Nov 14, 2024 Planning Commission

[ROLL CALL]

[00:01:57]

>>> HAVE SEVERAL PUBLIC HEARINGS. I AM SURE TO GO OVER WHAT THE PROCEDURE . THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT A Q&A SESSION. ALL QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED WILL BE ANSWERED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. IF ONE PERSON SPEAKS OR FIVE PEOPLE SPEAK OR MORE THAN THAT THEY WILL ALL WAITING ON ONE OF US TO ANSWER A QUESTION. WE WILL ANSWER THEM ALL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS

CLOSED. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I

[CONSENT AGENDA ]

OCTOBER? >>

[4. Waiver - Mimms Trail Right Turn Lane Appeal ]

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU.

OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT. THAT IS YOU.

>> THE NEXT TWO ITEMS . THESE ARE BOTH REQUESTS SEPARATED INTO A LEFT TURN OF THEM. THE DE WAIVER IS IN THE PACKET ALONG WITH THE RESPONSE LETTER. THIS IS ON MILLCREEK ROAD. NORTH OF THE CROSSING DEVELOPMENT. THERE WERE SIMILAR TURN LANES INSTALLED. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS I

CAN ANSWER THEM. >> YOU SAID THEY WERE EXISTING

NOW OR BEING BUILT? >> I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE FINISHED, BUT THEY ARE BONDED. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO GO INTO DEVELOPMENT AND WILL BE IF NOT COMPLETED YET.

>> WE WILL TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME. THE FIRST IS THE RIGHT

[00:05:02]

LANE. >> GOOD EVENING. REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. SO HERE IS THE MANUAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TURN LANES. WHEN HIGH-VOLUME TURN LANES ARE WARRANTED THEY WILL BE REQUIRED FOR A LEFT TURN LANES AND RIGHT TURN LANES.

UNLESS DETERMINED TRAFFIC STUDY. THE TRAFFIC STUDY DID TURN LANE WARRANT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WERE WANTED ON THE SECTION OF ROAD. ON THIS PARTICULAR SECTION OF ROAD WHAT WAS COLLECTED WAS ONLY 1000. WHEN WE LOOKS INDISCERNIBLE ] THE BLUE LINE INDICATES WHETHER A LEFT TURN LANE IS WARRANTED. EVEN ON THE RIGHT TURN LANE IT IS THE SAME THING.

>> IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE ON A ROAD OF ON THE 1000 CARS PER DAY THEY ARE NOT CLOSE TO BEING WARRANTED. EVEN IF YOU PULL BACK AND LOOK AT A BIGGER SCALE IN PARTICULAR MILLCREEK ROAD CONNECTS -- SOMEWHAT LIMITED IN REGARDS TO ITS USE. PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO COME DOWN MILLCREEK IN A COMMUTER ROLE.

IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GO EAST OR WEST -- IN REGARDS TO SANDHILL ROAD IT IS AND EAST-WEST LINKING, BUT THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE USING MILLCREEK ROAD ARE GOING TO BE THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE ON MILLCREEK ROAD. IN REGARDS TO HOW MANY MORE CARS WE ARE EXPECTING EVEN IF WE DOUBLE IT . EVEN 2000 OR 3000 WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ANYWHERE NEAR IN THE SECTION . WHERE WE TOOK OUR ACCOUNTS WAS IN OUR AREA OF MILLCREEK ROAD. FURTHER NORTH WHERE THERE IS AN ENTRANCE TO MIMMS TRAIL IN THE SUBDIVISION ACROSS THE STREET. THERE MAY BE MORE VEHICLES, SO TURN LANES MAY BE WARRANTED. WE HAD TO PUT THEM IN. IN THIS PARTICULAR SECTION THERE IS ONLY 1000 CARS PER DAY. WE FEEL THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE INDISCERNIBLE ] WE FEEL THIS IS GOING TO BE MORE OF A SECONDARY BACK ENTRANCE. EVEN THE FUTURE LANE USE PLAN NOW THAT THE PLAN THAT IS UP FOR TONIGHT IS PROPOSING TO CHANGE THE AREA. IN SUMMARY

[00:10:16]

SOME LARGE LOT RESIDENTIAL. IN REGARDS TO PUTTING IN THESE TURN LANES IF THESE WERE WARRANTED THERE WOULD BE NO QUESTION, BUT THEY ARE NOT ANYWHERE BEING WARRANTED ON A ROAD OF THIS LOW-VOLUME, SO WE DO NOT FEEL IT IS APPROPRIATE TO PUT IN TURN LANES ON THE ROADS WHERE IT IS NOT WARRANTED. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> SO THIS IS THE TRAFFIC COUNT AS OF TODAY. NOT WHEN THE

DEVELOPMENT GETS IN . >> NO. THAT IS THE COUNT TODAY.

WHEN WE DO THE TRAFFIC STUDY WE PROJECTED THE GROWTH OF TRAFFIC AS WELL AS THE OTHER PROJECTS IN THE AREA AS WELL AS ADDING

IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. >> SO THAT IS THE 1000?

>> THAT IS THE EXISTING COUNT TODAY.

>> IF YOU SAY LESS THAN 2000 AND LET'S SAY YOU AT 1500 HOW

DOES IT CHANGE THAT? >> WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE TURN LANE REQUIREMENTS IT IS DIFFERENT , SO ON THE RIGHT TURN LANE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF RIGHT TURNS THAT ARE GOING TO BE MADE AND THE VOLUME ON THE SAME STRETCH OF ROAD ON THE SAME DIRECTION. IT IS THE NUMBER OF RIGHT TURNS WITH THE VOLUME OF THROUGH MOVEMENTS COMING UP AND DOWN OR JUST GOING NORTH. THAT IS HOW THE RIGHT TURN IS

WARRANTED. >> SO ACROSS THE X-AXIS THEN YOU HAVE BEEN THAT IS THAT THE ROAD VOLUME WHICH IN THIS CASE

WOULD BE CLOSE TO 2000. >> YES. BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT VEHICLES PER HOUR WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT. TALK ABOUT 1000 CARS OVER THE DAY. WHAT THIS IS SHOWING IS IN THE PEAK HOURS WE ARE PROJECTING 380 CARS GOING NORTHBOUND AND WE ARE PROJECTING ON THE 20 RIGHT TURNS . AT THE PEAK. ON A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS MOST OF OUR TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE IN THE A.M. AND P.M. PEAK BECAUSE THAT IS WHEN EVERYBODY IS LEAVING AND GOING TO WORK AND COMING HOME.

MID-DAY ESPECIALLY OUT IN THIS PART. THERE IS REALLY NO COMMUTER TRAFFIC IN THIS AREA DURING THE DAY. SO THAT IS HOW IT IS FOR THE RIGHT TURN. I CAN EXPLAIN THE LEFT.

>> GO AHEAD WITH THE LEFT. >> THE LEFT IS THE SAME THING.

IT IS JUST OPPOSITE. THE NUMBER OF LEFT TURNS I AM MAKING , BUT I AM LOOKING AT IT COMPARED TO THE ADVANCING VOLUME, SO WHO I AM TURNING AGAINST. NOT NECESSARILY HOW MANY ARE GOING IN MY DIRECTION. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THE ADVANCING VOLUME IN THAT DIRECTION IS 125, AND WE ARE PROBABLY LESS THAN 50 LEFT TURNS IN THERE BECAUSE IN OUR SITE WHAT WE ARE SAYING JUST SO WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE. IN REGARDS TO THIS.

WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS A MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE ENTERING AND EXITING THIS DRIVEWAY ARE GOING TO BE GOING TO AND FROM THE NORTH. THEY ARE GOING TO BE COMING TO AND FROM MILLCREEK ROAD UP THERE, AND ARE GOING TO BE DISBURSING TO EITHER GO BACK

[00:15:01]

>> IS HARDLY GOING TO BE ANYBODY TURNING RIGHT INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO IF ANYTHING WE ARE GOING TO HAVE -- IF ANYBODY IS GOING TO BE TURNING INTO OUR DEVELOPMENT MOST PEOPLE IF ANYBODY ARE GOING TO BE TURNING LEFT INTO HERE BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE TRAFFIC IS

COMING FROM. >> IS IT ONE WAY IN AND OUT

THROUGH THAT ONE ACCESS POINT? >> NO. THIS IS CONNECTED ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE EXISTING MIMMS TRAIL SUBDIVISION. THE CURRENT MIMMS TRAIL HAS ONE CONNECTION ON MILLCREEK FURTHER NORTH AND THEN TWO OTHER CONNECTIONS AT THE TOP.

>> THAT IS NOT WHAT I WAS ASKING. SORRY. WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO PUT THIS PARTICULAR -- THESE LANES. THERE IS ANOTHER ENTRANCE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT YOU'RE TRYING TO

BUILD? >> CORRECT. THAT IS WHAT THESE

TURN LANES ARE FOR. >> WHAT IS THE ZONING OF THE

PROPERTY SOUTH OF THIS? >> IF THAT WERE EVER TO SELL IT

COULD BE A LOT. >> THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL WAS A PART OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT. WENT BANKRUPT AND BOUGHT IT FROM THE BANK AND BASICALLY BUILD HIS OWN HOUSE.

THE CITIES PERSPECTIVE IS WHETHER LANES ARE REQUIRED NO MATTER WHAT.

>> THIS MIGHT BE MORE TOWARDS ENGINEERING. THERE ARE OTHER D CELL LANES --

>> IT IS THE SAME REQUIREMENT IF WE WERE IN A COMMERCIAL SETTING. STILL NOT WARRANTED. SO I HAVE PROJECTS THAT ARE ON

[00:20:07]

TURN INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT. >> DO WE NOT MUCH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IS PLAN FOR THAT AREA? THERE IS A PROPERTY THAT IS -- THAT HAS A RIGHT LANE. NOSE HOUSES ARE BUILT YET.

>> WHERE AT? ON MILLCREEK? >> YEAH.

>> THERE ARE PHASES IN YELLOW RIGHT THERE THAT ARE BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE TWO ENTRANCES . A PART OF THAT HAS BEEN -- BEING REDEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. DOESN'T STAY ON YOUR PROPERTY ?

>> NO. IT GOES OFF. HOURS IS ONLY ABOUT 50 FEET. WE BARELY HAVE ENOUGH TO GET OUR DRIVE OUT. THERE IS AN ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL B IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RIGHT TURN LANE TO THE

SOUTH OF US. >> THIS DEVELOPMENT FURTHER NORTH WOULD LIKELY USE THE PARKWAY AS WELL.

>> FOR THE MOST PART YES. ALL OF THEIR ENTRANCES ARE NORTH OF US. THEY ALIGN WITH THE ORIGINAL AND THEN HAVE ONE MORE ON THE SOUTH SIDE. I DON'T ANTICIPATE THEM IF THEY CONTINUE EXTENDING DOWN. THEY ARE NOT PLANNING ON BUILDING NEW ENTRANCES, RIGHT? THEY HAVE TWO MAIN ENTRANCES , SO ALL OF THEIR DRIVERS THE FUTURE LAND U SOUTH OF THERE WHAT IS THE ZONE IN THE FUTURE? IS THAT ALL RURAL OR A LOT?

>> THE TALKING ABOUT IMMEDIATELY SOUTH?

>> THAT IS AND SEE 9. >> NOT THEIRS, BUT AROUND

SANDHILL. >> EVERYTHING IS PRETTY MUCH

GOING TO BE RURAL. >> BECAUSE THERE IS NO SEWER.

EVERYTHING ON SANDHILL WILL REMAIN .

>> HOW MANY CARS ARE THEY GOING TO PUT OUT?

>> BUT HAVE CONNECTIVITY. THIS IS MORE OF A BACK ENTRANCE INTO THIS THING. THIS IS NOT THE MAIN ENTRANCE. I THINK PEOPLE WILL BUT A MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE GOING AND THE INTERNAL DEVELOPMENT TO ACCESS THIS.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> . TO

APPROVE THE WAIVER. >> OKAY.

>> WILL SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ROLLCALL PLEASE.

[5. Waiver - Mimms Trail Left Turn Lane Appeal]

[6. CompPlan 2030 Amendments]

[00:26:00]

>> OKAY THE MOVE TO THE NEXT. COMP PLAN 2030

AMENDMENTS. >> LOT HERE. EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN THE AGENDA. THERE WAS A SUMMARY OF EACH CHAPTER AND WHAT ALL WAS CHANGED EACH CHAPTER LEVEL. DIFFERENT STATISTICS AND FIGURES. WE CAN GO OVER THAT.

WE INCLUDED THE TEXT CHANGES TO EVERY SINGLE CHAPTER IN THE PACKET. ALL OF THE THINGS WERE CHANGED SO A LOT MORE PEOPLE WERE INTERESTED IN THAT WE GOT FEEDBACK ON INDISCERNIBLE ] THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE COMPLICATED THING WITH THE FIVE-YEAR UPDATE IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IF WE WERE TO PUBLISH THE TO RANGERS THEY 300 OF THEM.

