE. IT IS LOCATED NORTH OF -- AT THE CORNER OF PITTS STREET AND -- AVENUE. THE FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS IS NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION. IF YOU LOOK AT ANY MAP FROM THE ZONING MAP TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO THE SHORT TERM RENTAL MAP THIS SECTION IS CARVED OUT AND PITTS STREET IS DDH AND THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING THIS TO RDD. IT WOULD BE IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH OTHER PLANS.CHANGING THE USE OF THIS IS -- THERE IS NO GROUNDS OR JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDING THE REZONING SO WITH THAT ,
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL. >> OKAY . THIS DOES REQUIRE
PUBLIC HEARING. >> FOR CONTEXT, I HAVE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF INTERESTED PEOPLE THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS
REZONING. >> 606 PITTS STREET REZONING DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME SPEAK ABOUT THAT AT THIS TIME YOU MAY? YES, SIR.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS -- TOLBERT JUNIOR. I AM HERE TO REPRESENT EBENEZER BAPTIST CHURCH AND WE ARE -- WE SUPPORT
[01:00:01]
THE CITY RECOMMENDATION IN DENYING THIS REQUEST . PITTS STREET HAS BEEN ONE OF THE MOST HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS IN AUBURN AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. OUR CHURCH HAS BEEN THERE SINCE -- AND AS IT STANDS NOW, A LOT OF THE AREA AROUND THE CHURCH HAS BEEN RE-DEVELOPED FOR STUDENT HOUSING. IT IS DIFFICULT TO GET OUT OF THE CHURCH AT TIMES SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU WOULD -- ON THIS COMPONENT.EXCUSE ME. I JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO DENY THIS PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. >> PLEASE SIGN IN.
>> COULD YOU PLEASE SIGN IN. >> THEY DID.
>> WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD TO SPEAK? ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? OKAY.
>> GOOD EVENING. I AM HAROLD REESE AND I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY AND I HAVE THEN THERE ALL MY LIFE. I
APPRECIATE YOUR DENIAL. >> WILL YOU PLEASE SIGN IN?
THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS MIKE ECCLES AND I OWN PROPERTY BESIDE 606 AND I ALSO OWN THREE OTHER LOTS ON PITTS STREET AND I OWN A HOME ON PITTS STREET .
SOME OF MY CONCERNS IS THIS IS AN ELDERLY NEIGHBORHOOD AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE THERE, THEY DRIVE SLOW. AND WE DO HAVE SOME CHILDREN.COM AND THEY PLAY AND THIS STREET HAS NO SIDEWALKS. A LOT OF TIMES KIDS ARE PLAYING IN THE STREETS AND I HAVE NOTICED THAT EVEN THOUGH I DON'T LIVE THERE, I LIVE IN GEORGIA, BUT I OWN PROPERTY THERE AND WHEN I COME HOME I NOTICE A LOT OF TRAFFIC COMING DOWN THAT STREET AND IT IS A DEAD-END STREET. PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE IT IS A DEAD-END STREET AND I'M AFRAID SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET HURT. I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD DENY THIS.
>> THANK YOU. >> PLEASE SIGN IN.
>> GOOD EVENING. >> I AM TERRY -- AND I LIVE AT -- PITTS STREET AND MY GRANDPARENTS LIVE ON THAT STREET . MY KIDS DO PLAY OUTSIDE. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. MY KIDS ARE CONSTANTLY GOING ACROSS THE STREET TO PLAY IN THE EMPTY LOT.
>> THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK THIS EVENING? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THERE IS SOMEBODY COMING UP.
>> I'M SORRY. >> THERE IS ANOTHER LADY
COMING. >> I LIVE ADJACENT TO PITTS STREET AND I HAVE BEEN AWAKENED BY TRAFFIC COMING DOWN PITTS STREET ATTEMPTING TO TURN ON MARTIN AVENUE AND RUNNING INTO THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME. I THINK ANYTHING ELSE DONE TO THAT SUBDIVISION WOULD MAKE TRAFFIC FLOW WORSE THAN IT
IS. I ASK THAT YOU VOTE NO. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE?
[01:05:10]
SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE APPLICANTWISHES TO SPEAK. >> HELLO. I AM LINDSAY SMITH AT 606 PITTS STREET. I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY RECENTLY AND I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE MANY OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SPOKEN TODAY. I UNDERSTAND THE LONG AND VARIED HISTORY THERE. I DO WANT TO CORRECT A COUPLE OF THINGS IN THE PACKET. WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO MEET YET BUT I DID SPEAK WITH YOUR ASSOCIATE IN DETAIL . IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO USE THIS PROPERTY AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL. IT IS FOR EITHER A SINGLE-FAMILY OR JUST LIKE IT IS ACROSS THE STREET, UNRELATED, WHICH COULD INVOLVE STUDENTS CLOSE TO AUBURN UNIVERSITY. DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET I DO NOT THINK THAT THERE IS ANY INTENTION TO SELL THAT PROPERTY HOWEVER IT IS ZONED TO ALLOW STUDENT HOUSING ACROSS THE STREET. THIS MAP, PITTS STREET WAS SPLIT DOWN THE STREET. HALF OF IT IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL BUT NOT MY HALF. I UNDERSTAND THAT SPOT ZONING IS NOT HEALTHY. I AM NOT HERE TO CONTEST THE DENIAL BUT WE ALREADY CREATED AN ISLAND EFFECT THERE WERE TO BRING MY HOME UP TO CODE, WHICH IS NECESSARY TO ENSURE IT THAT I AM GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT AND APPEAL TO PEOPLE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET WHERE STUDENTS COULD LIVE. THAT MAKES IT HARDER TO RENOVATE AND MARKET MY HOME AS A SINGLE-FAMILY BECAUSE THERE IS SOME SPLIT ZONING IN THAT AREA.
