8.b.1. 68V Greenwood Village 2026, LLC. Infrastructure development agreement. Greenwood Village. Postponed from October 7, 2025.

[9.a. Severe Weather Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday. Exempt specified items from City Sales Tax. Friday, February 20, 2026, through Sunday, February 22, 2026. Unanimous consent necessary.]

>> ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. ORDINANCES.

>> ITEM 9A AUTHORIZES THE 2026 SEVERE WEATHER SALES TAX HOLIDAY EXEMPTING SPECIFIED ITEMS FROM THE CITY SALES TAX.

FEBRUARY 20TH THROUGH 22ND, 2026. UNANIMOUS CONSENT IS NECESSARY.

>> I'LL INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AND ASK FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING FORWARD WITH THE VOTE ON THIS THIS EVENING? SEEING AND HEARING NONE, ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. LINDSAY THE ARE'LL ROLL CALL.

[9.b. Traffic control signs and devices.Establish school zone signs.Ogletree Elementary. Unanimous consent necessary.]

YES. >> IEMTD 89B AUTHORIZED THE INSTALLATION OF SCHOOL BOARD SIGNS IN THE VICINITY OF OGLETREE ELEMENTARY AND LAKEWELL

PARK. >> I'LL INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AND ASK FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND ANYONE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THE VOTE ON THIS THIS EVENING? SEEING AND HEARING NONE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR GETTING ONE ON THIS WEEK AND GETTING THIS ESTABLISHED. WE APPRECIATE IT.

>> IT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR SOME TIME WE HAD SOME RIGHT OF WAY THINGS WE HAD TO LOOK AT IT WAS ACTUALLY IN THE PLANS FOR THE LAKE WILMORE PARK CONSTRUCTION JUST A LITTLE BIT OF DELAY OVER SOME RIGHT OF WAY QUESTIONS WE HAD.

>> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, LINDSEY?

DAWSON. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> GRISWOLD.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> MOREMAN.

>> YES, MA'AM. >>

PARSONS. >>

[9.c.1. Greenwood Village Pre-zoning DDH. Pre-zone approximately 53.5 acres. Property located on West Farmville Road between Pepperwood Trail and Auburn Lake Road. Public hearing required. Second reading.]

>> APPROXIMATELY 53. 5 I CAN AARS OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON WEST FARMVILLE ROAD BETWEEN PEPPERWOOD TRAIL AND AUBURN LAKE ROAD. PLANNING COMMISSION DID NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY A VOTE OF 2-7 AT ITS AUGUST 14TH MEETING.

THIS IS THE SECOND READING. A MOTION IS NEEDED AND A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED.

>> I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO POSTPONE TO DATE NOVEMBER 18TH.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND TO POSTPONE TO NOVEMBER THE 18TH.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS ON THAT? OKAY. DO I NEED TO TAKE A ROLL CALL

VOTE? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> ALL RIGHT. LINDSAY WITH THE ROLL CALL.

[9.c.2. Greenwood Village Pre-zoning PDD. Pre-zone approximately 53.5 acres. Property located on West Farmville Road between Pepperwood Trail and Auburn Lakes Road. Public hearing required. Second reading.]

>> ITEM 19C2 IS REQUEST TO PREZONE APPROXIMATELY 53. 5 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCKED ON WEST FARMVILLE ROAD BETWEEN PEPPERWOOD TRAIL AND AUBURN LAKES ROAD THAT HAS BEEN PREZONED OR COULD HAVE BEEN PREZONED BUT HAS NOT BEEN TO APPLY TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OVERLAY DESIGNATION THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY A VOTE OF 5- 4 AT ITS AUGUST 14TH MEETING. THIS IS THE SECOND READING. A MOTION IS NEEDED AND A PUBLIC HEARING

IS REQUIRED. >> I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO POSTPONE TO A DATE CERTAIN OF NOVEMBER THE 18TH.

>> SECOND.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO POSTPONE TO NOVEMBER 18TH.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? OKAY. LINDSAY, ROLL CALL.

[9.c.3. Samples Property Annexation. Approximately 53.5 acres. Property located on West Farmville Road between Pepperwood Trail and Auburn Lakes Road. Second reading]

>> ITEM 9C3 IS REQUEST TO ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 53. 5 ACRES OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE SAMPLES PROPERTY LOCATED ON WEST FARMVILLE ROAD BETWEEN PEPPERWOOD TRAIL AND AUBURN LAKES ROAD. THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY A VOTE OF 9- 0 AT ITS AUGUST 14TH MEETING.

THIS IS THE SECOND READING. A MOTION IS NEEDED.