MOST OF THEM BEING CORRECTIONS. AND THE PROPOSED GROWTH CHANGES. WE HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT REFERENCES THAT, IS WHY IN THE PACKET AND REFERENCES IT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE WE HAVE A SLIGHT:ONLINE . AN APPLICATION WHERE YOU CAN GO AND SEE HOW THEY LOOK AND FIND HER ADDRESS AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES NEAR YOU. WANT TO PUT TOGETHER WAS A PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED AND THEN I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM YOU ALL. GROWTH CHANGE NUMBER TWO IS KIND OF OFF SOMETHING THAT IS A STEP PROPOSED CHANGE . THE CITY HAS BEEN PRETTY ACTIVE ACQUIRING A LOT OF HERE. THE BUDDHA IS A PROPERTY THAT WAS ANNEXED. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF ACTION OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS. THIS IS A CHANGE THAT IS GOING BE CODIFYING THAT. THIS IS THE ONE WHERE IT DEVIATES FROM WHAT I SHOWED YOU WHEN WE HAVE THE PUBLIC WORK SESSION. IF YOU REMEMBER THE LARGE PURPLE CHUNK TO THE EAST WAS A SMALL SLIVER OR I WOULD SAY THE TOP SQUARE OF THAT WAS GOING TO BE INDUSTRIA AND THEN THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOME MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY AND THE REST WAS GOING TO KIND OF PHASEOUT. THERE HAS BEEN A SHIFT, TO BE INDUSTRIAL.

IT KIND OFF THE METRICS FOR HOW MANY UNITS WERE

[00:30:01]

>> SO CURRENTLY THAT IS INDUSTRIAL?

>> NO IS NOT. >> SO IS A CHANGE. THIS WAS A PROPERTY OWNER REQUESTED CHANGE. THE PROPERTY OWNER -- I GUESS WHAT THIS WAS WAS COMMERCIAL, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WORKED TIRELESSLY TO GET OF DENIAL LETTERS AND WOULD LIKE IT BE RESIDENTIAL INSTEAD BECAUSE SHE HAS BEEN APPROACHED BY SEVERAL BUILDERS AND NOT PEOPLE INTERESTED IN COMMERCIAL.

AS MOVE WEST IT IS ALL RESIDENTIAL. THE REASON THIS WAS RURAL AND HAD BEEN FOR A WHILE IS A LOT OF ISSUES WITH UTILITIES AND QUESTIONS GETTING THAT FIGURED OUT. I THINK OVER RECENT MONTHS WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WORK WITH OWNER. JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE LOGISTICS OF ACTUALLY HOW YOU BRING UTILITIES AND WHAT IT COULD SUPPORT. ALSO THEM SHOWING AND PROVING TO THE CITY THAT UTILITIES COULD WORK ON SITE. THIS IS A STAFF INITIATED CHANGE. REALLY JUST A SWAP IN BETWEEN WERE SOME INDUSTRIAL COULD GO. LET ME GO TO THE NEXT ONE. I WOULD SAY THIS IS SIMILAR. WE HAVE GOTTEN SOME REQUESTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS ABOUT THIS AND ALSO FROM THE STAFF SIDE WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE IN THIS AREA . IT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE WITH THE SCHOOL SERVING AS THE HARD GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY. AND THEN ALSO HAVE SEVERAL CRUSTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS JUST KIND OF INQUIRING ABOUT CAN WE OF HIS GET A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS.

>> SOME OF THESE ARE JUST KIND OF DEPENDS. THIS PROPERTY OWNERS CAME OUT. THEY WERE VERY ACTIVE. I THINK SOME OF THE

[00:35:01]

THESE WERE ALL INCLUDED BECAUSE THEY TAKE ACCESS OFF INDISCERNIBLE ] AND THIS IS CLEANING UP INITIAL INDISCERNIBLE ] AND THEN THAT LOAD OF SLIVER WAS LEFT OUT FOR WHATEVER REASON, SO NOW IT IS BEING ADDED. IF YOU HAVE ANY DETAILED QUESTIONS AROUND THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS. HOW MUCH ACREAGE . I THINK IN THE VERY FIRST THING I SURE THERE IS A SUMMARY OF ALL OF THE NUMBERS AND WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. WE CAN PUT IT TOGETHER AND SHARE IT WITH YOU ALL THE WE DO WANT TO HAVE THIS AVAILABLE.

[00:40:36]

>> THIS IS A GOOD TIME TO BE OUT IN FRONT OF THE CHANGE INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL THE HELLO-REZ GOES UP DOWNTOWN.

THAT WAS PLANNED YEARS AND YEARS AGO. THIS IS THE SAME THING FOR OUR FUTURE OF 2030 AND BEYOND . IF YOU HAVE SOME INTEREST TO TAKE SOME TIME TO LOOK AT THAT WEBSITE.

>> I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.

YOU DID SOME HEAVY LIFTING HERE. WE APPRECIATE IT AS COMMISSIONERS. WE WANT TO SAY THANK YOU.

[7. Rezoning - Oakley Cove - PUBLIC HEARING]

>> THAT IS GREAT, BUT I DO NEED A MOTION.

>> APPROVED. >> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY I. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR REASONING.

>> THANK YOU. THIS REZONING DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT OAKLEY COVE. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SEEING NO ONE. IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS . WILL YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD? AND STATE YOUR NAME

AND ADDRESS. >> GOOD EVENING. WE CURRENTLY HAVE AN OFFICE THAT WE PURCHASED THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AROUND THE CORNER. WE CONDENSED THE OFFICES INTO ONE. WE HAVE A FREESTANDING BUILDING SITTING THERE. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ITS ON ONE PROPERTY SO THAT WE MEET THE REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE ONE MORE APARTMENT BASICALLY THE WHOLE THING IN A NUTSHELL.

>> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

STAFF OR APPLICANT ON THIS? >> THIS IS A STEP QUESTION I GUESS. THE WAY IT IS ZONED NOW THE CONVERSION THAT WAS DONE AS

NONCONFORMING. >> KIND OF. IT IMPLIES IT WAS ALREADY EXISTING. THE ORDINANCE CHANGED.

[00:45:11]

>> FOR THE RENOVATION YES. WE GET A LOT OF REQUESTS WHERE PEOPLE EITHER BUYING APARTMENT COMPLEXES AND RENOVATE THEM.

OFTENTIMES THE LIMITING FACTOR IS THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

SOMETIMES IT IS A TREMENDOUS ASSET TO THE CITY TO ALLOW THAT AND THEY CAN DO WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE ZONING INDISCERNIBLE ]

>> MY PROBLEM IS THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CDC ZONE AND WHAT IS ALLOWED THERE -- IT IS A FAMILY ORIENTED. YOU CAN PUT A DOLLAR STORE THERE AND IT CAN BE FIVE UNRELATED. THAT IS THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH CHANGING TO CDD.

ESPECIALLY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET WHERE IT IS TDH ON BOTH SIDES, SO I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS CHANGE.

>> IT IS ALMOST DOUBLE, SO

>> MY CONCERN IS THAT IS

>> WITH THE ONE EXTRA YEAH THAT IS WHAT IS CAUSING THE DENSITY

LEVEL ISSUE? >> YEAH. CHANGING INTO CDD .

INDISCERNIBLE ]

>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE BEDROOM?

>> CORRECT. SOME ARE GOVERNED -- SOME DENSITY IS DONE BY THE

UNIT. >> I THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE

[00:51:02]

'S JUST >> MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE

CHANGING TO CDD. >> A MOTION.

>> I WILL SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY I. PLEASE GET WITH STAFF AND SEE IF THERE ARE OTHER

[8. Annexation - Jolly Property ]

>> GOOD EVENING.

>> THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR THE NORTHERN LIMIT -- THE APPLICANT HAS A SUBSEQUENT REQUEST ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA TO APPLY THE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THIS PROPERTY. WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT NEXT. FOR THIS THE REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR ANNEXATION AND STAFF

RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. >> I KNOW THAT YOU ARE HERE FOR THIS. ANNEXATION AT THIS TIME DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM FOR REZONING AS A PUBLIC HEARING IN. I JUST ONLY TO GET MAD AT ME FOR NOT ALLOWING YOU TO SPEAK THIS EVENING. ANNEXATION -- THIS IS NOT A

PRE-ANNEXATION FOR ANYTHING? >> NO. THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

INITIALLY THERE WERE THREE ITEMS.

[9. Rezoning - Jolly Property - PUBLIC HEARING ]

>> THANK YOU. NOW WE WILL MOVE TO THE REQUEST . THE PROPERTY

[00:55:04]

CLUSTERING OF DEVELOPMENT TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT AND DISTURBANCE OF THE AREA. THE 50% MUST REMAIN AS CONSERVATION AREA . IN THIS CASE THAT WOULD EQUATE TO 89 ACRES AND THEY ARE PROPOSING TO KEEP 92 ACRES OF THAT PROPERTY AS CONSERVATION AREA. THE COD DESIGNATION DOES ALLOW SMALL LOT SIZES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE REQUIRED UNDER THE RURAL ZONING DISTRICT. HOWEVER THE MAXIMUM DENSITY IS LIMITED TO THAT DENSITY ALLOWED BY THE UNDERLYING DISTRICT, SO IN THIS CASE 178 ACRES WOULD PERMIT 59 LOTS AND NO MORE THAN 59 LOTS WOULD BE PERMITTED WITH OR WITHOUT THAT DESIGNATION. AS MENTIONED, THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO SUBMIT THEIR PRELIMINARY REQUEST IN JANUARY. WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONING APPLICATION OF THE DISTRICT . TWO CONDITIONS OF THE APPROVAL. OPEN-SPACE MAINTENANCE PLAN AND INSTRUMENT OF PERMANENT PROTECTION WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE IN PLACE BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT CAN BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW. THESE WILL BE BINDING DOCUMENTS THAT WOULD ENSURE THE CONSERVATION AREAS

ARE PROTECTED IN PERPETUITY. >> SO THAT THEY MAKE SURE I GOT THIS CORRECT. IF THIS WOULD JUST REMAIN RURAL THEY COULD DO

59 LOTS ? >> CORRECT.

>> SINCE WE ARE DOING CONSERVATION OVERLAY THEY WILL

STILL JUST HAVE 59 DISTRICTS? >> CORRECT THAT THE CONCEPT PLAN SHOWS THE TYPICAL LOT SIZE WOULD BE JUST OVER AN ACRE.

ABOUT 1.2 ACRES. >> WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR

MAINTAINING THE SPACE? >> THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS OF DOING THAT. COULD BE IN HOA. THEY COULD DEDICATE IT TO THE CITY. IT JUST DEPENDS ON HOW THEY WANT TO GO ABOUT THAT.

>> WILL YOU PLEASE REPEAT THE THREE CONDITIONS?

>> THE GOALS? TO LESSEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. TO MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES , AND TO

PRESERVE NATURAL RESOURCES. >> THIS NATURAL RESOURCE THAT WE SEE RIGHT HERE RUNS THROUGH THE WATERSHED. AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHEN IT COMES BACK IN JANUARY THERE WILL BE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING AT THAT TIME.

>> THE ARE ALL HERE TONIGHT. >> YES.

>> THAT BRINGS UP A QUESTION THAT HAS TO DO WITH ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THE COD OVERLAY. AS I RECALL IT WAS DEVELOPED -- SPECIFICALLY

THAT? >> YEAH. THE INTENT IS TO PROTECT THE WATER QUALITY OF THE WATERSHEDS IN AND AROUND

THE CITY. >> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. PLEASE REMEMBER THE FIVE MINUTES IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK WITH US. PLEASE SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. ALSO IF YOU CAN KEEP COMMENTS. I KNOW THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME REPEATING FACTORS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT JUST OF NOTE FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM. PLEASE COME

FORWARD. >> GOOD EVENING. ALTHOUGH MY

[01:00:12]

BEFORE MY WIFE AND I BOUGHT OUR LOT I VISITED WITH OUR FORMER PLANNING DIRECTOR. HE TOLD ME ANY DEVELOPMENT AROUND US WOULD REQUIRE THREE ACRE LOTS. EVEN IF THE PROPERTY REMAINED IN THE COUNTY. A PART OF THE CONVERSATION SUGGESTED SEPTIC SYSTEMS WOULD ONLY BE APPROVED ON THREE ACRE LOTS. I AM HERE TONIGHT TO ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HELP US MAINTAIN A THREE ACRE LOT REQUIREMENT FOR THIS RURAL AREA. I THINK THREE ACRE LOTS ARE MORE IN OUR WORLD DESIGNATION AND WOULD PROVIDE A LOT OF GREEN SPACE PROVIDED THE PROPERTY WAS NOT CLEAR-CUT. AND 3 ACRE LOTS WOULD AVOID ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH GREEN SPACE MAINTENANCE FAILURES BY THE HOA OR OTHER RESPONSIBLE PARTIES. IT APPEARS THE MAINTENANCE COULD ULTIMATELY FALL TO THE CITY COUNCIL . I DOUBT THE CITY OF AUBURN WOULD WANT TO BE IN THE POSITION OF PERFORMING THAT MAINTENANCE AND SEEKING REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE RESIDENCE. HOWEVER, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS INCLINED TO RECOMMEND THIS ANNEXATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHAT I AM LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW LOOKS TO BE VERY UNFRIENDLY TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. IF YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ANNEXATION AND OVERLAY PLEASE CONSIDER BUFFERING THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS BY MOVING SOME OF THE GREEN SPACE SO IT IS BETWEEN US AND THE SUBDIVISION. I WANT TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT ABOUT THE WATER HERE. I HAVE HUNTED THIS LAND FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. I DON'T RECALL SEEING A LOT OF WATER UP THERE. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT WHILE I HAVE HUNTED FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS WHEN I WALK OUT AT NIGHT ALONG THE ROAD LABELED AS A STREET OR STREET A I CAN CLEARLY SEE INTO MY HOUSE FROM THE ROAD . THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

>> BEFORE YOU GO CAN WE PUT UP THE MAP. THANKS.

>> ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK?

>> PLEASE SIGN IN. >> MY NAME IS MIKE PATTERSON. I DO NOT THINK THAT IS RIGHT AND FAIR TO THE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY NEED TO STAY WITH THREE ACRE LOTS, WHICH IS OWNED FOR THREE ACRE LOTS. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW YOU CAN DESIGN SOMETHING AND COME UP AND CHANGE IT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SOMEBODY CAN GET UP AND SAY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT. IT IS NOT FAIR TO ME OR ANYBODY ELSE OUT THERE WITH THREE ACRE LOTS, BUT ANYWAY. I AM AGAINST IT .

>> PLEASE SIGN IN. ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK?

>> MY NAME IS PATRICK. MY WIFE AND I CURRENTLY RESIDE THERE.

WE ARE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, SO WE WILL NOT BACK UP TO IT . I LOOK AT THIS AND THE OVERLAY. I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS IN THE SPIRIT OF THE DISTRICT. WE ARE

[01:05:10]

>> ANYONE ELSE?

>> MY HUSBAND AND I MOVED HERE SEVEN YEARS AGO AND A BIG REASON WE CHOSE THAT LOT WAS BECAUSE OF ITS RURAL NATURE. WE DID NOT LOOK AT ANYPLACE ELSE THAT HAD SMALLER LOTS IN TOWN.

I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL FOR SEVERAL REASONS.

1ST AND FOREMOST I THINK THAT PERMITTING A ONE ACRE LOT EXCEPTION -- ESTABLISHES A VERY BAD PRECEDENT FOR THIS AREA AND IT WILL BE EXPLOITED FOR EVERMORE FOR MANY OTHER RURAL LOTS IN THE AREA WHO WANT TO PUT IN A HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING FOR PROFIT OR FOR OTHER INCENTIVES. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WE HAD A PROPOSAL FOR A LOT THAT IS CLOSE TO THIS AND HAD SINGLE ROAD ACCESS , AND THEY WERE LOOKING FOR A ONE ACRE EXCEPTION BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING HOMES THAT GOT ONE ACRE EXCEPTIONS. UNDER A WINK AND A NOD YEARS AGO. THAT EXCEPTION HAS ALREADY TRYING TO GET EXPLOITED AND IT WOULD ONLY BE WORSE IF WE HAD WORE ONE ACRE LOTS. -- MOORE ONE ACRE LOTS.

THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER WANTS TO THE NEXT THEMSELVES INTO AUBURN THEN THEY SHOULD PLAY BY THE RULES THAT WE HAVE ALL PLAYED BY AND STAY WITH THE THREE ACRE LOTS. THIS IS A BAIT AND SWITCH OR IT WOULD BE A DATE AND SWITCHED AGAINST EXISTING HOMEOWNERS WHO HAVE FAITHFULLY ADHERED TO THE MINIMUM. AND IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR HOME VALUES I BELIEVE. I ALSO QUESTION WHETHER COD DESIGNATION IS NECESSARY TO PRESERVE A FLOODPLAIN FROM DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT IS ALREADY AN UNDEVELOPED FULL FLOODPLAIN. I QUESTION WHETHER THERE IS TRUE INTENTION BEHIND THIS REQUEST.

IT WILL ALSO ALTER THE CHARACTER AND VIOLATE THE DESIGN INTENTION OF THE SURROUNDING RURAL ZONE DEVELOPMENTS . THESE ONE ACRE LOT HOMES WOULD INEVITABLY BE AT A LOWER PRICE POINT AND QUALITY THEN A THREE ACRE HOME.

THAT ALSO WOULD BE HARMFUL TO EXISTING HOMEOWNERS IN TERMS OF PROPERTY VALUATIONS. THERE IS INSUFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT 59 MORE HOMES CURRENTLY IN MY OPINION. THERE ARE SERIOUS TRAFFIC ISSUES TO CONSIDER ON STONEWALL. AT ONE POINT THE COUNTY WOULD NOT BE INCENTIVIZED TO MAKE DEVELOPMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE THE TAX REVENUE BENEFITS WOULD FLOW TO AUBURN AND NOT TO THE COUNTY. WATER SUPPLY IS ALREADY AN ISSUE IN THAT AREA. WE SUFFER FROM WATER PRESSURE ISSUES. AS I HAVE READ THE DOCUMENTS IT SEEMS THAT GARBAGE COLLECTION WOULD NOT BE PROVIDED BY AUBURN IN THE

[01:10:01]

TAKE TREMENDOUS PRIDE. >> THANK YOU. PLEASE SIGN IN.

GOOD EVENING. >> SHE BROUGHT UP A LOT OF VALID POINTS THAT I THINK YOU SHOULD TAKE AND CONSIDER. WE HAVE A TON OF NEIGHBORS THAT ARE HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN THIS. THE MAIN THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IS MY CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA. I HAVE SPOKE WITH SOMEONE FROM THE CITY TO SEE IF A TRAFFIC STUDY HAD BEEN REQUESTED OR IF IT IS REQUIRED. I AM TOLD AT THIS TIME BUT HAS NOT BEEN REQUESTED AND MAY NOT EVEN BE REQUIRED. I WONDER WHY. LOOKING AT THE PAPERWORK THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD GENERATE ALMOST 600 AND VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY WHICH WOULD GREATLY IMPACT THE INTERSECTION OF STONEWALL WHERE WE HAVE AUBURN CITY SCHOOL CHILDREN WHO HAVE TO WALK DAILY BECAUSE THE BUS STOPS ARE AT THE CORNER. I AM HIGHLY CONCERNED WE WILL HAVE 590 PROPOSED VEHICLE TRIPS DURING THOSE BUSY TIMES. I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW IF A TRAFFIC STUDY COULD BE OR WOULD BE PERFORMED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPER AND PERSON REQUESTING THAT THIS BE REZONED. I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT MAINTAINING FOOD OUT THERE IN 2013 I CALLED THE POST OFFICE AND SAID WHY DO I HAVE THIS ADDRESS AND HE SAID THEY DO NOT ASK ME WHERE TO PUT THE CITY LIMITS SIGN AND DO NOT TELL ME HOW TO DELIVER THE MAIL, SO THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE FUNNY BY THE WAY. WE ARE HERE TONIGHT TALKING ABOUT WHERE THE CITY LIMITS SIGNS ARE AND WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WITH THAT. I HAVE BEEN A REAL ESTATE AGENT FOR 21 YEARS. I HAVE BEEN BLESSED TO BE IN THIS COMMUNITY AND BE SEX FULL BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH OF THE COMMUNITY BUT I DO NOT WANT TO REPEAT WHAT HAS BEEN SAID. I AGREE WITH IT. I DO APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THIS

[01:15:01]

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> THIS IS YOUR TIME.

>> SEEING NO ONE. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I WANTED TO JUST TO REITERATE WHAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED IS NOT PRELIMINARY. IT IS AN IDEA. WE MET WITH CITY STAFF AND PLANNING AND ENGINEERING. WATER RESOURCES. EVERYBODY ON HOW TO BETTER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.

WE COULD GO IN AND DEVELOP THE WHOLE THING. THAT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THE DEVELOPER. THE INTENT IS TO GO IN AND MINIMIZE IMPACT TO THE PROPERTY. I HAVE HEARD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT BUFFERS. THOSE ARE ALL ON THE FLOOR. I WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO ANYBODY. WE CAN MOVE THINGS AROUND. IT IS JUST A SCHEMATIC.

WE HAVE ACTUALLY CHANGED IT TWICE BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF TO HELP PRESERVE THE NATURAL RESOURCES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY. I GUESS WITH ME SAYING THAT THE HOA WOULD PROBABLY TAKE CARE OF THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT. THE TRAILS AND THOSE SORT OF THINGS. I HEARD SOMEBODY MENTION PARKS. SO THERE ARE OPTIONS HERE BESIDES JUST MAKING MONEY AND SELLING HOUSES. THERE ARE A LOT OF OPTIONS IN THIS CASE TO MOVE THINGS AROUND. FOR ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. TO MAKE IT -- AND I HAVE ALSO HEARD ONE ACRE LOTS. I THINK THE MINIMUM LOT IS 1.2. WE CAN ADJUST THAT BECAUSE WE ARE ALREADY UNDER THE MINIMUM HALF AND HALF. SO WE HAVE A FEW ACRES TO PLAY WITH IF WE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR BRINGING UP TO 1.3 ACRES OR THOSE SORT OF THINGS.

>> 59 IS THE MAX. WE ARE WITHIN THE REGULATIONS TO DO THIS.

BASED ON THE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. IF YOU DO RURAL THREE ACRES AND DIVIDE THE WHOLE PROPERTY IT WOULD BE 59 LOTS OR YOU CAN DO A CONSERVATION OVERLAY. NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE IT . WELL WITHIN THE RIGHTS TO DEVELOP EVERYTHING. OUR CLIENT HAS DECIDED LET'S NOT DO THAT. WE WILL REDUCE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROTECT THE STREAMS THAT ARE GOING THROUGH BECAUSE THERE IS ONE MAJOR STREAM. TO PARTAKE THAT. IF THERE ARE ANY BUFFERS REQUIRED WE ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO DISCUSS IT WITH THEM.

>> MOST OF MY QUESTIONS

[01:20:13]

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS ISN'T THE FINAL SAY SO.

>> THIS IS JUST A CONCEPT PLAN. WE ADJUSTED IT TO PROTECT AND HOW THEY WANTED THE CONSERVATION OVERLAY TO LOOK ORIGINALLY. IF YOU SAW IT YOU WOULD PROBABLY SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT IS TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. NOT DEVELOP EVERYTHING.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THE BUFFER QUESTION.

>> EVERYBODY KNOWS HOW TO GET IN TOUCH WITH ME THAT I WOULD BE GLAD TO SIT DOWN.

>> AND WILL REMAIN THE COUNTIES UNTIL WE HAVE SUFFICIENT PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD.

>> LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION ON ROADS. WE ARE NOT APPROVING OR DENYING A POT RIGHT NOW OR EVEN LOOKING AT A PLAT THAT WOULD LEO STREETS ROLLOUTS AND EVERYTHING. WHAT EVER IT IS GOING TO BE. THEREFORE GARBAGE TRUCKS WILL GO DOWN THOSE ROADS

AND PICK UP AT THE HOUSES. >> CORRECT. I THINK THE COMMENT IN THE STAFF REPORT IS TAILORED TO IF THIS WERE A SINGLE LOT DEVELOPMENT.

>> LET'S SAY WE GO WITH THE RURAL DESIGNATION. WHAT ABOUT GARBAGE PICKUP AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF?

>> SAME THING. >> GO-AHEAD.

>> WATER AND SEWER IS AVAILABLE?

>> WATER IS. SEWER IS NOT. >> IN THE CITY IT IS ONE ACRE.

THEY REGULATE THE ACTUAL LOT SIZES STATEWIDE ON THAT. I WILL SAY THAT WHEN A HOUSE IS PROPOSED THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE TO SHOW PRIMARY AND SECONDARY'S, AND THAT GOES WITH THE ACTUAL BUILDING PLAN. THOSE ARE REQUIRED BEFORE YOU

CAN BUILD ON THE PROPERTY? >> EXACTLY.

>> THE THING ABOUT THE SEPTIC. THE CITY OF AUBURN DOES NOT DO THAT. THAT'S THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH THROUGH THE STATE OF ALABAMA. THEY ARE THE ONES THAT MAKE THE REGULATIONS ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT THAT YOU CAN HAVE AND THE MINIMUM SIZE, AND IT CAN BE ONE ACRE. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT.

LET'S TALK ABOUT WATER. THE WATER PRESSURE.

>> THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE RESPONSIBLE WITH PROVIDING ADEQUATE WATER PRESSURE. MEETING THE STATE GUIDELINES AS WELL AS ANY FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS. JUST LIKE ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT IN TOWN. WE DO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CHANGES IN

[01:25:02]

ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOWN. >> IT IS GOING WHERE?

>> IN THE NEW FIRE TRAINING CENTER.

>> WHERE THE ORDER REST STOP USED TO BE.

>> I AM NOT PREPARED TO ANSWER THE ACTUAL ELEVATION QUESTION.

>> LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION. ANY THOUGHTS OF SEWER

GOING UP THAT WAY? >> NOT AT THIS TIME.

>> OKAY. >> ONE THING WE ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT IS TRAFFIC , AND ON THIS ONE IT IS CLEAR TO ME WHETHER OR NOT IT IS COD OR RURAL IT IS GOING TO BE THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS ON THE PROPERTY. I THINK THE NUMBER WAS 600 VEHICLES PER DAY ON THAT ROAD. WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF 600 PER DAY? IS THAT

HIGH OR LOW IN YOUR OPINION? >> SO THIS FALLS UNDER OUR THRESHOLD FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED. 59 HOMES. THE CALCULATION IS ABOUT 10 TRIPS PER DAY. THAT IS WHERE YOU GET THE 590. WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THAT? IT JUST DEPENDS. THERE WILL BE PEAK IMPACT HOURS OF COURSE, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO THE COUNTY TO SEE.