THE HOMES WERE BUILT IN 1950 AND FULL OF CHARACTER BUT THERE IS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY TO KEEP THEM FROM FALLING DOWN. THEY ARE NEEDING RENOVATION TO BE STRUCTURALLY SOUND, MY HOME INCLUDED. I WOULD LIKE TO ASKED TO OPEN THE CONVERSATION TO LOOK AT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED IN 1950, WE HAVE ALREADY TAKEN EVERY DEVELOPMENT PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY SO WE HAVE CREATED AN ISLAND OF SPLITTING OFF SOME HOMES FROM THE REST. I'M NOT SURE OF THE HISTORY AND I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BE CONSIDERED ON MY PROPERTY AS WELL. SO THAT I CAN PUT THE INVESTMENT IN IT TO MAKE IT BEAUTIFUL AGAIN. THAT WOULD BE MY INTENTION. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OR ANYTHING ELSE I
CAN PROVIDE. >> COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?
>> HOW WOULD I HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION ? HOW CAN WE FURTHER THIS CONVERSATION?
>> START BY CONTACTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
>> I AM PRETTY SURE THERE IS A TIMELINE ON REZONING APPLICATIONS BUT, A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION ARE OUTSTANDING FROM OLD NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE ARE IRREGULARITIES AND YOU WILL FIND NOT JUST NEIGHBORHOODS BUT THE WAY THE HOUSES ARE SPLIT. NORTHGATE HAS A PRETTY HARSH LINE THAT GOES THROUGH WHERE THERE IS THREE OF THEM ON ONE SIDE. I WILL SAY, BEFORE YOU PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY A LOT OF THIS CONVERSATION WAS HAD AND THAT INFORMS THE LINES. THERE IS A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THESE LINES SO, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO PETITION FOR REZONING, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION ON THE CITY SIDE FROM A FUTURE LAND USE STANDPOINT , THE ZONING STANDPOINT, IT JUST DOES NOT WORK.
[01:10:07]
AND 4:30. RIGHT NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.>> JUST A QUESTION ON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION -- INAUDIBLE ] THEY REMAINED HOMES.
>> IT WAS ESTABLISHED SO THAT ONLY SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, GO IN THERE TO PROTECT FROM ENCROACHMENT .
>> FURTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT REZONING, WE CAN DO THAT AT ANOTHER TIME. YOU ARE FREE TO EXPRESS WHERE YOU ARE AT BUT HAVING BACK-AND-FORTH ABOUT WHY THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED AS IT IS, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT TOMORROW.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS? >> I MOVED TO DENY REZONING
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
[17. Conditional Use - KC Sol-Tech - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2024-031]
>> THIS REQUEST IS A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR INDUSTRIAL USE, METAL FABRICATION. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2117 MCMILLIAN STREET IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE. THIS IS AT THE TERMINUS OF MCMILLIAN STREET AND IT ABUTS A PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS. THERE IS EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ON-SITE AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS WAREHOUSING USE THAT IS ALREADY PERMITTED THROUGH PREVIOUS CONDITIONAL USE APPROVALS FOR THIS ADDRESS IN THE PROPOSED USE WILL GO TO THIS BUILDING RIGHT HERE. WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 20,000 SQUARE FEET. SO THE NEW USE WILL BE IN THE STANDALONE SMALLER BUILDING. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH A CONDITION THAT AN EASEMENT FOR THE INITIAL PROPERTY BE RECORDED THROUGH THE ORIGINAL PLAT. OTHER THAN THAT, STAFF HAS NO CONCERNS.
>> THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON KC
SOL-TECH? >> HOWARD PORTER , I COULD NOT HEAR WHAT THE RESTRICTED LANGUAGE WAS?
>> A CONDITION TO PROVIDE AN EASEMENT FOR A WATER LINE THAT
SERVES THE PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE 2024-031 .
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO MOVE TO CITY COUNCIL AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS WITH
CONDITIONS. ALL OF FAVOR? >> AYE
[18. Conditional Use - W Veterans RV Storage - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2024-037]
>> THE NEXT CASE IS CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A COMMERCIAL
[01:15:04]
SPORT USE, SPECIFICALLY A WAREHOUSE RV STORAGE FACILITY AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO ALLOW METAL BUILDING MATERIALS ON PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 419 WEST VETERANS BOULEVARD IN THE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. SEVERAL COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USES HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THE LAST YEAR IN CLOSE PROXIMITY OF THE USE.COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USES ALL SO PROVIDE A GOOD TRANSITION FROM THOSE THAT ARE ON SOUTH COLLEGE STREET BEYOND THE TECH PARK.