>> I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO POSTPONE TO A DATE CERTAIN OF NOVEMBER THE 18TH.

>> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT PL ROLL CALL, PLEASE, LINDSAY.

>> ITEM 9C4 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.

ITEM 9C5 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.

[9.c.7. Young Annexation. Approximately 43 acres. Property located on the North side of Lee Road 23, south of the Chewacla Ridge Subdivision. Unanimous consent necessary.]

ITEM 9C6 HAS ALSO BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.

AND ITEM 9C7 IS A DIFFERENT REQUEST. ITEM 9C7 IS A REQUEST TO ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 43 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LEE ROAD 23 SOUTH OF THE CHEWACLA RIDGE SUBDIVISION. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST AT ITS SEPTEMBER 11TH MEETING. UNANIMOUS CONSENT IS NECESSARY.

>> I'LL INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AND ASK FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. DOES ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL HAVE

[00:15:02]

A PROBLEM MOVING FORWARD WITH A VOTE ON THIS THIS EVENING? SEEING AND HEARING NONE, ANY COMMENTS OR

QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE A BRIEF QUESTION.

>> PLEASE. THIS IS GOING TO BE ANNEXED IF IT'S VOTED IN AS RURAL.

AND IS IT INTENDED TO STAY RURAL?

>> CORRECT. IT COMES IN AS RURAL AND OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR CAN SPEAK TO THAT FROM WHAT HE KNOWS.

>> THERE'S NO OTHER OPTION FOR IT PRETTY MUCH.

IT WOULD HAVE TO STAY RURAL. JUST WITH THE LOCATION.

THE ONLY THING THAT IT COULD BE I'D HAVE TO CHECK IF IT'S IN THE WATER SHED SPECIFICALLY BUT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO UPZONE ANYTHING ANY DENSER. SO FOR 43 ACRES YOU'D GET 13, 14 LOTS. EVEN IF THEY WERE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF CONSERVATION IT WOULD ONLY BE 14 LOTS.

THAT DOESN'T CHANGE.

>> I DO APOLOGIZE IT'S THE OCTOBER 9TH MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT HEARD THIS, NOT SEPTEMBER.

JUST FYI.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? LINDSEY?

[10.a.1. 397 Martin Avenue Townhomes. Performance residential use (multiple-unit development). Property located at the northwest corner of North Ross Street and Martin Avenue. ]

>> FOR RESOLUTIONS ITEM 10A1 IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL USE OF FIVE-UNIT MULTIUNIT DEVELOPMENT, TOWNHOUSES ON APPROXIMATELY 1. 21 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 397 MARTIN AV IN THE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ZONING DISTRICT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY REQUESTED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST AT ITS OCTOBER 9TH MEETING.

A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED. FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL. SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL?

>> I'D LIKE TO ASK THE CITY US WHY THIS IS OR IS NOT AN ADDU DEVELOPMENT.

>> I'LL HAVE OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR SPEAK TO THAT.

>> THANK YOU. THE DEFINITION OF ADDUS HAS TO DO WITH THE PERCENTAGE OF PRIVATE SPACE AND COMMON SPACE WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT. THE RATIO IS 50%.

GREATER THAN 50% COMMON SPACE FOR SOMETHING WOULD BE RECONSIDERED A SINGLE- FAMILY HOUSE. AND THEN THEY EXCEED THAT.

THIS IS NOT AN ADDU. ADDUS ARE NORMALLY TO BE SIMPLE, IT'S NORMALLY YOU SEE THE FIVE BEDS FIVE BATHS KIND OF DEAL THEY'RE ALL INSIDE. BUT THEY'LL HAVE TO SUBMIT A DRDR FLOOR PLAN TOO DOESN'T HAVE TO BE VERIFIED. THAT WILL BE SOMETHING WE'LL VERIFY IN THE DRT PROCESS THAT THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO EXCEED THE PRIVATE SPACE RATIO.

>> OTHERWISE THAT WOULD MAKE THIS A PRIVATE DORMITORY IF IT STARTED EXCEEDING CERTAIN THINGS AS WELL. THOSE RATIOS ARE A HARD AND FAST RULE OF THE REVIEW PROCESS. THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT THE FLOOR PLANS AND THE FLOOR PLANS HAVE TO BE APPROVED BEFORE THEY CAN GET APPROVAL.

>> SO YOU AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER -- OR EXCUSE ME, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR CAN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION WHETHER IT'S AN ADDU, PRIVATE DORMITORY OR SOMETHING OTHER THAN THAT?