>> THE WHOLE PROCESS OVER TIME AS YOU GROW. THERE IS A PROCESS THAT SAYS WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE ROAD. NOW WE ARE GOING TO DO

SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH IT. >> AND WHETHER OR NOT WE APPROVE OR LEAVE IT RURAL IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE IMPACT OF THE TRAFFIC REGARDLESS.

>> AROUND ANNEXATIONS HAPPENING WITHIN THE BOUNDARY. LARGELY SUPPORTIVE . WHEN THINGS GET ON THE FRINGES LIKE THIS THEY DO BRISTLE. I THINK WHEN THINGS ARE OUTSIDE THEY ARE STAUNCHLY OPPOSED.

>> THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS ON GRADE LS.

GREAT ELLIS .

>> THAT IS A COUNTY ROAD, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO CONFIRM WITH THE COUNTY.

[01:30:05]

>> THANK YOU ALL. DISCLOSED TO CITY COUNCIL.

>> THE ARE HOLDING IT. >> SECOND MEETING IN DECEMBER.

>> OKAY. >> WE WILL LET THEM GET MOVED.

[10. Annexation - Weeks Property ]

>> I HAVE EMOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. THANK

[11. Rezoning - Weeks Property - PUBLIC HEARING]

YOU. >> THIS IS FROM THE SAME PROPERTY. WE HAVE A REZONING REQUEST. YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THE SURROUNDING LAND USES.

>> I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> THANK YOU. >> THIS REQUEST IS FOR

[12. Conditional Use - Mises Institute - PUBLIC HEARING]

[01:35:03]

>> THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK.

>> LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I WOULD LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION. DID I GET AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION TO APPROVAL?

>> NO. SO THE CONDITION WOULD HAVE BEEN ALREADY IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THE LAWS NEED TO BE CONSOLIDATED. IT WAS A COMMENT BUT NEEDED TO BE A CONDITION BECAUSE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO HAVE THE PARKING THAT IS GREATLY REDUCED FROM THE SQUARE FOOT IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED AN APARTMENT OR ANYTHING.

>> MY CONCERN IS THERE COULD BE -- WHEN YOU TAKE AN INSTITUTE LIKE THIS I DO NOT UNDERSTAND FUNDING OR ALL OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE DIFFERENT PARCELS . MY CONCERN IS THERE COULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THEM FROM CONSOLIDATING ALL OF THESE. I THINK THERE ARE THREE PARCELS INTO ONE. WITHOUT CONFERRING WITH THEM. I AM CONCERNED THAT COULD BE AN ISSUE. I WOULD HATE TO TIE THIS TO SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE

DONE. >> IF HE COULD GO BACK. IT IS KIND OF FAINT . I GUESS WHERE THE ARROW IS POINTING THERE IS AN ORANGE BOX. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ALL THREE. IT COULD BE THE LARGER .

[01:40:09]

>> I DO UNDERSTAND THE PARKING CONCERN OF TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH THIS. IF THIS COMMISSION WAS TO SEE FIT TO APPROVE THIS AND IT BECAME A PROBLEM BE WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO REVISIT IT AT A

DIFFERENT MEETING. >> WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS A DIFFERENT USE DESIGNATION.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS OR MOTIONS?

>> I WOULD SAY THEY CAN EITHER REQUEST

>> THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO COME BACK .

>> OKAY.

[13. Conditional Use - Beehive Lot 5 - PUBLIC HEARING ]

>> THE FUTURE LAND USE HE RECOMMENDED EARLIER TO CHANGE TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, SO THESE USES WILL ALIGN WITH THAT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 1.1 ACRES, AND THE SITE PLAN SHOWS ONE BUILDING THAT IS 7750 SQUARE FEET . ACCESS TO THE SITE WILL BE TAKEN AND THE INDIVIDUAL USES WILL BE REVIEWED SEPARATELY WHEN THEY ARE PROPOSED THROUGH THAT PROCESS. WITH NO CONDITIONS OR

COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THIS AT THE TIME IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS ITEM. SEE NOBODY BUT WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR

APPLICANT OR STAFF? >> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

[14. Conditional Use - Cherokee Road MUD - PUBLIC HEARING]

[01:45:23]

>> THERE IS A SLIGHT OVERLAP IN THE SOUTH BE THE FUTURE LAND USE . THAT HAS AN AVERAGE OF FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

BASED ON THIS THE STAFF DOES NOT SEE ANY ADDITIONAL ADVERSE EFFECTS BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. AND RECOMMENDS

APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST. >> THANK YOU. SOME OF THE REASONS THEY MAY WANT TO DO THIS VERSUS WHAT IS

SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED? >> ON THIS PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRE SITE -- KIND OF I WOULD SEE ABOUT HALF OF THAT DRIVEWAY IS ALL EASEMENTS. I AM SURE PEOPLE -- I AM SURE A LOT OF

EMAILS WE GOT. >> I AM ACTUALLY SOMEONE WHO EMAILED AND SENT PICTURES. THIS VERY SMALL STREAM IS CRITICAL TO URBAN DRAINAGE. IT KEEPS WATER MOVING DOWN TOWARDS OUR PROPERTIES. CURRENTLY THEY DO FLOOD WHEN THERE IS BIG RAN, BUT THEN IT GOES AWAY QUICKLY. WHEN THEY BUILT THIS AND THEY ARE COVERING UP THE STREAM WITH A DRIVEWAY AND CLEARING A LOT OF THE LAND THAT IS THICK FORT SMITH UNDERGROWTH. IT IS ALL GOING TO GO STRAIGHT INTO THAT STREAM ACROSS THE PROPERTIES AND IMPACT THE DOWNSTREAM END WHERE THIS OUTLET GOES UNDER WHERE WE ARE ALREADY HAVING DRAINAGE ISSUES. LOSING THE TREES IN THE UNDERSTORY IS GOING TO MAKE THIS SO MUCH WORSE. A PART OF WHY I WANTED TO LIVE IN THAT AREA WAS BECAUSE THERE WERE TREES. I CAN'T IN THE BACKYARD WITH MY SON THE WIND THIS IS BUILT THERE WILL BE LIGHTS. THIS IS NOT IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT IS AROUND IT . IT'S LISTED AS CONDITIONALLY AS FOR TOWNHOMES, WHICH I THINK BY CITY POLICY SHOULD BE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED, BUT THIS WOULD MEAN MORE OF AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, AND THAT IS OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT IS AROUND IT I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT ESPECIALLY IF IT WERE ACTUALLY ON SHELTON MILL. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT DO NOT FEEL THIS IS APPROPRIATE, AND I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE INTENTION OF THE SITE. THIS IS A DEAD-END ROAD AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TONS OF KIDS WHO STAND AT THAT CORNER.

BY ADDING CARS COMING OUT EVERY MORNING IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE A HAZARD FOR THE PRIMARY BUS STOP FOR THREE OF OUR SCHOOLS IN THE CITY. THESE ARE ALL OF THE REASONS WHY I OPPOSE IT AS A SCIENTIST THAT STUDIES THE SITUATION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO SIGN IN.

[01:50:28]

>> LET'S CONSERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOT PUT A BUNCH OF RENTAL UNITS IN. THAT DOESN'T HELP ANY OF US. TAKES AWAY THE TREES THAT WE LOVE. TAKES AWAY THE BIRDS. OTHER LITTLE THINGS THAT THE ONES OF US THAT HAVE LIVED THERE A SHORT TIME , BUT I HAVE LIVED THERE OVER 40 YEARS. AND THAT IS JUST NOT WHAT THAT GENERAL AREA IS ALL ABOUT. IT IS MORE NEIGHBORS AND NEIGHBORHOODS AND ENJOYING WHAT IS GOING ON FROM OUR GROUP RIGHT BACK THROUGH TO THE ONES THAT I CAN SEE IN MY BACKYARD. I CAN SEE THEIR HOUSES AND ALL OF THIS, AND THIS IS GOING TO BE BLOCKING OFF A WHOLE BUNCH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY ARE THERE FOR A REASON AND IF THAT IS ALL IT IS INTO WHATEVER HE IS TALKING ABOUT THAT IS NOT ENOUGH TO KILL THE OTHER ZONING PART OR A LOGICALLY THINKING OLD DUDE LIKE ME. YOU ARE ALL SMARTER THAN ME AND THAT IS THE REASON I DID NOT SEND IN AN APPLICATION TO BE A MEMBER.

>> THERE IS STILL TIME. >> THIS MEANS A LOT TO US .

RIGHT NOW MY WIFE HAS ALZHEIMER'S. AN EXTRA AMOUNT OF NOISE FROM EIGHT UNITS. THE NOISE FROM THAT FROM POSSIBLE RENTERS WOULD BE DISTURBING TO US. AND THAT IS THE REASON FOR ME STANDING HERE NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE MOTION, BUT THAT IS A FACT. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. LEAVE US OUR

NEIGHBORHOOD PLEASE. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK?

>> YOU JUST HEARD FROM MY WIFE. I WILL REPEAT A LOT OF THE THINGS YOU'LL PROBABLY HEAR TONIGHT. WE HAVE THREE MAJOR CATEGORIES. THE FIRST ONE I WILL TOUCH ON IS THE ADMINISTRATIVE IRREGULARITIES THAT WE THINK TOOK PLACE IN THE LEGAL NOTICE THAT WE RECEIVED. THE CERTIFIED LETTER IDENTIFIED THE CONDITIONAL USES. EIGHT TOWNHOMES. SUBCLASS STAFF REPORT AND DOCUMENTS THAT WERE IN THE PACKET THAT WAS ACTUALLY INDICATED AS EIGHT MULTIUNIT DEVELOPMENT OR UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. ACCORDING TO THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE THESE ARE SEPARATE USES. TOWNHOMES AND MULTIUNIT DEVELOPMENTS. SO THERE IS NO SUBDIVISION IN THE PACKET, SO WE ARE ASSUMING THAT IS WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING THE CONDITION FOR USE. I WOULD PROBABLY ARGUE SINCE THE PUBLIC RAIN WAS ADVERTISED INCORRECTLY IN THE CERTIFIED LETTER AND THE VILLAGE NEWSPAPER IT NEEDS TO BE RE-ADVERTISED BEFORE ANY ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL. THE SECOND TOPIC IS GOING TO TOUCH ON THE CONDITIONAL USE WE THINK IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED ON ALL SIDES EXCEPT FOR ABOUT 50 FEET TO THE SOUTH WEST . THAT IS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION AND

[01:55:17]

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE?

>> GOOD EVENING. >> THIS SUBDIVISION WAS BUILT . THIS AREA WAS BUILT IN 1965.

THERE IS A LEAST ONE MAN IN THIS ROOM WHO HAS LIVED HIS ENTIRE LIFE ON THE STREET. IT IS QUIET AND RESIDENTIAL. THIS PROPOSAL WOULD BRING STUDENT HOUSING TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT WILL BRING KIDS WANDERING HOME FROM THE BARS AT 2:00 A.M. IT IS ONE MILE FROM THE STADIUM. NOTHING IS TO STOP INVESTORS FROM PURCHASING THESE, AND FOR THE DENSITY TO BE EVEN HIGHER THAN WHAT IT IS ZONED FOR. WE WILL HAVE KIDS SHARING ROOMS. IT WILL BE CHAOS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS NOT FAIR TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED THERE THEIR ENTIRE LIVES. THIS ZONING IS SPECIFICALLY MEANT TO BE RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS NOT RESIDENTIAL. EIGHT UNITS AT THE END OF THE STREET IS NOT RESIDENTIAL. THIS IS MUCH LIKE THE ARGUMENT OF THE 178 ACRE

TRACK. >> IT RUNS INTO THE OTHER LAW PROPOSED , AND THAT WAS MY NEIGHBOR , AND SHE LIVED THERE FOR YEARS. I CANNOT EVEN TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES ROTO-ROOTER HAS BEEN OUT THERE. HOW MANY TIMES SHE WOULD HAVE PLUMBERS

[02:00:01]

Y'ALL TO CONSIDER. THANKS. >> HI, MARTIN MOORE, 318 -- ONE OF THOSE MIDDLE PARKING LOT BACKS RIGHT UP TO MY BACKYARD.

I DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH TO ADD TO WHAT MY NEIGHBORS HAVE SAID.

I WANT TO REITERATE I AGREE WITH THEM THAT THIS DOESN'T MEET THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I DO SYMPATHIZE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER WHERE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF BUILDABLE LAND THERE BUT IF YOU LOOK WHERE HE PROPOSES AND AT OUR LOT SIZES I DO BELIEVE THERE'S ENOUGH ROOM FOR MORE THAN ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOUSE SIMILAR TO OUR LOTS TO GO IN THERE SO I THINK THIS DOESN'T MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN GENERAL AND IS AS EVERYONE SAID, IT'S A NICE QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDED BY ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A DETRIMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY TO OUR PROPERTY AND ALSO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE FIELD SO

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M DEBORAH VEALE AT 802 DRIVE NOT ADJACENT TO ANY OF THIS ON THE OTHER SIDE BACKING UP TO THE OTHER CREEK THAT DEFINES TALUHOMA AS AN AREA AND I'VE SEEN ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THAT GOES ON , ON THAT SIDE AND I'M ON THE CORNER OF TALUHOMA . I SAW WHEN A RETAINING POND WAS PUT IN BECAUSE OUR CREEK WOULD FLOOD.

I'VE SEEN -- I HAVE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT DOWN THE SIDE OF MY ROAD AND I'VE SEEN THE EROSION THAT HAS HAPPENED FROM THAT RETAINING POND AND DOWN MY CREEK AND DOWN MY PROPERTY.