THE CONCEPT OF THE PROPOSAL IS FAIRLY NEW. THIS IS THE FIRST ONE PROPOSED IN AUBURN BUT IT IS BECOMING A THING ACROSS THE UNITED STATES WHERE PEOPLE ARE CONSTRUCTING THESE USES AND SOME OF THE UNITS WILL HAVE MEZZANINES IN THEM WHERE THEY CAN LOUNGE AND WORK ON THEIR VEHICLES , WHATEVER VEHICLES THEY ARE AND THIS IS FOR FOUR BUILDINGS THAT WILL BE DIVIDED INTO INDIVIDUAL UNITS. 46 UNITS. THEY ARE ABOUT 50 FEET BY 25 FEET WIDE , IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN. THERE WILL BE ROGER DOORS ON THE INTERNAL SIDE AND A STANDALONE DOOR TO ACCESS EACH UNIT. THEY ARE REQUESTING THE LABOR TO HAVE METAL BUILDING MATERIALS ON THE SIDE AND THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY IN ADDITION TO THE COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USES THAT HAVE BEEN GRANTED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, WAIVERS HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR SOME OF THE MATERIALS. THEY ARE PROPOSING BRICK ALONG THE FRONT AND THESE TWO BUILDINGS ARE WHERE THE OFFICE SPACE WILL BE SO THEY LOOK LIKE A OFFICE FROM THE STREET. THE MOST VISIBLE SIDES THAT WILL BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OF THE MATERIALS WOULD BE THOSE OUTERMOST BUILDINGS AND THAT COULD BE MITIGATED WITH LANDSCAPING. STAFF WOULD BE MORE APT OF APPROVAL IF THEY DID HAVE A COMPLIANT BUILDING MATERIAL ON THE PORTION OF THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE CLOSER TO THE STREET.
AND THE METAL TOWARDS THE REAR. SOME OF THE PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVED WAIVERS EARLY YEAR WERE FOR BUILDINGS SET FURTHER BACK ON THEIR PROPERTIES AND THESE ARE CLOSER UP SIMPLY BECAUSE TWO THIRDS OF THE PROPERTY IS COMPRISED OF A STREAM, STREAM BUFFER, AND FLOODPLAIN . RENDERING A PART OF THE PROPERTY ON BUILDABLE. -- NOT BUILDABLE. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND STAFF WOULD BE OKAY WITH THE METAL MATERIALS A CERTAIN DISTANCE BACK FROM THE STREET. I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON THIS YEAR -- USE. WE DO RECOMMEND WITH CONDITIONS AND THOSE ARE THAT NO RESIDENTIAL USE IS ALLOWED AT ANY TIME. THAT THE VEHICLES ARE STORED IN THE UNITS THEMSELVES AT ALL TIMES AND NO TAILGATING IS ALLOWED ON SITE.
I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
>> IS THE APPLICANT HERE? THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING SO I AM GOING TO OPEN THAT FOR THE WEST VETERANS RV STORAGE. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO COME SPEAK ABOUT THIS? SEEING
[01:20:06]
NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTING SEPARATE, CONDITIONAL USE. APPLICANT, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS?>> MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE MATERIALS THAT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE STREET, FROM VETERANS. YES ON PUTTING BRICK OR STONE AND THEN THE ONES THAT YOU CANNOT SEE, THIS IS ABOUT THE WAIVER.
>> SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO PUT BRICK AND ON SOME OF THE RENDERINGS IT IS PAINTED BECAUSE THE COLOR IS NOT NAILED DOWN SO DON'T GET TOO HUNG UP ON THAT. THE FRONT WALLS WILL MAKE THE CORRIDOR STANDARDS AND THIS IS A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF ALL OF THE OTHER WALLS. REALLY, EVERY OTHER WALL WILL BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET . THE MAJORITY OF THE FAÇADE WILL BE
CLADDING GOES. >> LET ME GET BACK TO MY
>> WOULD YOU AGREE TO HAVE BRICK OR WHATEVER MATERIALS ARE ALLOWED BY THE CITY ON THE SIDES THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM THE
ROAD AS STAFF HAS SAID? >> I GUESSED -- GUESS ONE THING I WOULD REQUEST, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE COULD DO TO MAKE IT SO THAT -- BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF SOME OF THESE STRUCTURES, THE PREFERENCE IS GOING TO BE TO NOT RUN BRICK ALL THE WAY DOWN BECAUSE THERE ARE PORTIONS YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO SEE BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF IT.
ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I HAVE WITH IT, BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING, WE COULD BE CUTTING OFF ONE THIRD OF THE WAY DOWN OR HALFWAY DOWN WITH A BRICK FAÇADE ALONG THE WALL. I AM NOT AN ARCHITECT BUT I HAVE A HARD TIME PICTURING THAT. ONE THING I WOULD THROW OUT THERE , IT WILL BE A CONTROLLED FACILITY WE WILL DO ALL OF THE SCREENING THAT WE NEED FROM THE STREET FRONTAGE AND IF POSSIBLE WE WILL HANDLE SOME OF IT WITH LANDSCAPING BUT I THINK THERE IS SOME OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE
WRAPPING IT. >> STAFFING DIDN'T GIVE US ANY
-- >> I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE. THE OTHER THING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, THIS IS KIND OF AN ARCHITECTURAL THING BUT THIS IS DOING WHAT IS CALLED STONE OR BRICK ON THE LOWER. SO WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT DOING THAT ON THE INTERIOR OF THE DOORS AND THAT WOULD CERTAINLY HELP BUT I THINK THE PIECES OF THE BUILDING THAT WILL BE VISIBLE ARE, I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF THE BENEFIT WE WILL GET FROM HAVING A DIFFERENT MATERIAL THERE. BUT, IF THAT IS A STICKING POINT WE WILL CERTAINLY CONSIDER IT. DOES
THAT HELP? >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PLAN VIEW? FROM MY VIEWPOINT I FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE BECAUSE OF THE CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT AT LEAST PART OF THAT COULD BE VISIBLE FROM AN ANGLE, THAT MIGHT BE THREE OR FOUR BAYS DOWN. MY OTHER CONCERN IS WHAT TYPE OF MATERIAL WILL IT BE? WILL IT BE A NICE ARCHITECTURAL PANEL ? MY VIEWPOINT, IF WE APPROVE SOMETHING, IT OPENS UP
[01:25:05]
THE DOOR BECAUSE THIS IS SO CLOSE TO THE STREET. IT VERY CLOSE. I AM NOT SURE WHAT LANDSCAPING CAN ACHIEVE, FROM MY STANDPOINT, WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO SEE THERE COMPARED TO THE OTHERS. THAT IS A GOOD BIT BACK FROM THE ROAD.>> WE WERE NOT GIVEN A TON OF PARAMETERS. SO , --
>> I'M WITH YOU. >> THERE'S NO CONDITION.