>> CORRECT. NORMALLY IN BETWEEN THE DISTINCTION IT'S THE COMMON SPACE AND PRIVATE SPACE WITHIN A STRUCTURE. THE MUD IS ALSO THE MULTIPLE STRUCTURE ON ONE LOT SINCE THEY'RE NOT SUBDIVIDING, THEY'RE JUST ADDING TO THE DENSITY THAT THEY CAN ON THIS LOT WITH THE MULTIPLE STRUCTURES.

>> AND ALL THETHE ALL ON THE SAME LOT.

THAT'S ONE THE THINGS THAT ALSO DISTINGUISHES AND MAKES THINGS TOWNHOMES WHEN THE PARKING IS ALL ON ONE LOT. THAT'S FEE SIMPLE DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS NOT THAT.

>> SINCE THE REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE IT'S THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S CALL BUT IT DOES HAVE TO DO WITH A PERCENTAGE OF COMMON AREA VERSUS WHAT'S IN BEDROOMS AND OTHER THINGS. THIS HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN UTILIZED CITYWIDE FOR A WHILE NOW.

>> ZONING ON THIS IS RDD?

>> YES. REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

>> AND FIVE UNRELATED PERSONS CAN LIVE --

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY.

>> HOW MANY BUILDINGS ARE THERE? I FORGET.

>> FIVE.

>> FIVE IN EACH BUILDING OROR TOTAL ON THE --

>> FIVE IN EACH BUILDING.

>> HAS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT BEEN DETERMINED?

>> I DON'T THINK THIS REQUIRES THAT.

YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY THIS DOESN'T MEET THE THRESHOLD FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY.

>> RANDY, DO YOU WANT TO JUST SPEAK QUICKLY TO THE THRESHOLD,

PLEASE? >> YES.

WE DO HAVE MINIMUM KIND OF THRESHOLDS

[00:20:02]

FOR WHEN THEY ARE REQUIRED FOR DIFFERENT USES.

AND THIS ONE BEING THE SIZE THATTHAT IT IS DID TRIGGER THE NEED FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED?

[10.a.2. 415 North Ross Street ADDU. Performance residential development (academic detached dwelling unit). Property located at 415 N. Ross Street]

ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES.

>> ITEM 10A2 IS REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF ONE OF A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL USE ONE ACADEMIC DETACHED DWELLING UNIT ON APPROXIMATELY .

19 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 415 NORTH ROSS STREET IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT URBAN ZONING DISTRICT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION UMTSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY A VOTE OF 7- 0 AT ITS OCTOBER 9TH HEARING.

A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED.

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL.

SEEING NO ONE WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> THE ONLY THING THAT BOTHERED ME ABOUT THIS IS IT'S A VERY SMALL PIECE OF LAND AND THERE ARE SIX PARKING PLACES ON THERE AND THE PARKING IS THREE BEHIND THREE.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HAS BEEN DONE ELSEWHERE AND HASHAS

MODERATELY SUCCESSFUL. >> I GUESS --

>> HOLD ON A SECOND. OKAY.

TRY AGAIN.

>> I DON'T WANT TO CLAIM MODERATE SUCCESS. WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT THIS HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED ON DIFFERENT SCALES AND I THINK INCREASINGLY I'D SAY PROBABLY OVER THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT INTERNALLY THAT TANDEM PARKING IS PROBABLY SOMETHING WE NEED TO FORMALIZE AND MAKE A DECISION ON IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ALLOW AT SCALE. THE SCENARIO -- THIS SCENARIO WHERE THERE ARE SIX PARKING SPACES AND THERE'S ONLY -- THEY'RE ALL LIVING TOGETHER, THIS IS PROBABLY THE PREFERRED MODEL RATHER THAN IT'S GOING TO BE IN A BIGGER DEVELOPMENT WHERE THERE WILL BE TANDEM PARKING OF, SAY, 20 PARKING SPACES BEHIND 20 PARKING SPACES AND ALL THOSE PEOPLE DON'T LIVE TOGETHER AND THEY'RE CALLING DOWN TO THE FRONT DESK GETTING PEOPLE OUT.

SO THIS IS ON A MUCH -- ON A MICRO SCALE DOES WORK FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. ALSO THE PARKING CONFIGURATION IS A ZONING REQUIREMENT, NOT NECESSARILY TANDEM PARKING BUT PARKING CANNOT BE ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING FORCING PEOPLE TO THEN BACK OUT ONTO THE STREET TO GET OUT OF A, PAING LOT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT ALLOWED IN THE MANUAL. THAT'S WICHB OF THE REASONS THIS DID NOT COME FORWARD SEVERAL MONTHS AGO UNDER DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP. . THE PARKING CONFIGURATION IS DRIVEN BY ZONING AND TANDEM PARKING IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN UTILIZING AS A SOLUTION TO GETTING PARKING ON SITE IN SOME OF THESE SCENARIOS.