I'VE LOST PROPERTY FOR EROSION BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE THINGS.

THEY ARE BUILDING SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH THE POSSIBILITIES OF EROSION AND THE CEMENT THAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT ON TO GET INTO THAT PROPERTY.

AND THAT IS A CONCERN TO ME AS WELL AS THE FLOODING ISSUE, THEY HAVE MUCH MORE PROBLEMS WITH FLOODING. THEY DON'T HAVE AN RETAINING POND IN THAT AREA THAT I KNOW OF SO THIS IS JUST PUTTING MORE IMPERMEABLE SURFACES TO DRAIN INTO THAT CREEK WHICH WILL THEN DRAIN DOWN. SO THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS. THE OTHER CONCERN IS PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF KIDS THAT GET DOWN AT THE END OF THAT STREET, SHELTON IS A BUSY STREET. AND CHEROKEE IS WHERE THE CITY HAS PUT A FLASHING WALKING LIGHT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SAFELY CROSS THE STREET AND THAT'S KIDS AS THEY COME TO BUS STOPS, ADULTS, ELDERLY, PEOPLE WITH PETS, PEOPLE WITH KIDS AND BIKES, ALL ACROSS AT THAT INTERSECTION TO GET TO THE OTHER SIDE. AND YOU ARE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF CHEROKEE AND THAT LITTLE CIRCLE . PEOPLE WALK THAT ENTIRE WAY. THEY WALK DOWN CHEROKEE AND DOWN TO BE UP AND BACK AROUND AND UP TO BODIE AND GO AROUND TALUHOMA AND COME BACK AROUND AND COME OVER THERE TO CHEROKEE AND THAT AREA AND THAT IS KIND OF A WALKING TRAIL FOR THE AREA SO I WANTED TO ADD IN THERE THAT THERE ARE ALL THOSE PEOPLE WALKING THAT AREA, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN THAT MANY MORE VEHICLES IN

THAT SMALL SPACE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. PLEASE SIGN IN, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK?

[02:05:09]

>> I AM JOHN COCHRAN AND I LIVE AT 878 CHEROKEE WHICH IS RIGHT UP ON THE EDGE OF THIS PROPERTY AND I SENT SOME EMAILS, Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE SEEN A PICTURE OF MY YARD WITH FLOODING AND THAT'S NOT A SPECIAL RAIN, THAT'S JUST A QUICK -- ANY QUICK THUNDERSTORM WILL GET THAT BUT LET ME BACKTRACK BECAUSE I GOT A STATEMENT FROM SOMEBODY THAT COULDN'T STAY. HER NAME IS DEBORAH STABLER. THEY LIVE AT 326. THEY OPPOSE THE BUILDING OF THIS. WE ARE ALL SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING NEIGHBORHOODS SUCH UNITS ARE NOT KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD. SHE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A DELAY SO THAT SHE COULD BE HERE AND BRING Y'ALL UP PAST HISTORY FROM BACK IN 2001 WHEN THEY TALKED ABOUT PUTTING A ROAD IN AND CONTACT WITH HIGHER DENTIST -- DENSITY ELEMENTS AND STUFF AND THEY TALK ABOUT BRINGING EMERY LAYING OUT CHEROKEE BUT THAT'S ALL ANOTHER STORY. SO THERE IS A LOT OF HISTORY THERE. THIS COUNSEL HAS HEARD THIS BACK-AND-FORTH THAT WENT ON ALL NIGHT WITH THESE OTHER THINGS ABOUT MAKING CONCESSIONS AND STUFF. THAT HAS HAPPENED WITH THIS PROPERTY SEVERAL TIMES AND 20 ODD YEARS AGO WHEN IT HAPPENED THEY SAID THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE BUILT, LAWLEY, LAWLEY. THERE IS HISTORY AND IF THE COUNCIL IS -- HAS DONE SOMETHING BEFORE IT SEEMS LIKE WE WOULD SEE THAT AGAIN. I REQUESTED INFORMATION ON HOW TO GET OLD MINUTES OF MEETINGS SO I COULD MAYBE LOOK BACK AND SEE WHAT WAS DISCUSSED AND WHAT WASN'T DISCUSSED BECAUSE I WASN'T THERE. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT IN . WE MAY NEED TO JUST POSTPONE THIS UNTIL WE CAN GET A FULL ASSESSMENT AND LIKE EVERYBODY HAS ADDED, I CAN'T SAY ANYTHING ELSE. IT FLOODS. WE NEED TO FIX THAT. THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE IT WORSE AND WE SHOULD TABLE IT AT LEAST UNTIL WE LOOK AT THAT. I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO TELL YOU. HOW COULD YOUR STAFF SAY THAT THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE AN ADVERSE AFFECT TO PUTTING THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. I READ THE DESCRIPTION OF ADH AND IT SAYS THAT THE PRIMARY USE IS RESIDENTIAL.

>> IT'S RESIDENTIAL. RIGHT? CONVENTIONAL RESIDENTIAL. AND THEN IT DEFINES THAT LATER IN THE ORDINANCE AS BEING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS. OKAY? THIS CONDITIONAL USE IS JUST THAT. IT'S A SPECIAL ASSUMPTION WE HAVE TO MAKE TO GIVE THEM PERMISSION TO DO THIS. IT SHOULDN'T BE AS STAFF SAYS JUST BECAUSE IT MEETS THIS AND THIS, IT'S OKAY. THE PRIMARY USE IS INDIVIDUAL FAMILY HOUSES AND, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO THROW SOME LOTS IN THERE, MAYBE, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S A FLOODPLAIN. THEY MIGHT HAVE ISSUES. BUT THEY OWN IT NOW. AND THEY GOT SOLD LIKE THEY SAID BUYER BEWARE. BUT I DO HOPE Y'ALL EITHER POSTPONE THIS OR IGNORE THE STAFF REQUEST UNTIL WE AT LEAST ADDRESS THE FLOODING AND MAKE SURE THIS WON'T AGGRAVATE IT. OR ANYTHING ELSE. THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY THERE. THAT I THINK NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT AND THOUGHT MORE THOUGHT PROCESS PUT INTO IT THAN JUST BECAUSE IT MEETS THE LEGALITY AND THE DEFINITIONS AND THE RULES THAT IT'S OKAY. I THINK MY FIVE MINUTES ARE ABOUT UP. THANK

YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU

[02:10:01]

>> THANK YOU. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS PAMELA, I LIVE AT 808 -- DRIVE AND I'VE LIVED THERE 28 YEARS. EVERYONE HAS SAID WHAT I HAVE TO SAY BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE MAINLY THE PROBLEM WITH OUR CHILDREN . I HAVE A SMALL DOG, I AM WAY PAST LITTLE CHILDREN BUT I WALK A LOT AND I HAVE A DOG THAT WALKS WITH ME. I CAN'T TELL YOU THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT I HAVE HAD TO FLAG DOWN PEOPLE FLYING THROUGH CAHAVA. U.P.S. DRIVERS, SOME POSTAL WORKERS, NOT AS MUCH AS FEDEX AND STUDENTS COMING THROUGH. GIVING THEIR TWO ENTRANCES TO SHELTON ROAD FROM WHERE I LIVE. ONE ON THE COB END AND ONE ON CHEROKEE. IT'S HARD TO GET IN AND OUT OF OUR LITTLE CIRCLE JUST WITH HORRIBLE TRAFFIC ON SHELTON ROAD SO THAT'S ANOTHER PROBLEM AND THE BUS STOP ON THE CORNER.

THE CHILDREN -- THAT'S DANGEROUS EVEN WITH THE FLASHING LIGHTS. I HAVE A HUGE CONCERN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC FROM THESE TOWNHOMES, DOWN CHEROKEE, JUST THAT ONE LITTLE STRETCH OF ROAD AND THE BUILDING OF THE TOWNHOMES WILL COMPLETELY DESTROY THAT ROAD WITH ALL THE HEAVY MACHINERY AND STUFF LIKE THAT AND THEN ADD THE FLOODPLAIN TO IT. SO THANK YOU

VERY MUCH. >> PLEASE SIGN IN. ANYONE ELSE?

>> MY NAME IS ERIC AND I LIVE AT 316 TALUHOMA AND REALLY REITERATE ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID BEFORE.

DEFINITELY MY BACKYARD WILL FLOOD MORE . ONE OF THE REASONS WE MOVED TO THAT HOUSE WAS BECAUSE I HAVE A SPECIAL NEEDS CHILD WHO IS AUTISTIC AND THAT CREATES A SOUND BARRIER SO THE LOUD NOISES REALLY FRUSTRATE HIM SO BRINGING THAT IN WILL DEFINITELY DISRUPT US SO WE WOULD BE RIGHT UP AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE HOUSES AND IT'S JUST KIND OF RUINS THE FEEL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD QUITE A BIT. SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD TO SAY. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE?

>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS GERALD STEPHENS . I LIVE AT 828 CARVER DRIVE AND I'M A RETIRED SAFETY OFFICER OF THIS CITY. WHEN I MOVED INTO THIS COMMUNITY IN 2002 CHILDREN WAS EVERYWHERE. KIDS WAS EVERYWHERE. BUT EVEN BACK THEN PEOPLE WERE SPEEDING, YOU KNOW I CALLED ON MY COMRADES TO COME ASSIST US, CONSIDERING ALL THAT'S GOING ON, GAME DAYS AND ALL OF THAT THEY DID THE BEST THEY COULD BUT TALUHOMA I'M AWARE OF THE COMMUNITY OVER THERE, I MOST DEFINITELY AWARE OF THE PEOPLE ON CAHAVA, WHEN I FIRST MOVED THERE THERE WAS

[02:15:03]

THAT'S HOW MUCH I LIKE IT OVER THERE. IT'S QUIET. IT'S TIGHT. THE PEOPLE RESPECT EACH OTHER. WE LOVE EACH OTHER. I LOOK OUT FOR AS MANY AS I CAN. I BRING MY KIDS THERE. YOU KNOW, I'M HAPPY, I'M GOOD. WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING TO GET CONTROL OVER THE HISTORY AND THE TRADITION IN THESE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN HIT WAY BEFORE OUR TIME. WAY BEFORE OUR TIME. SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS. I WILL TRY TO REALLY LISTEN TO EVERYBODY WHO HAS SPOKEN FROM TALUHOMA, CAHAVA, CHEROKEE AND ALL THAT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN THERE. WE SEE THE SPEEDING CARS . WE SEE THE SCHOOL BUSES COMING THROUGH U.P.S., FEDEX, DOOR DASH AND EVERYBODY ELSE. BUT I'VE ALSO SEEN PEOPLE MOVING IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE THERE'S TWO PEOPLE LIVING THERE AND IT'S FOUR. AND THREE PEOPLE MOVE IN AND IT'S FIVE. AND THEY ARE JUST PASSING THROUGH. BUT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE I WALK OUTSIDE AND I HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THESE PEOPLE AND LET THEM KNOW WHO ACTUALLY LIVES IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND WHAT WE STAND FOR. SO. AGAIN I JUST WANTED TO LET IT BE KNOWN I WASN'T GOING TO SAY ANYTHING BUT I JUST COULDN'T SIT HERE AND NOT SAY SOMETHING AND I HOPE Y'ALL BEAR EVERYTHING THAT WAS SAID IN REFERENCE TO KEEP THAT IN

MIND. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. SEEING NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE APPLICANT IS HERE. QUESTIONS? FOR EITHER?

>> GOOD EVENING. I DO HAVE A FEW THINGS TO SAY. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PRIOR TO THAT THOUGH. IF THERE

ARE ANY SPECIFIC. >> ARE THESE TOWNHOMES OR IS THIS A MULTIUNIT RENTAL FACILITY?

>> SO THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS TO PROVIDE SIMPLE TOWNHOMES.

THE THOUGHT PROCESS IS NOW DUE TO THE TOWNHOME REQUIREMENTS AND THE NEED TO SUBDIVIDE OF THE PRIVATE STREETS WAS TO GET APPROVED THIS HOPEFULLY AS A MULTIUNIT DEVELOPMENT AND POTENTIALLY CONDO BECAUSE OF THE HARDSHIPS OF TRYING TO -- THAT WE'VE ALL DEALT WITH -- TRYING TO SUBDIVIDE OFF OF THESE TYPES OF AREAS I BELIEVE WE ARE ON THE WAY TO CORRECTING SOME OF THAT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A LITTLE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY. ODDLY ENOUGH I HAVE PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THIS PROPERTY. FAIRLY EXTENSIVE PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THIS PROPERTY. I DID MY SENIOR DESIGN PROJECT ON THIS PROPERTY ON THE CREEK THAT WOULD BE CROSSED BY THIS PROJECT DID A FLOOD STUDY, DID A GOOD BIT OF WORK IN THIS AREA BUT SUBSEQUENT TO THAT THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT THAT CAME THROUGH JUST SOUTH OF HERE, EMBRY LANE.