>> YEAH, YEAH. I THINK THERE WAS A BUILDING, IT WAS THE COCA-COLA BUILDING THAT DID A SIMILAR THING WHERE THEY WENT
THROUGH THE SPECIAL STAFF. >> I AGREE. THAT IS SET FURTHER OFF THE ROAD AND THERE IS MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR SCREENING. THE FINAL SELECTION ON BUILDING MATERIALS WILL BE BASED ON WHATEVER WE DECIDE AT THIS MEETING. BUT, AS FAR AS THE EXACT TYPE OF PANEL I THING WE HAVE YOUR STANDARD CREATIVE INAUDIBLE ] AND IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO
OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT IF WE NEED TO ENVELOP ADDITIONAL -- BY WORKING WITH STAFF WE CAN DETERMINE WHERE THAT LINE IS. I THINK, PRIMARILY, THE BEST APPLICATION OF THAT WILL BE ON THE TWO BUILDINGS ON THE OUTSIDE WALLS . I'M JUST NOT SURE HOW MUCH THAT IS GOING TO
ACCOMPLISH. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING AMENABLE
>> MOVED TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE 2024-037 WITH CONDITIONS.
AND WORK WITH STAFF. >> WORK WITH STAFF TO DETERMINE
WHAT IS AND IS NOT VISIBLE. >> RECOMMENDATION -- SOMEBODY ELSE MAKE A MOTION. I MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
>> WITH CONDITIONS? >> WITH CONDITIONS FOR THE
BUILDING MATERIALS. >> FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE
THERE ARE NO OVERNIGHT STAYS. >> YES. WITH STAFF RECOMMENDED
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. WITH CONDITIONS ON THE CONDITIONAL USE. ALL OF FAVOR?
>> NOW WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE WAIVER.
>> WHERE IS IT? OKAY. I MOVED TO APPROVE THE WAIVER WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL DEALING WITH BUFFER YARDS, BUILDING MATERIALS, PARKING TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE WAIVER. ALL OF FAVOR?
>> AYE >> ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. ALL
[19. Conditional Use – GameLink - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2024-033]
RIGHT. >> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR MANUFACTURING. THE PROPERTY IS
[01:30:03]
LOCATED AT 2330 PUMPHREY AVENUE UNIT E IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT . ERE IS AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON SITE WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS USED FOR -- THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED FOR PRIOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVALS AND THE NEW REQUEST WILL BE IN A NEW BUILDING THAT IS 6600 SQUARE FEET. THIS IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE AND STAFFRECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> WITH NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS?
>> NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING . WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? >> MOVED TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
[20. Conditional Use - Judd Avenue Mixed Use - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2024-036 ]
>> THE NEXT REQUEST IS CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR MIXED-USE. THE PROPERTY IS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT AND IT ENCOMPASSES FOUR PARCELS THAT TOTAL APPROXIMATELY 2.5 ACRES AND THE PROPERTY HAS FRONTAGE ON JUDD AVENUE AND RICHLAND ROAD . THE SITE PLAN SHOWS 16 COTTAGE HOUSING UNITS WITH A CLUSTER OF 12 ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AT FOUR TO THE SOUTH AND THOSE UNITS WILL TAKE ACCESS FROM JUDD AVENUE AND TO THE WEST IS AN 8000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT WILL ACCESS RICHLAND ROAD AND THERE IS A SIDEWALK HERE THAT CONNECTS THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL PORTIONS. HERE IS A LIST OF THE COMMERCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT USES THAT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. STAFF IS AGREEABLE TO THE MAJORITY OF THEM. THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT WE RECOMMEND TO OUR STRICKEN FROM THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL AND THAT INCLUDES A FUNERAL HOME AND A PRIVATE CLUB. WE BELIEVE THE SUN HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO CREATE ON DO A FAX TO NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS. AND -- WE WOULD DIDN'T RECOMMEND THAT BE DENIED AS WELL BECAUSE THAT WOULD PREVENT ANY COMMERCIAL USE ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL . THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A WAIVER TO THE COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT THAT THE NET FLOOR AREA OF EACH UNIT SHALL NOT EXCEED 1.5 TIMES OF THE AREA OF THE MAIN LEVEL . THIS STANDARD WAS PUT INTO EFFECT TO ENSURE THE COTTAGE HOUSING UNITS WERE CONSTRUCTED IN A WAY THAT , TO ENSURE THE CUSTOMARY DESIGNS.