>> HOW COMMON IS THIS, WOULD YOU

SAY? >> I WOULD SAY OVER THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS I THINK I'VE SEEN IT FOUR TIMES ON ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS. LIKE I SAID -- LIKE I SAID, ON VARYING SCALES. THEY'VE KIND OF COME WITH THE ACCOMMODATION OF A MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENT WITH IT.

THAT WAY LIKE I SAID IT'S NOT A SITUATION WHERE LIKE YOU'RE IN A BUILDING, YOU MAY BE ON ONE FLOOR BUT SOMEONE ONON A FLOOR HAS PARKED BEHIND AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHO IT IS.

THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS WE HAVE MANDATED BUT LIKE I SAID WE'VE RECOGNIZED THIS INTERNALLY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO TALK WITH JUST BECAUSE KIND OF FROM A GEOGRAPHICAL STANDPOINT THIS ALLOWS PEOPLE TO KIND OF GET AROUND -- IT'S A GEOMETRY ISSUE THAT IS DRIVING PEOPLE TO SEEK THIS SOLUTION.

>> YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE RESERVED PARKING OR ASSIGNED PARKING IN THIS CASE. YOU JUST GRAB ONE.

>> THEORETICALLY, THAT CAN HAPPEN.

MEANING IN THE DARK AGES OF TIME I LIVED WITH TANDEM PARKING IN A MUCH DIFFERENT CITY AND THOSE WERE ASSIGNED BY THE UNIT. AND SO YOU HAD TO DEAL WITH -- JUST AS YOU'RE REFERRING TO YOU HAD TO DEAL WITH YOUR OWN ROOMMATE, WHICH IS I NEED YOUR CAR KEYS OR I'M GETTING YOU OUT OF BED AT 5:00 A.M. WHEN I NEED TO GO AND YOU DON'T WANT THAT.

BUT IT IS -- TO YOU ARE WHY POINT, COUNCILMAN MOREMAN, IT'S CHALLENGING FOR THE RESIDENTS BUT THEY'RE ALSO SIGNING UP FOR IT. AND I THINK WHAT OUR STAFF IS SAYING IS WE WANT TO GET A BETTER HANDLE ON REGULATING THESE DIFFERENTLY, SO YOU MAY SEE SOME NOW BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING FORWARD SOME REGULATIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO THIS. AT THE END OF THE DAY IT ALSO BECOMES A MARKET CONDITION. IF PEOPLE DON'T CARE FOR THAT STYLE OF PARKING THEY MAY NOT CHOOSE TO RENT THE UNIT. BUT I THINK THE BIGGER CONCERN FOR THE COUNCIL WITH THESE BECOMES IN ONE- OFF PROJECTS IS WE DON'T WANT THREE PEOPLE PARK ON THE PROPERTY AND THREE PEOPLE PARKING ON THE STREET IRRITATING THEIR NEIGHBORS OR LONG- TIME RESIDENTS. YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU ASKED ME A QUESTION INITIALLY ABOUT IT I FIGURED THAT WAS ONE OF THE LENSES YOU WERE COMINGCOMING FROM. MOST OF YOU THIS IS COUNCILMAN GRISWOLD'S WARD IN THIS VICHBT VICINITY BUT WE HAVE SOME LONG-TIME RESIDENTS IN THE VICINITY, MARTIN AVENUE, HUDSON TERRACE, OTHER PLACES

[00:25:01]

THAT ARE CONSTANTLY CONTACTING A NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THEY HAVE BEEN THERE A VERY LONG TIME AND THEY'RE CONSTANTLY REACHING OUT ABOUT STREET PARKING AND WE ARE SOMETIMES SENDING PUBLIC SAFETY OUT TO DEAL WITH DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THAT. AND I CAN RECOMMEND ANYBODY LISTENING DO NOT PARK IN THE WRONG DIRECTION ON THESE STREETS OR YOU'RE LIKELY TO GET TICKETED WHEN WE GET ONE OF THOSE PHONE CALLS. AND DON'T BLOCK PEOPLE'S DRIVEWAYS.

BUT THAT'S THE DYNAMIC HERE THAT'S A CHALLENGE.

AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.

AND REGULATORIWISE I DON'T KNOW DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO TELL THEM WE CAN'T ALLOW IT, THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T SPEAK TO IT?

>> I GUESS RIGHT NOW WITH THE ORDINANCE NOT SPEAKING TO IT LIKE I SAID WE HAVE MADE PARKING THE ISSUE ON THIS SITE IN THE PAST AND PARKING CONFIGURATION IS A REASON FOR US NOT TO APPROVE DRT PLANS.