BELIEVE IT CAME THROUGH -- I'M GOING TO REACHING WAY BACK, MAYBE 2003? ALL RIGHT? THEN AMBER AND I MIGHT BE THE ONLY ONE AND KATIE, THAT REMEMBER MUCH ABOUT IT BUT THE EMBRY

[02:20:02]

AND THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME DIDN'T HAVE MUCH OF AN ISSUE WITH THAT BECAUSE IT KEPT HIM FROM HAVING TO SPEND THE DOLLARS TO CROSS THE CREEK AND THAT IS HOW THIS PARCEL ERODES, KIND OF LEFT THERE'S -- THERE AND ENDED UP IN OTHER HANDS NOW AND THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY NOW HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR A WILL -- WAY TO HANDLE THIS AND HE'S LOOKED AT IT FROM A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. HIS INITIAL THOUGHT WAS TO DO SOME SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES. I BELIEVE WE HAD A LAYOUT THAT HAD LIKE SEVEN OF THEM. ONE THING THE CREEK CROSSING IS BOTH PHYSICAL AND NOT GERMANE TO THIS CONVERSATION BUT IT'S A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP BUT NO MATTER HOW YOU DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY YOUR UNIT COUNT IS GOING TO BE VERY SIMILAR. WHAT HE WAS PROPOSING TO DO IS INSTEAD OF COMING IN AND CROSSING THIS AND DROPPING A CUL-DE-SAC ESSENTIALLY AS SOON AS YOU CROSS THE CREEK AND THEN ESSENTIALLY CLEARCUTTING EVERYTHING , THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO TO PUT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THERE BECAUSE OF THE LANDMASS AND THE FOOTPRINT THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO DO IT, HIS ATTEMPT WAS TO DO THIS WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE EXPECTATION OF ALL THREE BEDROOM UNITS, CURRENTLY LOOKING AT THAT'S WORST CASE SCENARIO FROM A BEDROOM COUNT, CURRENTLY LOOKING AT OPTIONS TO REDUCE SOME OF THESE UNITS TO TWO BEDROOM UNITS SO THE ONLY REASON THAT MATTERS IS THE PARKING. BECAUSE THE PARKING REQUIRED IS DIRECTLY TIED TO THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED SO THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR ALL THREE BEDROOM UNITS AND IT MEETS THAT REQUIREMENT THAT THE HOPE WOULD BE FOR THAT THEY FIGURE OUT SOME OTHER PLANS TO PROVIDE TWO BEDROOM UNITS AND WE CAN START SHRINKING THAT BECAUSE IT IS IN HIS BEST INTEREST TO DO SO. THE -- HIS GOAL IS NOT TO COME IN AND RENT TO STUDENTS. FIRST OF ALL THE FAMILY DEFINITION APPLIES IN DTH. IT'S A MAXIMUM OF THREE BEDROOMS, THIS IS NOT PROPOSED TO BE A STUDENT LIVING COMMUNITY, THIS IS PROPOSED FOR YOUNG FAMILIES AND PROBABLY MORE PREDOMINANT THE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I SAY THAT TO GIVE HISTORY TO THE RESIDENTS INPUT AS TO HOW THIS GOT CREATED IN THE FIRST PLACE. I BELIEVE THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION TO HAVE HERE. SO WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF THAT THERE ARE A WAYS TO MITIGATE IMPACTS, IF YOU LOOK, WE ARE AT THE VERY BEGINNING AND I WOULD LIKE TO PULL THAT DEVELOPMENT FURTHER DOWN THE HILL AND HOPEFULLY SHRINK THE PARKING. I DON'T KNOW THAT FOR CERTAIN, WAITING ON SOME INFO BUT WHAT I DO KNOW IS THIS LAYOUT GIVES THE ABILITY TO LEAVE SOME BUFFER BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO KEEP THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SEPARATE FROM THE ONES AROUND IT. SPECIFICALLY ON THE SOUTH AND BACK IN THE CORNER THERE IS NO REASON TO REMOVE THOSE TREES THAT ARE THERE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO GET BACK INTO THAT AREA WITH THE DEVELOPER AND IT WOULD, IN THIS SCENARIO, WOULDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE FOR THE DEVELOPER TO DO SO IT JUST BRINGS IN THE VALUE TO GO FARTHER AND FARTHER AND REMOVE ALL THAT VEGETATION. SO, THE PLAN HERE IS TO MINIMIZE IMPACT AND IN MY OPINION THIS IS NOT ACTUALLY FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARING STANDPOINT THIS IS LESS IMPACTFUL THAN A SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE BECAUSE IF IT BECOMES SINGLE-FAMILY IT'S GOING TO GET CLEARCUT.

WITHOUT QUESTION. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO IT SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE GEOMETRY OF THE PROPERTY SO ALL THAT BEING SAID I DID HEAR SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC. I DON'T KNOW THAT HOWEVER YOU DEVELOP THIS SEVEN OR EIGHT OR 12 UNITS IS NOT GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC

[02:25:01]

>> I'M SORRY. I HAVE A QUICK -- YOU SAID YOU DID HAVE A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED LAYOUT THAT WAS ABOUT SEVEN UNITS?

>> SIX OR SEVEN. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT LIKE I SAID, YOU WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE PUSHING TO BE ABLE TO GET THOSE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU WOULD BE PUSHING THE HOMES AS FAR NORTHWEST PARALLEL TO THE CREEK AS YOU COULD POSSIBLY GET THEM TO BE ABLE TO GET THE REST OF THEM AROUND SO THAT MEANS EVERYTHING THAT'S NOT WITHIN THAT CREEK BUFFER -- THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING

LEFT. >> LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING -- MORE THAN ONE THING. YOU SAID THAT AT FIRST YOU HAD THOUGHT ABOUT THIS BEING SIMPLE AND WHAT WAS THE REASON WHY IT IS

NOT? >> THE DEVELOPER REALLY DOESN'T FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IT IN EITHER DIRECTION. IT WAS REALLY MORE OF A -- TRUTHFULLY IT WAS THE STEP REQUIRED TO NOW GET THE -- TO STILL GET THE WAIVER TO SUBDIVIDE OFF OF THE

PRIVATE STREET. >> OKAY.

>> THIS CAME UP ON AN EARLIER MEETING. PROPERTIES -- PROPERTY OWNERS ARE NOW ENTITLED TO PRIVATE STREETS IF THEY ARE NOT SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING AND THERE'S NO CONDUCTIVITY POSED, THERE WERE SEVERAL STANDARDS THAT WAS ONE OF THE CHANGES IN THE BREAKS THAT WE WENT OVER. JUST KIND OF FROM PERUSING THIS, THIS WOULD QUALIFY SO JUST WANT TO KIND OF --

>> NEXT, QUESTION WAS BUT THEN YOU WENT ON AND YOU SAID WE ARE THINKING ABOUT MAYBE PUTTING THEM INTO CONDOS BUT RIGHT NOW

IT'S JUST MUD? >> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IF THEY WERE TO CONDO THIS OUT OF A MULTIPLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT

THAT'S WHAT THAT WOULD BE? >> YEAH. SO I GUESS KIND OF THE CHANGES ON THESE KIND OF ON A TENTATIVE STANDPOINT SETBACK DIFFERENT, IT'S A SPACE THING.

>> WE HAD DEVELOPMENTS THAT COME BACK AND WANTED TO CHANGE FROM CONDOS TO HOMES BECAUSE CONDOS ARE SO EXPENSIVE TO

ENSURE. >> LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY THIS IS LAID OUT THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE GARBAGE CANS ARE THERE? THERE'S GOING TO BE A

DUMPSTER? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> WHERE IS THE DUMPSTER GOING?

>> IT'S SHOWN IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PARKING LOT.

>> I CAN BARELY READ THAT IT'S SO LITTLE. THE PRINT IS SO LITTLE. I SEE THAT DUMPSTER. SO, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A BIG DUMPSTER EMPTYING TRUCK COMING IN.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> OKAY.

>> I WOULD SUBMIT WITH THAT THOUGHT PROCESS THAT -- YOU ARE

GOING TO HAVE A TRASH TRUCK. >> WELL, I KNOW.

>> AND THERE'S ONE THAT RUNS THROUGH THE STREETS RIGHT NOW TO PICK UP TRASH TOO. IF IT WAS JUST A BUNCH OF SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS WE WOULD STILL HAVE A PRIVATE DRIVE THERE?

>> NO BECAUSE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING CANNOT BE OFF A PRIVATE

STREET. >> SO IT WOULD BE --

>> IT WOULD JUST EXTEND CHEROKEE. INTO A CUL-DE-SAC.

>> YEAH. >> WHAT I HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS IS THAT THEY WANT THE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS. THE TREES, YEAH, THERE ARE TREES THERE BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT I HEAR AT LEAST. MY READING BETWEEN THE LINES?

>> I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. PRETTY MUCH, THAT WAS ONE OF THE MAIN TENANTS OF WHAT WE GOT FROM THE SLEW OF EMAILS WE RECEIVED, PROBABLY OVER A DOZEN AS WELL. TREES ARE ONE OF THEIR MAIN CONCERNS. I THINK TREES -- MAINTAINING THE TREES ALSO KIND OF THE WHAT THE END PRODUCT WAS BUT I THINK TO THE POINT -- AS WELL AT EIGHT DWELLING UNITS AT AND ACROSS 3.6 ACRES IT'S ONLY 2.2. IN CA IS DOUBLE THAT, RIGHT? DD H -- IF SOMEONE WANTED TO BUILD SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING THEY COULD I PASS EVERYBODY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BUILD ON FLOODPLAINS OR WHATEVER IF THEY WANTED TO DO IT AND PUT 20 HOMES BACK THERE AND THERE WOULD NOT BE A SINGLE TREE LEFT SO. THAT'S --

>> AND WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TONIGHT TALKING.

>> NO. BY RIGHT. >> I TELL YOU. IT'S GOING TO SHOCK SOME TO SAY THIS BUT I'M USUALLY GOOD WITH A LOT OF THESE CONDITIONAL USES AND PEOPLE COMING ALONG AND DOING ALL GOOD STUFF BUT THIS ONE DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT. IT JUST

[02:30:02]

THIS AT ALL. >> CAN WE GO --

>> WHAT YOU MAY NOT WRITE? >> IT'S THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WITH THIS MULTIPLE UNIT THING RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. JUST THE CHARACTER AND WHEN WE TRY TO ZONE THINGS WE TRY TO GO FROM LOW DENSITY TO HIGH DENSITY AND THIS IS JUST THROWING SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE, LOW DENSITY AND I JUST --

>> I -- I UNDERSTAND IT TOO AND I AGREE WITH PHIL, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND IT'S LIKE YOU'VE GOT THIS DD H RIGHT OUT IN THE MIDDLE SURROUNDED BY IN CA. I KNOW THERE IS A DD H DOWN

AT THE CORNER. >> IT'S NOT NEW.

>> AND WE ARE NOT HEARING REZONING HERE.

>> I KNOW THAT. HOW DID IT GET --

>> SO THIS IS THE ORIGINAL ZONING. THIS IS NOT REZONED

ANYTHING. >> I KNOW THAT. SO WHENEVER ZONING WAS IMPLEMENTED IN THE CITY THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL ZONE. IT HAS NOT BEEN REZONED ONCE.

>> I REALIZE THAT. >> IT'S ONE OF THOSE UNIQUE

SITUATIONS. >> THE PROPERTY BELOW IT, THE NCH WAS ALSO DDH AND THAT GOT REZONED.

>> OKAY, HEY, ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S PLEASE FOCUS.

>> I GET WHERE THE HATERS ARE COMING FROM ON THAT AND FROM THEIR OBJECTIONS AND THE AREA. MY QUESTION IS, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOUR INTENT WAS NOT TO LET STUDENTS RENT BACK THERE. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? THAT IS NOT THE DEVELOPER'S INTENT. THAT

CANNOT BE CONTROLLED. >> THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT KEEP THAT FROM BEING CONTROLLED WHICH CAN ENFORCE THE FAMILY DEFINITION WITHIN THE AREA.

>> IT REMAINS THAT. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION, ONE PERSON BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT -- CAME AS A TOWNHOME AND NOW IT'S SWITCHED TO A MOD. WE

HAVE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS HERE? >> THAT IS A GREAT POINT. I WOULD SAY SO, WHAT IS BEFORE EVERYBODY TONIGHT IS ACTUALLY NOT A PLAT. THAT IS A SITE PLAN SO AT THE -- AT THIS POINT YOU WOULD KNOW ABOUT ANYTHING AND WHEN WE HAD THE MEETING THIS WASN'T GOING TO BE TOWNHOMES AND I SAID I CANNOT SHARE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE CONVERTED, THAT WAS A CONVERSATION INTERNALLY WE HAD THAT FROM THE LOOKS OF IT, IT WOULD BE AT THIS POINT IN TIME IN THE PHASE AND OF ELEMENT OF TOWNHOMES, THEY VIRTUALLY LOOK THE SAME ON A SITE FAN. THERE WOULD BE NO DISTINCTION UNTIL IT WAS A TOWNHOME AND A PLAT AND WHEN THE PLAT WAS SUBMITTED COME UP IN THE PLAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED THEN YOU WOULD SEE THE DISTINCTION AND SHOWCASE THE SAME BECAUSE THERE ARE LINES ON THE SITE PLAN. AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IT IN THE MEETING IT WAS THEY WERE GOING TO PURSUE THE CONDITIONAL USE AND THEN AFTER THEY GOT APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE THEY WOULD EVENTUALLY COME BACK WITH A PLAT SO THAT IS STILL KIND OF IN LINE WITH THE TRAJECTORY WE

ARE CURRENTLY FOLLOWING. >> HAD TO SEE WHAT IS DIVIDED

TONIGHT? >> WHEN THEY PUT IN THE PROJECT DRIVE, LET'S TALK ABOUT WATER ISSUES BECAUSE THAT IS THE MAIN CONCERN OF A LOT OF PEOPLE AND I AM SYMPATHETIC TO HOMEOWNERS BUT YOU'VE GOT TO REALIZE THIS IS AN INTERIOR LOT IN AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT SO SOMEONE IS GOING TO DEVELOP THIS AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE FLOODING ISSUES ARE MITIGATED? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH THAT ROAD? YOU STUDIED THIS AS A SENIOR

PROJECT. >> I'M GOING TO REVISE MY

STUDY 32 YEARS LATER. >> I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOUR

PLANS ARE. >> 21 YEARS AGO I DID MY SENIOR DESIGN ON THIS AND I IMAGINE IT'S, THERE IS SOME FLOODING AND IT'S PROBABLY SIGNIFICANTLY THE CAUSE OF THAT FLOODING IS THE SAME TODAY THAT IT WAS THEN AND IT WAS PREDOMINANTLY OVERGROWTH OBSTRUCTIONS WITHIN THE CREEK

[02:35:01]

>> AND THAT WOULD MATTER BASED ON THIS TYPE OF --

>> IF YOU GO TO CITY STREETS, WITH THAT INCREASE THE COST OF

THIS DEVELOPMENT? >> PROBABLY NOT A WHOLE LOT.