THEY ARE MEANT TO BE SMALLER UNITS THAN A TYPICAL FAMILY HOME. THE EXAMPLE THAT I REFERENCED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE SITE PLAN SHOWS A , FOR THE NORTHERN CLUSTER HERE, A BUILDING FOOTPRINT OF APPROXIMATELY 760 SQUARE FEET AND THE ZONING REQUIREMENT WOULD REQUIRE AN UPPER FLOOR OF 380 SQUARE FEET FOR 1140 SQUARE FEET. IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO ALLOW WHAT TO EXCEED NO MORE THAN 1.75 TIMES -- TO NOT EXCEED THAT . SO FOR THE PREVIOUS EXAMPLE THAT WOULD ALLOW AN UPPER FLOOR OF 570 SQUARE FEET. IT WOULD JUST GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE UNIT. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE USES WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE
[01:35:06]
PRIVATE CLUB AND THE FUNERAL HOME AND ALL OTHERS ARE STRICKEN AND THE WAIVER UP TO 1.75 TIMES AND JUST CONDITIONAL THAT ALL OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SHOW.>> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? IS THE APPLICANT HERE?
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AND I AM GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE JUDD AVENUE CONDITIONAL USE.
>> TO THE COMMISSION I AM ERNEST GREIG AND THIS IS WHERE MY CHURCH IS IN THE PROPERTY BORDERS ON THE SOUTH AND EAST OF THE CHURCH. FOR 25 YEARS THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF OUR CHURCH WAS VACANT. IT WAS AN EYESORE. THIS COST US QUITE A BIT OF MONEY ON THE FRONT PART OF THE CHURCH THERE. THAT PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF US WERE BOTH OWNED BY PREVIOUS CHURCH MEMBERS THAT ARE DECEASED NOW BUT THE PROPERTY IS PRECIOUS TO US BECAUSE OF WHO LIVED THERE AND THE WAY IT WAS WHEN THEY LIVED THERE. FOR 25 YEARS NOBODY HAD BEEN THERE AND THIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY HAS COME IN TO ENHANCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE AS A CHURCH BODY WE ARE ENCOURAGED BY IT AND WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT GO FORWARD. WE WELCOME THE NEIGHBORS. IT HELPS US AS CHRISTIANS TO LIVE OUT WHAT THE BIBLE TELLS US TO DO. WE OFFER THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED THERE BEFORE SO THAT THEY CAN WALK OUT OF THE DOOR, GO ACROSS THE PARKING LOT AND COME TO CHURCH. CHURCH OPERATES ON THREE THINGS. NOSES, NICKELS, AND NUMBERS. IT IS AN ASSET TO US. ALSO, WE DON'T WANT TO COME IN AND BRING THE PROPERTY VALUE DOWN. OR SOMETHING THAT WILL JUST LOOK BAD. THE COMPANY BEHIND US, THERE WAS A GREAT OUTCRY BEFORE THEY BUILT. IT WAS A HOLE IN THE GROUND BACK THERE. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PLACE AND WE GET ALONG GOOD. WE HAVE INVITED THEM TO BE A PART OF OUR CONGREGATION, JUST LIKE WE DO ANYPLACE ELSE. IT IS AN UPGRADE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD
AND A POSITIVE AS A CHURCH. >> THANK YOU. PLEASE SIGN IN IF YOU HAVE NOT. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.
WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? WE HAVE TWO
THINGS TO VOTE ON. >> I MOVED OUT WE APPROVE THE -- EXCUSE ME. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CU-2024-036 , THE COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. WITH CONDITIONS. THAT INCLUDES
ELIMINATING -- >> WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT IN
THE WAIVER SEPARATE. >> THAT INCLUDES ELIMINATING THE THREE USES NOTED BY STAFF.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. ALL OF FAVOR?
>> AYE >> OPPOSED? THANK YOU. WAIVER?
>> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE WAIVER.
>> NOT ALLOWING THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE COTTAGE UNIT TO EXCEED MORE THAN 1.75 THE SIZE OF THE MAIN FLOOR.
[01:40:02]
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
[21. Annexation - Farmville Mixed Use AX-2024-023 ]
>> THIS IS ONE OF FOUR REQUEST FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SIDE. CURRENTLY THIS IS ANNEXATION OF 3.8 ACRES INTO AUBURN CITY LIMITS AND IT IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST FARMVILLE ROAD AND IS ADJACENT TO U.S. HIGHWAY 280 .
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS CURRENTLY AND WOULD RECEIVE WORLD UPON ANNEXATION BUT IT IS ALSO THE SUBJECT OF THE SUBSEQUENT REZONING REQUESTS , PLURAL.
THIS SITE MEETS ALL OF OUR ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS AND
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> THIS IS -- THIS DOES NOT
REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVED TO APPROVE 24 NINE.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE .
[22. Rezoning - Farmville Mixed Use DDH - PUBLIC HEARING RZ-2024-008 ]
>> OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> THIS IS THE SECOND REQUEST FOR THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SIDE. IT IS A REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE SAME LOT THAT YOU JUST SAW FROM WORLD TO DEVELOP IT DISTRICT HOUSING. THE PURPOSE IS TO MATCH THE BASE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY JUST NORTH OF IT WHICH WOULD ROUND OUT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE. THIS PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY UP FOR REZONING IS MAJORITY IN THE GATEWAY COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE PORTION OF THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED WITH ANY TYPE OF HOUSING OR COMMERCIAL SPACE SO MOST OF THE CONVERSATION AROUND LAND-USE WILL INCLUDE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS REQUEST CONFLICT IS WITH THE DH BECAUSE IT CONTAINS COMMERCIAL HOWEVER, IT WOULD ALLOW THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO BE APPROVED WHICH WOULD GET RID OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES THAT EXIST BETWEEN THE ZONING OF DDH AND COMMERCIAL. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.