IF SMS SOMETHING STAFF DID NOT HAVE CONFIDENCE IN FROM THE SHARED DRIVE ASPECT, PEOPLE WEREN'T ABLE TO MANEUVER WE WOULD DENY IT AND IT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

>> DO WE RECALL ON THIS PUBLIC WORKS QUESTION OR CITY ENGINEERING QUESTION THAT SECTION OF ROSS IS NOT WHERE YOU WANT TO BE PARKING ON THE STREET AND WE DON'T SEE IT BUT IS IT FLAT OUT PROHIBITED?

>> IT IS NOT FLAT OUT PROHIBITED FROM A YELLOW CURB STANDPOINT. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT WISE AND PUBLIC SAFETY COULD PROBABLY ENFORCE NO PARKING BASED ON HINDRANCE TO OTHER VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC MOVEMENT.

>> SPEAKING OF CITIZENS THERE'S A HOUSE ON THE CORNER THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND IT'S WELL PROTECTED BY

LANDSCAPING. >> YES, WE REDID A LOT OF THAT LANDSCAPING WHEN WE WENT IN THAT

AREA. >> AND LOOK, THE HOUSE THAT THIS IS POTENTIALLY REPLACING WAS A TIRED OLD HOUSE THAT WASN'T BEING WELL TAKEN CARE OF AT LEAST VISUALLY FROM THE CURB. BUT THOSE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN LIVING IN THAT HOUSE THAT ARE LIVING THEIR QUIET LIFE, ARE THERE GOING TO BE SOME PROTECTIONS? ARE THERE SOME CLEAR DIVISIONS AS TO THE FUNCTIONALITY IN THE LOTS? THERE WON'T BE A MISTAKE THAT YOU CAN GO PARK BEHIND THEIR HOUSE

OR -- >> YEAH, SO ANYBODY WHO'S DRIVEN ON ROSS IN THE PAST MONTH SINCE THE SIGN HAS BEEN UP HAS ALSO NOTICED THE NOT FOR SALE SIGN AT THAT LAID I WHY'S HOUSE.

SHE CAME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I THINK THE ONLY REAL DISPUTE RIGHT NOW IS THE SHARED DRIVEWAY AND THE EASEMENT ACCESS. THAT WAS MENTIONED AT PLANNING COMMISSION. THAT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ALSO IDENTIFIED ON A STAFF LEVEL THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SPOKEN TO IN THE DRT PROCESS AS WELL.

THAT DRIVE AISLE -- THE CURRENT SOLUTION THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED WOULD ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THE SPACE TO MAINTAIN THAT SHARED ACCESS AGREEMENT.

LIKE I SAID THAT WAS A RIVETING DISCUSSION AT PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT THE SHARED ACCESS, THE EASEMENT, ALLOWING THE CARS TO MANEUVER TO NOT ENCROACH ON THE NEIGHBOR, AND I THINK SHE -- THE NEIGHBOR THERE IS DEFINITELY MOTIVATED TO ENSURE THAT THEY HONOR IT.

>> THAT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME. I HOPE WE'LL DO THAT.

>> THE COUNCIL INDULGES AND YOU'RE INCLINED TO APPROVE THIS WE COULD CLARIFY THAT THERE IS NO ONSTREET PARKING ALLOWED IN THIS BLOCK FROM DRAKE TO ALACA ROAD. IT'S KIND OF LIKE ASPECTS OF GATE STREET IF YOU'RE NOT BLOCKING THE LANE PEOPLE LIKE TO -- IF THEY'RE NOT BLOCKING A BIKE LANE THEY JUST LIKE TO PARK ON GATE STREET. I DON'T RECOMMEND THAT BUT THEY DO THAT ANYWAY.

>> THIS ISN'T THAT FAR FROM THE

INTERSECTION. >> NO, NO.

IT'S A TIGHT AREA. WE CAN ALSO SHORE THAT UP BUT THAT'S UP TO THE

COUNCIL. >> I WANTED TO ASK, OKAY, SO ON THIS A2 AND A1 ARE THEY GOING TO BE NEAR EACH OTHER? ARE THEY CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER? BECAUSE I SEE NEAR ROSS AND MARTIN.

>> ONE'S DOWN AT MARTIN AND NORTH ROSS AND THE OTHER IS BETWEEN DRAKE AND OPA- LOCKA ROAD. THEY'RE CLOSE BUT NOT THAT

CLOSE. >> HOW MANY UNITS ARE WE TALKING ABOUT FOR NUMBER 2? JUST ONE?

>> ONE.

>> AND FOR NUMBER ONE JUST ONE?