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY IT PROBABLY DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THIS IS A PRIVATE DRIVER NOT?

>> THE COST OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THAT CREEK CROSSING. CITY STREET, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO PROVIDE 24 FEET OF ASPHALT AND CURB AND GUTTER WHEN YOU PUT THIS PRIVATE DRIVE IN THERE WE ARE GOING TO PROVIDE PROBABLY 22 FEET OF ASPHALT IN YOUR CURB AND GUTTER. IT'S A SMALL AMOUNT, FINANCIAL

DIFFERENCE. >> THANK YOU.

>> QUESTIONS? >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

CONDITIONAL USE CASE SEE YOU. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A

SECOND. >> ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

BEING CALLED ] >> 4-3.

>> LAST AGENDA ITEM OF THE EVENING. A WAIVER REQUEST IF

YOU WANT TO WAIT JUST A SECOND. >> OKAY. WAIVER REQUEST. UPTOWN

[15. Waiver - Uptown 1]

ONE. >> THIS IS AN APPEAL TO THE DENIAL OF ENGINEERING DESIGN MANUAL WAIVER REQUEST RELATED TO RIGHT TURN AND LEFT TURN ACCELERATION LANES. THE DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED AT 350 BRAD AVENUE AND IT IS KNOWN AS UPTOWN ONE AND BOTH WAIVER REQUESTS WERE CONSIDERED AND SUBSEQUENTLY PROVIDE AND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING AN APPEAL.

>> AND THIS IS ONE AND LEFT OR RIGHT AND ONE?

>> WE DID THEM AS TWO. >> NO, SO, YEAH, THIS IS TWO TURN LANES AND YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO SPLIT THE QUESTION AND DECIDE ON THEM INDIVIDUALLY.

>> JUSTICE LEFT TURN D CELL? >> LEFT TURN AND A RIGHT TURN?

>> YES, IT'S A LEFT TURN AND A --

>> RIGHT TURN. YEAH, RIGHT NOW THEY ARE -- RIGHT.

>> WE CAN MAKE A MOTION. >> OKAY. IS THERE ANY MORE HISTORY YOU CAN PROVIDE ON THIS?

>> THE ONLY LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY I WOULD PROVIDE IS THAT WE CONSIDER THIS CASE A FEW MONTHS AGO, I WORKED WITH THE ENGINEER TO WORK WITH A STREETSCAPE PLAN SHOWING THE WIDENING STREET SCAPE AND WE DO HAVE A SOLUTION THAT WORKS TO ACCOMMODATE THE LANES THAT WILL GO THROUGH DEVELOPMENT SO. THEY

[02:40:01]

WANT AN APPEAL. >> IT WOULDN'T HAVE THAT SOLUTION, YOU HAVE THEM HAVING TO BUY ADDITIONAL PROPERTY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT OF THEIR PROPERTY,

RIGHT? >> CORRECT.

>> AND THE WIDENING HAPPENS IN FRONT OF THEIR PROPERTY, NOT

THE WHOLE BRAGG AVENUE? >> THEY WERE SHOWING

SYMMETRICAL WIDENING . >> THEY WERE SHOWING A LITTLE BIT OF WIDENING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BRAGG AND SOME TO THE

NORTH SIDE. >> AND IT'S THE CORNER. BRAGG

AND -- >> WHITE STREET IS ONE LOT OVER. THERE'S A LOT AND THEN THERE IS WHITE STREET.

>> OKAY. WAIVER REQUEST DOES NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING, APPLICANT IS HERE. PLEASE COME TALK TO US.

>> I'VE NEVER GOTTEN TO USE THIS BEFORE SO I'M A LITTLE

NERVOUS. >> IT'S JUST A MICROPHONE.

>> I'M GLAD THIS IS A HEARING BECAUSE I'M STARVING AND STRUGGLING. IF I FADE, Y'ALL BEAR WITH ME.

>> YOU ARE STANDING BETWEEN US AND OUR DINNER.

>> I WILL DO MY BEST TO BE CONCISE. REAL QUICK, I'VE GOT SOME POINTS I WANT TO RUN THROUGH. WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BUT IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'VE GOT A COUPLE POINTS I WANT TO HIT. STONE RAISES ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPMENT. HE'S GOT A COUPLE POINTS HE WANTED TO GO THROUGH IN THIS SLIDE SHOW THAT -- I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO BE RELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION AND THEN WE CAN KIND OF PICK QUESTIONS OR IF Y'ALL FEEL FREE TO STOP ME IF WE'VE GOT TO TALK THROUGH ANY OF THAT BUT I WILL TRY TO BE AS CONCISE AS POSSIBLE. THE LAST SLIDE WAS -- THAT ALLISON MENTIONED WAS A SKETCH WE DID WHENEVER THIS FIRST CAME UP AND WE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THE WAIVER, THIS WOULD BE -- THIS REPRESENTS THE FULL EXTENT OF WHAT THE LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANE REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE FOR THE 35 MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT. AS A PART OF -- JUST TO GIVE YOU GUYS SOME CONTEXT, HIGHLIGHT SOME ISSUES THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO OVERCOME IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE SOME OF THE ISSUES AND IMPACTS OF PROPERTIES ON THIS ONE WITH THE MOST RECENT -- TOO FAR, SORRY. WITH THE MOST RECENT WAIVER DENIAL ENGINEERING HAS GIVEN US SOME OPTIONS TO LIMIT THE IMPACTS TO ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE PROPERTY WE ARE GOING TO DEVELOP AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF DROPPING SPEED LIMIT TO 25 MILES PER HOUR AND AT ONE POINT ALSO NARROWING THE LANES TO WIDE LANES 12 FOOT WIDE LANES IS THE STANDARD SO WHAT THIS SKETCH REPRESENTS WOULD BE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM A DIMENSIONAL STANDPOINT OF 25-MILE-PER-HOUR DESIGN SPEED AND THE 11 FOOT WIDE LANES. SO YOU CAN SEE WE'VE GOT A RIGHT TURN LANE AND A LEFT TURN LANE.

COUPLE THINGS I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT RELATIVE TO THIS PARTICULAR IMAGE THAT YOU GUYS CAN SEE WE STILL HAVE CONCERNS EVEN FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE WITH A COUPLE THINGS. IMPACTS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES BOTH ON PARTICULARLY TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WE ARE DEVELOPING AND TO THE SOUTH AT BRAGG. FOR CONTEXT ON THE BOTTOM LEFT OF THE SCREEN THAT IS THE CENTRAL ENTRANCE OF THE THREE BRAGG SO THAT ENTIRE DRIVEWAY WOULD HAVE TO GET REWORKED WITH THIS LEFT TURN LANE ADDITION INCLUDING SOME SIDEWALK FIXES ON EITHER SIDE JUST TO ACCOMMODATE THE WIDENING AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS OVER THERE PARTICULARLY IN THE BOTTOM LEFT THERE IS -- THERE WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH. I'M NOT SURE WHO OWNS THE LIGHTBULB, IT MIGHT BE THE POWER COMPANIES I'M NOT SURE AT THIS STAGE. THE BIGGEST THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT FROM A ADJACENT PROPERTY CONCERN IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL WHICH WOULD BE A BY THE BOOK BASED ON DESIGN SPEED WIDENING TO ACCOMMODATE THESE TURN LANES, THERE WOULD BE CURB CLIPPING THE ADJACENT PROPERTY SO I WOULD SAY THE 25-MILE-PER-HOUR DROP IS A DEFINITE IMPROVEMENT HOWEVER I DON'T SEE A WAY TO AVOID HAVING SOME SORT OF CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THIS AT THESE DIMENSIONS WITH EVEN

[02:45:03]

WITH THAT PARTICULAR WIDENING OF THE SIDEWALL WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THOSE UNITS THERE IS REALLY NO SPACE TO PUSH THEM FURTHER ONTO THE PROPERTY FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT REASONS. ONE, JUST BECAUSE OF THE ISSUES WITH THE AERIAL FIRE ACCESS, THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS IN ORDER TO GET THE DIVISION OF WHAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS ALSO IMPACTED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY BROUGHT UP DURING THE ORIGINAL PLANNING COMMISSION SUBMISSION WITH THE EXISTING CITY STORMWATER EASEMENT WHICH WE ARE NOT REALLY NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO BECAUSE THEY ARE LETTING US USE IT TO EXPAND, USING THE STORMWATER RETENTION, WHICH IS A GREAT THING, BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO POINT OUT IS THIS NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO CONSTRUCT THE SITE WHICH AT THE COST OF THE PROPERTY -- SPATIALLY THIS CLOSE

[02:50:08]

>> I'M JUST INTERESTED IN THAT CHANGE AND, YOU KNOW YOU ALREADY BROUGHT THIS PROJECT FORWARD, RIGHT? SO ALL THIS IS

APPROVED EXCEPT JUST -- >> WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW, GROWING THROUGH INITIAL COMMENTS SO I THINK WE WILL HAVE THAT MEETING ON THURSDAY AND WHATEVER WE DECIDE IN HERE TONIGHT IS REALLY GOING TO IMPACT WHAT I'VE GOT FOR THAT BUT YEAH, THE TURN LANE WAS NOT A PART OF THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES.

>> THE STREETSCAPE YOU MENTIONED? IS THAT PART OF WHY YOU ARE DOING THE DEVELOPMENT? THE CITY WAS GOING TO DO THAT

OR NOT? >> THE STREETSCAPE IS GOING TO BE ON THE DEVELOPER TO CONSTRUCT ACROSS OUR FRONTAGE AND ONE OF THE OTHER POINTS I WANTED TO BRING UP PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE STREETSCAPE SINCE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT, THAT TYPE OF STREETSCAPE IN OUR OPINION -- A LITTLE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE STUFF LIKE THAT BUT GENERALLY THAT TYPE OF STREETSCAPE IS A VERY URBANIZED PEDESTRIAN HEAVY TYPE OF SECTION, AT THE BACK OF THE CURB THERE ARE STREET TREES WITH WELLS, THERE IS NO STRIP OF GREEN SPACE AT THAT POINT AND SO I'M NOT SAYING WE ARE GETTING MIXED SIGNALS BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS THE ENGINEERING PIECE OF THIS WHICH IS BASED ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE ROAD, REQUIRED BUT THE PLANNING PIECE OF IT ALSO SEEMS -- IN OUR HEAD THEY DON'T

REALLY MESH TOGETHER. SO, -- >> IS THIS 350 BRAGG?

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S THIS WHOLE STRETCH OF BRAGG.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. YOU KEEP TALKING. I WILL TALK LATER.

>> I'M GETTING TIRED OF TALKING BUT, SO, YEAH. I THINK THAT'S WHERE THIS IS GOING. WHICH I THINK IS GREAT. I GUESS OUR -- ONE OF OUR PRIMARY CONCERNS FROM A PEDESTRIAN PERSPECTIVE PARTICULARLY WITH THE RIGHT TURN LINE WOULD YIELD CONTROL BUT GENERALLY THE PURPOSE OF TURN LANES DECELERATION LANES ARE TO KEEP THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC MOVING. IT WILL KIND OF BY NATURE ALLOW FOR A LITTLE BIT BIGGER TURN MANEUVER TO THE RIGHT, THE RIGHT TURN INTO THE DEVELOPMENT WE HAVE THE STREETSCAPE CROSSING. I'M NOT SAYING THAT THERE IS ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BUT I'M SAYING THAT IT SEEMS THAT MAY NOT BE THE BEST MOVE FROM A PEDESTRIAN STANDPOINT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN CONSIDER ON OUR END.

ALSO, THE STREETSCAPE WOULD ALSO IMPACT ANOTHER -- IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO MOVE NOW THAT IT'S GOING TO BE

MOVED. >> THE CITY IS PLANNING ON TAKING BRAGG DOWN FROM 35 TO 25?