>> YOU RD ANSWERED MY QUESTION. THIS IS REZONING TO DDH AND DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
>> I AM BECKY AND WE LIVE ACROSS THE WAY AND WE BACK UP TO THIS PROPERTY. I GUESS OUR ONE CONCERN IS AS FAR AS TRAFFIC LIGHTS , THERE IS A LARGE GUARD RAIL ALONG 280 AND WE ARE KIND OF LIMITED BECAUSE OF THAT. THE STRIP IS ALSO SHORT. AND THIS HAS INCREASED IN THAT DIRECTION. BUT THE ONLY THING WE WOULD ASK SOME KIND OF OFFER BE PUT IN.
>> I APPRECIATE YOU COMING TO SPEAK ON THIS REQUEST.
>> THERE'S THE TRAFFIC , THE GUARD RAIL, THE NOISE, THE
[01:45:03]
LIGHTS. WE DONE HAVE MUCH LIGHT SHINING THROUGH THE TREES HERE.>> PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONERS? REZONING? >> MOVED TO APPROVE
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
[23. Rezoning - Farmville Mixed-Use PDD - PUBLIC HEARING RZ-2024-009]
>> THE THIRD REQUEST IS THE REQUEST TO APPLY THE OVERLAY DISTRICT TO 14.17 ACRES WITH A DAYS OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOUSING OR DDH. THE AREA INCLUDES LIKE YOU SEE IN THE COLOR RED, 3.79 ACRE PROPERTY THAT WAS JUST APPROVED FOR ANNEXATION AND THE SUBSEQUENT REZONING TO DDH AS WELL AS THE 10.2 ACRES TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY. MIKE MENTIONED BEFORE THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE GATEWAY COMMERCIAL . THE APPROVAL OF THE PDD WOULD CONSTITUTE THE CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR ALL PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN THAT -- SO YOU CAN SEE IN THE BLUE AND THE PINK THAT INCLUDES THE PROPOSED TOWN HOMES AND MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT WOULD TOTAL 80 TOTAL PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 60 WOULD BE TOWNHOUSE LOT AND 12 WOULD BE MULTIFAMILY UNITS. THE MAXIMUM DENSITY FOR PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENT IN DDH WOULD BE 5.5 -- -- SO, THIS WOULD ALLOW THE PROPERTY TO HAVE 77 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THIS BE PDD AND THAT WOULD MAKE THE MAXIMUM 7.65 UNITS -- TO ALLOW FOR THE PROPOSED 80 UNITS TO BE DEVELOPED. IN EXCHANGE FOR THIS INCENTIVE, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES PUTTING A 20 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER AROUND THE PROPERTY, NOT JUST THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. IN ADDITION THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT IS SHOWN WILL BE THE SUBJECT OF THE SUBSEQUENT CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST TO APPLY OR TO DECIDE THE ARRAY OF USES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED. THE REQUEST WOULD MAKE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT COMPATIBLE WITH GATEWAY COMMERCIAL THERE FOR STAFF IS APPROVING THIS REZONING WEST WITH SOME CONDITIONS. I CAN GO INTO DETAIL. THE FIRST WOULD BE IN REGARDS TO THE 20 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER. AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER IS ONLY AROUND THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND WE WOULD REQUIRE IT TO EXTEND ALL THE WAY AROUND THE COMMERCIAL PORTION AS WELL TO ENCOMPASS THE WHOLE PROPERTY. SECOND , WHEN CALCULATING OPEN SPACE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ANY BUFFER YARD WITHIN A PROJECT LOT SO ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE DRAWN IN WITH A BUFFER YARD IN BLUE, YOU CAN SEE AT THE VERY TOP WITH THE TOWNHOUSE LOT, THOSE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE OPEN SPACE AND CURRENTLY THE APPLICANT SET US A -- SATISFIES THIS BY ABOUT 2.8 ACRES. THAT ISN'T A CONCERN BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE THAT A CONDITION. THIRD, BUFFER
[01:50:04]
YARDS WOULD NEED TO BE PUT IN AN EASEMENT THAT WOULD BE HELD BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND FOURTH, IF THEY WERE TO BE DESTROYED, -- WOULD GO TO THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS.AGAIN, WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THOSE CONDITIONS.
>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. FOR FARMVILLE MIXED
USE PDD. PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> MY QUESTION IS. I KNOW CITY WANTS IN AND OUT ON EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD BUT THOSE TWO DEAD-END STREETS GO TO OUR PROPERTY AND THAT WILL JUST BE SOMEBODY TRYING TO TURN AROUND, ETC. CAN THOSE NOT GO THERE?
THAT IS MY QUESTION. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I ACTUALLY HAVE THE SAME QUESTION THAT SHE DOES. I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THAT ROAD, IF IT
CAME OVER. >> IT IS A LARGE PARCEL AND IF IT IS EVER REDEVELOPED -- THIS PROPERTY AT THE END OF FLAGSTONE WAS DEVELOPED THIS CAME THROUGH SO THIS IS WHAT
THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN WAS. >> OKAY .
>> SO THE INTENT IS IF EVER IT SELLS THEN WE MIGHT MAKE USE OF
IT? >> COULD YOU STILL PUT IN A
TEMPORARY TURNAROUND? >> YES .
>> I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A CONDITION.