>> THERE WERE FIVE.

>> FIVE? SO TRAFFIC, PARKING.

IN THAT AREA. IT SEEMS IT'S ALREADY CONGESTED IN THAT AREA AS IT IS. SO IT'S GOING TO BRING IN A LOT OF CARS.

>> SO FOR THE 415 NORTH ROSS, THAT'S WHY LIKE I SAID THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT KIND OF WHAT THE CONFIGURATION OF THE PARKING NEEDS TO BE.

BECAUSE THE MAIN CONCERN AND I THINK STAFF'S POSITION HAS BEEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW ANYTHING WHERE PARKING CONFIGURATION MANDATES THAT THE DRIVERS BACK OUT ONTO ROSS TO GET OUT OF THE PARKING SPOTS.

THAT'S WHY THE FOCUS IS PUSHING A LOT OF THE PARKING TO THE BACK OF THE LOT. THAT'S ALSO AN AESTHETIC REQUIREMENT IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AS WELL.

[00:30:01]

>> ONE OF THEM IS CONSIDERED TOWNHOMES AND THE OTHER IS ADDUS.

SO THE TOWNHOMES THEY'RE NOT -- AND I KNOW I'M GOING

BACK TO -- >> YEAH.

SO TOWNHOMES IS REALLY JUST MORE THE NAME.

TOWNHOMES ISN'T NECESSARILY THE BUILDING TYPE.

SINCE TOWNHOMES TO GET INTO THIS AGAIN, THE TOWNHOMES CAN BE ON MULTIPLE LOTS. CAN BE ON MULTIPLE LOTS, KIND OF FEE SIMPLE DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S ATTACHED SINGLE- FAMILY HOUSING.

BUT THEN YOU HAVE TOWNHOMES WHERE THEY FUNCTION LIKE THIS AS AN MUD BUT IT'S REALLY JUST MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON ONE LOT --

>> IT LOOKS LIKE A TOWNHOUSE BUT IT'S SHARING A PROPERTY WITH OTHERS.

WHAT WE DEFINE AS A TOWNHOUSE IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE TECHNICALLY SU OWN THE PROPERTY UNDER YOUR STRUCTURE. BUT THEY WOULD BE MORE THAN TWO PLUS IN A ROW OR THREE UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS.

>> SO THE MINIMUM FOR TOWNHOMES ARE THREE ATTACHED STRUCTURES PRETTY MUCH BUT THE ADDU LIKE I SAID IT LOOKS LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE FROM THE FRONT BUT THE AMOUNT OF PRIVATE SPACE WITHIN IT AND PRIVATE SPACE BEING THE BEDROOM AND THE BATHROOMS DEDICATED IN IT SO WHEN YOU SEE THOSE FIVE BEDS, FIVE BATHS OR 5 1/2 BATHS KIND OF DEAL AND THEY'RE ALL WITHIN BEDROOMS NORMALLY THAT'S GOING TO TIP THE PRIVATE SPACE RATIO ABOVE 50%.

THAT WOULD THEN MAKE IT MEET THE DEFINITION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF AN ACADEMIC DETACHED DWELLING.

>> CONNIE, FROM THE OUTSIDE THEE COULD LOOK ALMOST IDENTICAL FROM YOUR PRACTICE SIDE THAT YOU'RE GETTING AT, IS THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO THE INTERIOR OF THESE AND THE TECHNICAL NUANCES BUT FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZENS AND FOR OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS THESE LOOK IDENTICAL ON THE OUTSIDE AND THEORETICALLY THEY'D BOTH BE HAVING FIVE STUDENTS LIVING IN EACH OF THESE UNITS.

>> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE ADDU - -

>> YOU LIVE RIGHT BY IT.

>> THAT'S WHY -- THAT'S WHY I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT.

>> OKAY. >> AND ON PARKING WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO REGULATE HOW IT'S DONE.

>> WE DEFINITELY DO. THAT'S MORE OF A CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING MANUAL THING.

CURRENTLY ON A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT IN ANOTHER PART OF TOWN THERE'S A BIG -- THEY'VE REACHED OUT TO US ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS TRYING TO MITIGATE AND LESSEN THEIR DRIVEWAY WIDTH -- THEIR DRIVE AISLE WIDTH AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S MANDATED IN THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING MANUAL. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S AN INTERNAL DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE AND KIND OF MAKE A DECISION ABOUT, STANDARDS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO TIE TO TANDEM PARKING LIKE I SAID BECAUSE IT'S BUILDING MORE PERVASIVE BECAUSE IT'S A GEOMETRY SOLUTION TO A LOT OF THE URBAN INFILL THAT'S GOING ON OR THESE URBAN DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEY'RE

DOING. >> IN OTHER WORDS, IN OUR TECHNICAL MEETINGS WE'LL DEAL WITH WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS ADEQUATE FROM A MANEUVERABILITY STANDPOINT AND IF WE DON'T DEEM THAT THE CARS CAN MANEUVER ADEQUATELY ON THE SIDE AND PULL OUT IN A FORWARD FASHION THEN THEY CANNOT PROCEED ULTIMATELY. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ENGINEER IT TO OUR SATISFACTION.