>> ONE OF THE THINGS I CONSIDERED EVALUATING THE WAIVER REQUEST IS AS HE'S APPROACHING TO USE A LESSER SPEED LIMIT. I DID THE SAME THING ACROSS THE PARKING LOT RIGHT AT INTERSECTION SO I WAS COMFORTABLE WITH A REDUCED SPEED LIMIT TO BE USED FOR THE DESIGN OF THE TURN LANES SO VERY SIMILAR SITUATION HERE. WHITE STREET IS ONE LOT OVER TO THE WEST AND THEN YOU ARE AT NORTH DONAHUE DRIVE SO CARS ARE NOT -- SHOULD NOT BE GOING 35. IT'S PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE

TO DO 25. >> I AGREE. SLOWER WOULD BE BETTER. ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT DOES FEEL THIS IS IN A REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IT'S GOING TO BE -- SEEMS LIKE IT WANTS TO BE MORE URBANIZED PARTICULARLY WITH THE STREETSCAPE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> LEFT HAND TURN LANE IS SOMETHING YOU CAN AT --

ACCOMMODATE. >> THAT'S GOING TO BE EASIER THAN THE RIGHT TURN LANE. AND THE BARRIER ON THE RIGHT TURN

LANE IS -- >> TELEPHONE POLE AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THOSE THREE LOTS WHICH IS A BIG

ISSUE. >> I'VE ALSO BEEN ASKED TO BRING UP AND I KNOW IT'S A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY TURN LANES ACROSS THE STREET ACROSS THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S WORTH POINTING OUT AND IT DOES FEEL LIKE IT'S SOME -- IF THIS IS SOMETHING YOU DECIDE WE NEED TO DO THEN THAT'S WHAT IT IS BUT IT DOES FEEL LIKE THIS WOULD POTENTIALLY SET SOME PRECEDENT THEN -- AS BRAGG REDEVELOP SOME ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE A SIMILAR SECTION. AND DEPENDING ON WHATEVER THE FUTURE STREETSCAPE AND ROAD SECTION PLANS LOOK LIKE. TRAVIS IS GOING TO TALK TOO.

[02:55:16]

>> I'M TRAVIS WISDOM, THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROJECT. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, WE NEED THE WAIVERS OF THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD. I THINK EVERYBODY WHO SITS UP HERE PROBABLY REALIZES THE ONLY RECYCLING CENTER HAS BEEN A BLIGHT IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR 45 YEARS. WE DON'T GET THIS WAIVER THIS PROJECT DIES HERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT FROM BRAGG AVENUE BUT IT'S BECOMING AN URBAN AREA MORE AND MORE AND THIS IS GOING TO SCREW UP INDUSTRY AND TRAFFIC IF WE HAVE TO PUT THESE IN, IT'S GOING TO IMPACT A LOT OF THE RESIDENCE IN THE AREA IF WE HAVE TO PUT THESE IN. IF WE ARE GOING TO A 25 MILE PER HOUR SPEED YOU DON'T NEED A D CELL LANE. THERE'S NOBODY WHO NEEDS TO SLOW DOWN FROM 50 AND ACCELERATE RIGHT BACK UP TO 25. YOU ARE APPROACHING THE STOP SIGN GOING THIS WAY SO WE REALLY FEEL LIKE THIS IS IT FOR US. IF WE CAN'T GET THESE WAIVERS, THE RECYCLING CENTER IS GOING TO HAVE TO STAY. THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY QUICKLY. I'M SORRY -- DANCE STUDIO. SO I WANTED TO GET THAT

IN. THANK YOU. >> I KNOW IT'S LATE. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS STONE RAY, MY ADDRESS IS 915 GLENWOOD AVENUE SOUTHEAST ATLANTA GEORGIA. I WANT TO ECHO A LOT OF WHAT LEE MENTIONED. IF YOU COULD ADVANCE TO THE NEXT SLIDE OR CAN I CONTROL? PERFECT. I WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN WHICH IS MIXED-USE TOO AND SPECIFICALLY CALLS OUT AN URBAN CHARACTER FOR THE ENTIRE STRETCH OF THIS CORNER FROM WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE ON THE PRIVATE SIDE, WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO MAKE SURE OUR BUILDINGS FACED THE STREET IN AN URBAN WAY AND HAVE A STOOP, RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE RAISED OFF THE GROUND SLIGHTLY ON THE INTERIOR OF THIS SITE, THE PRIVATE STREET THAT WE HAVE DRAWN, IT WILL APPEAR LIKE A PUBLIC STREET AND THOSE BUILDINGS WILL FRONT IT, WE HAVE A PIECE OF GROUND THAT WE HAVE LEFT FOR FUTURE PHASE TWO COMMERCIAL TO HAVE MIXED-USE AS THE ZONING DISTRICT OR THE FUTURE LAND USE CALLS OUT FOR SO WE HAVE DONE I THINK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE GIVEN THE PROGRAM AND THE OTHER CONSTRAINTS OF THIS PARKING REQUIREMENTS BUILDING HEIGHTS, THINGS LIKE THAT TO ACHIEVE AN URBAN CHARACTER, BUT WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE STREET SCAPE SHOULD PARTICIPATE IN THAT AS WELL AS MUCH AS IT CAN AND LEE MENTIONED THE ORIGINAL STREETSCAPE PLAN FOR BRAGG BEING AN EIGHT FOOT SIDEWALK WITH SWALE BUFFER AND TREES AND DURING OUR D.A.R.T. PROCESS, STAFF HAS UPDATED THAT TO BE A 10 FOOT SIDEWALK WITHOUT THE SWALE, THE TREES NOW VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE IN THE URBAN CORE. THAT IS SIGNALING TO US THAT STAFF BELIEVES THAT THIS IS EXPECTING MORE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC THAN THEY WERE PRIOR IN THE FUTURE.

THERE'S A LOT OF PROPERTY ALONG BRAGG THAT IS UNDEVELOPED AND THIS IS A CHALLENGING CASE BECAUSE YOU CAN STAND ON PORTIONS OF THE STREET AND IT ALMOST APPEARS RURAL WITH THOSE LARGE UNDEVELOPED PROPERTIES BUT I THINK STAFF IS SIGNALING WITH THOSE INCREASED REQUIREMENTS ON THE STREET SCAPE FRONT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A SERIOUS PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARE ALL BE IT LESS THAN THE CORE IT'S STILL A VERY IMPORTANT STREET IN THAT REGARD. AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE ADDITION OF THE D CELL LANES IS OPPOSING THAT IN SOME WAY AND, LET'S SEE. THIS COMMISSION HAS HEARD MANY APPEALS BEFORE ON THAT SAME TOPIC OF SITES THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND MOST OF THOSE ARE IN MORE PER REFERRAL SUBURBAN CONDITIONS THAT ARE A LOT MORE -- LESS COMPLEX THAN THIS ONE. THIS IS A DIAGRAM OF THE SITE. THERE'S A SITE HERE AND BRAGG AVENUE IS HOME TO ONE OF THE TIGER TRANSIT LINES THAT IS THE BUS STOP RIGHT THERE ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE OUR ENTRANCE WOULD BE, IT'S RIGHT THERE. AND THAT BUS STOP HAS 15 MINUTE HEADWAYS SO FOUR BUSES PER HOUR THERE, THERE'S 86 UNITS ACROSS THE STREET AT 319 BRAGG RIGHT HERE , THIS PROJECT LIKE LEE MENTIONED DOES

[03:00:04]

THIS IS A QUICK DIAGRAM THAT I DID JUST TO SHOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE ADDITIONAL WIDTH THAT THESE LANES WOULD CHANGE THE STREET SECTION SO HERE IS A TWO LANE STREET AND THE DRIVE AT CROSSINGS AND HERE IS ONE AND YOU CAN SEE THE ADDITIONAL WIDTH IT WOULD TAKE AND SOME CASES THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING HAS TO JOG LIKE THIS AROUND IT SO THE VERY NICE STREETSCAPE WE ARE EAGER TO INSTALL THOSE 10 FOOT SIDEWALKS, IT HAS TO JOG AROUND THESE TURN LANES NOT ONLY ON THIS SITE BUT PRESUMABLY IF OTHERS ALONG BRAGG ARE DEVELOPED AS WELL AND THE BUS STOP IS HERE AND WE WANT PEOPLE TO CROSS FROM HERE TO HERE. WE THINK THIS IS A REAL SAFETY CONCERN FOR PEDESTRIANS, CREATING ADDITIONAL CONFLICT BETWEEN DRIVERS AND PEDESTRIANS WE WANT TO DECREASE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. FROM CURB TO CURB AND DRIVER BEHAVIOR IS SOMETHING WE CAN'T CONTROL AND A LOT OF TIMES WHEN DRIVERS ENTER A DECEL LANE LIKE THIS THEY CAN FORGET TO YIELD AT THESE CROSSWALKS BECAUSE THE LANE SIGNALS TO YOU, THIS IS FOR ME AND TURNS RIGHT AND I CAN DO SO AT A HIGHER SPEED AND WOULD HAVE TO STOP AND TAKE A SHARPER TURN. I WANTED TO SHOW THE COMMISSION THESE TWO DIAGRAMS TO HAVE A VISUAL OF WHAT WE WOULD AVOID AND WHY WE BELIEVE THAT THE KIND OF -- WYATT NEEDS A TURN LANE VERSUS THE CITY'S OTHER GOALS OF HAVING AN URBAN, WALKABLE SPACE. WE BELIEVE THEY ARE OPPOSED TO EACH OTHER. I ALSO PULLED TWO PROJECTS. THESE HAPPEN TO BE IN GEORGIA BUT THEY ARE SIMILAR TYPE PROJECTS. THIS IS A PROJECT 69 TOWNHOMES SIMILAR SCALE WHAT WE ARE BUILDING, WE HAVE 30 OF THEM BUT THIS IS ON A STREET THAT HAS TWO LANES AND AUDLEY HAS THE EXACT SAME TRAFFIC COUNT AS BRAGG AVENUE. IT DOES NOT HAVE THE DECEL LANES TO ENTER AND OUT -- AND YOU CAN SEE THE STREET SCAPE WE WANT TO BUILD AS PART OF THIS PROJECT AND YOU CAN IMAGINE AT THIS POINT IF YOU WERE A RIGHT TURN LANE HEAR HOW THAT WOULD HAVE TO PUSH THOSE UNITS BACK AS IT WOULD ON OUR SIDE AS WELL. HERE IS ANOTHER ONE.

TRANSITIONING ] SO I HAVE TURNED LANES AT THE SIGNAL OF INTERSECTIONS, RIGHT? SO THAT WHEN YOU'RE SITTING IN THE IMAGE IS THE TURN ONTO ANOTHER STREET. NOW I AM POINTING OUT. YES, SIR. HERE'S A SECOND ONE. THIS IS A MUCH LARGER ONE. HAS A COMMERCIAL COMPONENT. AND IT HAS A 10 FOOT SIDE LOT -- SIDEWALK ALONG APPRENTICE HAS STREET PARKING. AND THE SPEED LIMIT IS HIGHER.

IT IS 35 MILES PER HOUR. YOU CAN SEE THE SINGLE ENTRANCE THEY ARE. SO I WANTED TO PULL TWO PRESIDENTS IN THE TWO GROWING CITIES OF A SIMILAR PRODUCT AND SIMILAR STREET SECTION. SIMILAR TRAFFIC COUNTS AND SPEED LIMITS TO SHOW IT IS POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW? AND OUR GOAL HERE IS TO -- EXCUSE ME.

TO MAKE THE CASE THAT THE CITY OVERARCHING GOALS AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY , WE THINK THEY ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE BLACK AND WHITE -- AT A TIME. THAT SITUATION. SO THAT IS WHAT I HAVE TO SAY BUT I'M

[03:05:05]

IF YOU HAVE THEM. THANK YOU. >> WELCOME BACK. THANK YOU PLAN TO LIGHTEN -- IS THAT WHAT I AM SEEING HERE?

>> DATA PLAN FROM PROBABLY 15 YEARS AGO TO LIGHTEN IT. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HELD THE FACT WAS THAT I THINK SOMEONE MOVED INTO THE CORNER OF SANDERS AND -- THE HOUSE THAT IS ON THE HELP THAT I THINK IT WAS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND THEY TURN IT INTO A RESIDENCE. THAT KIND OF IMPACTED OUR -- BUT I THINK IT IS --

>> IS IT STILL IN THE BOOKS? >> IT IS NOT ON ANY OF OUR SECURE PLANS. IT IS SOMETHING WAY TALK ABOUT AS TRAFFIC

INCREASES. >> THAT IS A SUICIDE LINE?

>> IT IS. IT IS A RIGHT TURN LANE. YES, YES.

>>

>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> OH, I AM SORRY. LET'S DO ONE. IT IS NOT ON -- THE AGENDA BUT -- THE LANE , FIRST CHOICE.

>> THE RIGHT TURN LANE. >> RIGHT.

>> LET ME GET MY BEARINGS WHEN I MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE

DECELERATION LANE. >> SECOND.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> AYE. >> OPPOSED?

>> OPPOSED. >> OKAY. LEFT TURN LANE.

>> >> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE WAIVER WITH RESPECT TO THE LEFT TURN LANE.

>> SECOND PERIOD OF MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE. ALL

THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE.

>> ON THE POST? >> OPPOSED.

>> >>

>> YES. >> DANA CAMP.

>> NO. >> PHIL CHASLER.

>> NO BREAD >> --

>> OSCAR MOSELEY. >> NO.

>> OR -3. >> THE LAST IDENTIFIER -- THAT WAS THE LAST AGENDA ITEM FOR THE EVENING. ARE THERE ANY

COMMUNICATIONS? >> ARE GOING TO QUIT?

>> FOR HANGING IN T

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.