>> IT WILL BE COMING SOON FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT . SO THAT IS
SOMETHING WE CAN WORK WITH. >> SO, WE ARE JUST DOING PDD
RIGHT NOW? >> I MOVED TO APPROVE
RZ-2024-009 WITH CONDITIONS. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
>> AYE >> OPPOSED ? THANK YOU.
[24. Conditional Use - Farmville Mixed Use - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2024-032]
>> FOURTH AND FINAL REQUEST FOR THIS SITE IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A VARIETY OF USES. INSTITUTIONAL , OFFICE, COMMERCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT AND THIS IS A LIST OF THE , THE EXTENDED LIST BROKEN DOWN OF EVERYTHING THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. THE PROPERTY IS DDH AND FUTURE LAND USE OF GATEWAY COMMERCIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ON THIS VERY SOUTHEAST CORNER TO INPUT A 12,000 SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH THE APPLICANT STATING IT WOULD BE DEVELOPED AS DEMAND REQUIRES. THEY BELIEVE THE PROPOSED USES IS PART OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGNATIONS. WE RECOMMEND
APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. >> SO THERE IS NO
]? >> WE DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY. THE
[01:55:01]
CONDITIONS, THE FOUR THAT YOU JUST APPROVED FOR THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE APPLIED TO THIS REQUEST AS WELL AS WELL AS THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY CONDITIONS AND A DRIVE-THROUGH USE NEEDING APPROVAL FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND D.O.T..>> SO IT DOESN'T COME WITH THE DRIVE-THROUGH AT THIS POINT?
>> NO. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS CONDITIONAL USE FARMVILLE MIXED USE DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING . WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS?
>> MOVED TO FORWARD THE CONDITIONAL USE 2024-032 TO THE
CITY COUNCIL WITH CONDITIONS. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL OF FAVOR?
[25. Conditional Use - Ogletree Village Shopping Center - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2024-038]
>> AYE . >> OPPOSED? THANK YOU.
>> THE NEXT ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A CONDITIONAL USE FOR OGLETREE VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER . IT IS UP THE CORNER OF MOORES MILL ROAD AND OGLETREE ROAD. THE OGLETREE VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER IS JUST UNDER 48 ACRES AND WITHIN THIS AREA HAVE BEEN APPROVED A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER. PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH INCLUDES MULTIPLE UNIT OF ELEMENTS WITH TOWNHOMES AND TWIN HOMES AS WELL AS ASSISTED LIVING. OVER THE YEARS THE SHOPPING CENTER HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR 193,000 SQUARE FEET COMMERCIAL SPACE. THE ZONING ORDINANCE CAPS A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER AT 100,000 SQUARE FEET SO THIS REQUEST IS TO RECLASSIFY THE SHOPPING CENTER TO A COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY DIFFERENT APPROVALS OTHER THAN WHAT IS THERE. STAFF
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. OGLETREE VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS, PLEASE COME FORWARD TO DO SO.
SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS?
>> MOVED TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE 2024-038.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
[26. Waiver - Café Racer Building Materials WZ-2024-011]
>> OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A WAIVER FOR CAFE RACER BUILDING MATERIALS. THE PROPERTY CONTAINS 1.17 ACRES AND IT IS LOCATED AT NORTHGATE STREET AND OPELIKA ROAD. THIS IS ZONED CRD-U AND THIS IS PRETTY STRINGENT . I THINK MY OPINION AND INTERPRETATION IS THE OWNERS HAVE BEEN SILENT AND I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD MEAN THERE WOULD BE LEEWAY AND I THINK, GIVEN SOME OF THE OTHER WAIVERS THAT WE HAVE APPROVED REGARDING MATERIALS IN DIFFERENT DISTRICTS AND IN DIFFERENT PLACES WITH THESE BUILDINGS WHERE IT IS MORE OF THE AESTHETIC THAT THEY WERE DOING.
THIS IS A HIGH-TRAFFIC CORNER AND ONE OF THE MAIN CORE DOORS THAT PEOPLE SEE AND ALSO AN EXTENSION OF THE DOWNTOWN AS WELL. THEY WERE KIND OF EXPLICIT ABOUT WHAT THE BUILDING MATERIALS CAN BE. THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT -- OF THIS. ON THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE PAGE -- OVER TO THE
[02:00:02]
COLORS? >> YEAH, YEAH. ALL THE WAY UP.