IT WOULDN'T BE ON HERE TYPICALLY IF THEY DIDN'T THINK THEY COULD.

>> I MEAN, MY DAUGHTER PLAYS THIS LITTLE GAME WHERE YOU TRY TO MOVE CARS OUT OF DIFFERENT PLACES AND STUFF. AND THIS EVOKES SOME OF THOSE CHALLENGES IT LOOKS

LIKE. >> ONE OF THE THINGS WITH THIS, THE ZONING DISTRICT CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT, A LOT OF THESE ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS WERE LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE OLDER LOTS THAT ARE VERY SMALL THAT ARE REALLY KIND OF NON- COMPLIANT AND DON'T LEND THEMSELVES TO ANY OTHER HOUSING TOPOLOGY. A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THIS WAS THOUGHT ABOUT IN ASSEMBLAGE, THAT THESE SMALLER PARCELS WOULD BE PUT TOGETHER AND THERE WOULD BE BIGGER STRUCTURES PUT THERE, NOT THERE WOULD BE A SCRAPING REDEVELOPMENT WITHOUT ANY OTHER ASSEMBLAGE. THAT'S ALSO PART OF THE PROBLEM, THAT'S REALLY NOTHING ELSE THAT COULD GO HERE.

>> YOU COULD NOT PUT A SMALL TINY HOUSE THERE.

IT WOULDN'T FIT OR IT DOESN'T FIT FROM A MARKET PERSPECTIVE.

>> YEAH, SO A TINY HOUSE WOULDN'T FIT FROM LIKE A MARKET PERSPECTIVE. BUT I GUESS --

>> THEORETICALLY IT WOULD BUT --

>> YEAH. AND I GUESS FROM LIKE A BIGGER MUD OR LIKE A BIGGER TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT WITH -- IT DOESN'T -- IT DOESN'T FIT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. AND PEOPLE ARE KIND OF PURSUING THE MARKETABILITY OF AN ADDU.

>> SO IF THE COUNCIL DENIED THIS THEN WHAT COULD THEY BUILDBUILD

THERE? >> THEY COULD -- THEY HAVE A LOT OF OPTIONS. THERE'S A LOT -- I MEAN, FROM A PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT THEY COULD DO DUPLEXES, THEY COULD DO SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING.

LIKE I SAID, THEY HAVE THOSE OPTIONS. IT'S JUST THEY'RE PURSUING THE ADDU. THEY'RE LOOKING AT FIVE BEDS.

THAT'S DRIVING THE PARKING. EVEN IF WE WERE TO PUT REDUCED PARKING MIMS FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THEY HAVE ALL SAID THEY CANNOT RENT BEDROOMS WITHOUT A PARKING SPACE TO GIVE TO THOSE PEOPLE FOR THE SAME PRICE SO THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN DOING THAT. THIS IS A CHOICE THAT THEY ARE MAKING. NO ONE IS MAKING THEM DO FIVE BEDS.

THEY'RE CHOOSING TO DO FIVE BEDS.

THEY COULD DO FOUR AND IT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM.

[00:35:01]

COULD DO THREE AND IT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM.

THIS IS THEIR CHOICE.

>> OKAY.

>> KELLEY?

>> MOST OF THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED BUT I THINK THERE'S A COMBINATION OF THINGS THAT RAISE CONCERNS WITH ME AND THAT'S OBVIOUSLY THE TINY LOT LINE. THE SMALL LOT.

THE INTERFERENCE WITH THE FOLKS WHO LIVE ON THE CORNER WITH THE SHARED DRIVEWAY. POTENTIAL DISTURBANCE BECAUSE OF THE SMALL LOT AND AN ADDU IN THE BACK YARD OF LONG- TIME RESIDENTS.

AND THE TANDEM PARKING. SO I THINK ALL OF THOSE THINGS GENERATE CONCERNS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.

>> AND I DO RESPECT THOSE COMMENTS.

HOWEVER, IF A SINGLE- FAMILY HOME WERE TO BE BUILT WITH FOUR TO FIVE BEDROOMS, THEY COULD STILL BE LEASED OUT INDIVIDUALLY AND YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. SO -- CORRECT?