SO, JUST ASSOCIATING IT WITH THE OTHER BUILDINGS, THESE WILL BE METAL PANELS AND THIS IS EXPOSED BUT THE ORDINANCE IS EXPLICIT ABOUT THIS CANNOT BE USED BEYOND ACCENT AND TRIM. IT HAS A CLEAR COLOR PALETTE AND WHAT THE MATERIALS CAN BE AND THIS IS THE EPITOME OF WHAT IT SHOULD NOT BE. SO, WITH THIS BEING EXPLICIT AS FAR AS WHAT IS ALLOWED FOR MATERIAL SAMPLING AND HOW MUCH OF THAT MATERIAL CAN BE USED AND WHERE, I DID NOT THINK IT SHOULD BE APPROVED SO WE RECOMMEND
DENIAL. >> THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION. IS A MATERIAL ,
COLORS, OR BOTH? >> I THINK DOWNTOWN, THE COLORS, THERE IS A DOWNTOWN COLOR PALETTE BUT I THINK THIS IS JUST MATERIALS. IT IS MUCH MORE LIKE THE METALS AND THINGS
LIKE THAT. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
THE APPLICANT IS HERE. >> IN REGARDS TO MATERIALS, YES, IT IS METAL BUT THIS IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN DOING BRICK. THIS IS PART OF THE BRAND. ALL OF THEIR BUILDINGS EVEN DOWNTOWN ARE THE SAME. HIRE AND METAL PANELS WITH THE COLORS AND THE MAJORITY OF THE FRONT, WHICH IS METAL PANELS IS WHERE THE KITCHEN AND EVERYTHING IS THAT. THE FRONT, THAT IS THE ONLY PLACE FOR CUSTOMERS TO ENTER AT ALONG WITH A LONG LARGE OUTSIDE. IT IS NOT THE COLORS THAT WE ARE HERE ABOUT . IT IS THE BUILDING MATERIALS SPECIFICALLY. WITH IT BEING PART OF THEIR BRAND THEY WOULD PREFER TO USE THE HIGHER END METAL PANELS FOR THE BUILDING MATERIALS SO, WE KNOW IT IS A WAIVER SO , THIS IS THE VIEW LOOKING FROM THE INTERSECTION. AT THE TOP WOULD BE THE INTERSECTION OF OPELIKA ROAD . THE BACK IS THE VIEW FROM THE ROADS THAT NOBODY WOULD EVER SEE. THE DRIVE-THROUGH IS JUST A METAL COVER. PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERACTING WITH THE CUSTOMERS ARE UNDERCOVER THAT WAY. THE TOP PICTURE THERE WOULD BE THE BACKSIDE IF YOU ARE AT THE FRONT OF OPELIKA ROAD AND LOOKING BACK THAT WOULD BE THE VIEW FROM THAT SIDE AND THE BOTTOM ENGLEWOOD BE AS IF YOU WERE VIEWING FROM THE POST OFFICE. SO THE MIDDLE PART IS IN THE BACK. THE FRONT IS ALL OPEN GLASS. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
>> WHAT ARE THE APPROVED MATERIALS?
>> SHALL CONSIST OF NATURAL MATERIALS LIKE WOOD, STONE, BRICK, STUCCO, CONCRETE BLOCK, VERTICAL JOINTS AND MAXIMUM SEVEN INCH EXPOSURE . SIMULATED CEDAR SHAKE MAY BE APPROVE AFTER REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION. COLUMNS SHOULD BE IN THE SAME MATERIALS AS THE BUILDING FAÇADE. -- BOND. OR SIMILAR TYPE OF MATERIALS MAY ONLY BE USED AS ARCHITECTURAL TRIM AND
ACCENT. SO, VERY EXPLICIT. >> SO, CAN I PAINT THE BRICK
[02:05:04]
>> I WANT TO ELABORATE ON WHAT BRAD SAID. I AM BRAD WITH CAFE RACER AND AS WAS MENTIONED OF THIS IS VERY MUCH PART OF THE BRAND. THIS IS PART OF OUR GOLDEN ARCHES AND THIS IS WHO WE ARE. WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS ON ANOTHER BUILD IN ATHENS AND THEY POINTED OUT THE FACT THAT IF WE WERE TO GO WITH SOMETHING THAT WAS -- IT WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE AND I SAID NO, THIS IS OUR BRAND AND WHO WE ARE. IN LARGE PART , WHAT IS FRONT FACING IS GLASS. THIS IS THE BACKSIDE OF THE BUILDING. WE JUST ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >> I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE WAIVER. FOR WZ-2024-011 .
>> SECOND. >> SO YOU FEEL LIKE THEY CAN ACHIEVE THE COLOR SCHEME WITH DIFFERENT MATERIALS?
>> YES. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. DENIAL IS WHAT IS PROPOSED. ROLL CALL PLEASE.
>> THAT IS THE LAST OF THE AGENDA ITEMS. NO
COMMUNICATIONS. >> IF YOU HAVE ANY
[13. Preliminary Plat - H&G Stables - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2024-041 (Part 2 of 2)]
COMMUNICATION CARGO FIRST. >> I DO NOT HAVE ANY.
>> WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE STABLES. I HAVE A VOTE IN THE
AFFIRMATIVE. >> THE MOTION WAS TO DENY THEN FIVE PEOPLE VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION TO DENY SO JUST FOR CLARITY PURPOSES, I NEED A MOTION IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
>> I WILL RENEW MY MOTION TO APPROVE PP-2024-041 .
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
>> LET'S CALL THE ROLL. >> ROLL CALL PLEASE.
>> THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. THE OTHER ITEM, I AM GOING TO SEND
[OTHER BUSINESS]
YOU ALL AN EMAIL TO GIVE YOU SCHEDULES FOR UPCOMING WORK SESSIONS AND ONE IS PROJECT SPECIFIC AND ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE PUD REGULATIONS. SO WE WILL MEET TO JUST MAKE SURE THERE IS CLARITY AND THEN WE WILL MEET WITH YOU ALL ABOUT WHAT THE REGULATIONS ARE BEFORE THEY GO TO COUNSEL. WE WILL HAVE A FULL WORK SESSION AND YOU CAN HAVE OPINIONS. IT IS NOT JUST A THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE. WE WILL ANSWER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE OR INPUT , THAT WILL BE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.CURRENTLY, AS IS. IT MIGHT BE LATER LIKE SEPTEMBER.
[STAFF COMMUNICATION ]
[02:10:07]
>> OKAY. >> I'M SORRY, I DO HAVE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT. WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT BUT, I YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED A NEW GENTLEMAN. WE ARE JUST HAPPY TO
HAVE YOU. >> WHAT IS YOUR NAME?
>> MY NAME IS SEVEN --. >> THANK YOU.
>> I MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.