>> YEAH, CORRECT. THERE'S ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF HERE ACTUALLY NEAR MARTIN AND ROSS THAT IT'S A COMBINATION OF ADDUS AND SING FLOOEM SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING. SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING ONLY REQUIRES TWO PARKING SPOTS INSTEAD OF THE SIX FOR THE FIVE BEDROOMS. LIKE I SAID IT'S A MARKET CHOICE BY THEM. THEY OFTENTIMES BUILD IT SO THEY CAN RENT IT OUT AT THE SAME PRICE OF THE OTHER BEDROOMS. TO ANSWER YES THEY COULD CHANGE THE INTERNAL CONFIGURATION, HAVE MORE COMMON SPACE THAN PRIVATE SPACE, BE CLASSIFIED AS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE AND ONLY BE REQUIRED TO BUILD TWO PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF THE SIX.

THAT IS CORRECT.

>> WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY BE A BIGGER PROBLEM WITH REGARD TO PARKING AS PROPOSED IN THIS.

>> CORRECT. BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THE NECESSARY ON- SITE PARKING FOR THEIR OTHER THREE TENANTS WHICH WOULD THEN DRIVE THEM TO MAYBE PARK ACROSS THE STREET OR PARK FURTHER DOWN THE STREET IN OTHER PEOPLE'S NEIGHBORHOODS.

THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY.

>> WOULD THERE BE A DRT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS?

>> YES. >> SO THAT WOULD LEAVE YOU THE OPTION OF SAYING NO, THAT'S NOT SUFFICIENT.

>> YEAH. I GUESS ON OUR END WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS TO DENY A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE THAT ISN'T -- THAT DOESN'T HAVE FIVE PARKING SPACES. LIKE SINGLE- FAMILY HOUSING RIGHT NOW ONLY REQUIRES TWO PARKING SPACES, OFF- SITE PARKING SPACES.

THEY COULD BUILD THAT AND LEAVE IT TO THEIR TENANTS TO KIND OF FEND FOR THEMSELVES.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'D BE ABLE TO CONTROL.

>> YOU DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE SHOULD YOU NEED TO ASK THEM ANY QUESTIONS.

>> DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A GOOD MARKET PLAN THERE TO HAVE FIVE OCCUPANTS AND ONLY TWO PARKING

SPACES. >> I THINK THEY'D AGREE WITH YOU, THAT'S WHY THEY TRIED TO BUILD SIX PARKING SPACES.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED PLEASE SAY NAY.

>> NAY.

>> WHY DON'T YOU DO HANDS SO WE

CAN BE CLEAR. >> ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. OKAY? RIGHT HAND.

>> SIX.

>> NOT IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHTRIGHT HAND.

[10.a.3. 613 & 615 Luverne Avenue. Performance residential use (multiple unit development). Property located at 613 & 615 Luverne Avenue.]

THREE. OKAY. MOTION PASSES.

>> ITEM 10A3 IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL USE OF THREE- UNIT MULTIPLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON APPROXIMATELY . 6 ACRES WHICH IS CURRENTLY TWO LOTS THAT WOULD BE COMBINED INTO ONE LOCATED AT 613 AND 615 LUVERNE AV IN THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY A VOTE OF 2- 5 AT ITS OCTOBER 9TH MEETING. A PUBLIC HEARING IS

REQUIRED. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND.

>> HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. AT THIS TIME WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.

YES, MA'AM.

>> MY NAME IS JESSICA ROSE ART. I RESIDE AT 802 GENEVA, STREET, OPA- LOCKA, ALABAMA.

GOOD EVENING. I AM THE BUILDING DESIGNER ON THIS PROJECT. I'M REPRESENTING THE OWNERS.

AND WE WENT BEFORE PLANNING WHAT WAS THAT -- IT WAS EARLIER IN OCTOBER. I'M SORRY. I FORGET THE DATE.

SEVERAL OF THE NEIGHBORS EXPRESSED MANY CONCERNS. SO I'M APPROACHING THE PODIUM TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS. I THINK THEY WERE UNDER AN

[00:40:01]

IMPRESSION THAT WAS INACCURATE. WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD -- PARDON ME. I HAVE SOME NERVES.

>> YOU'RE DOING FINE. >> IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WHAT IS ALLOWABLE IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE FLOOR PLANS PROVIDED WE'RE ADDRESSING THAT WITH A FLOOR PLAN.

IT'S GOT A PRIMARY BEDROOM WITH AN ENSUITE AND THEN UPSTAIRS YOU'LL HAVE SMALLER BEDROOMS. SO WE'RE ADDRESSING THAT. BASICALLY, THE OWNERS BOUGHT THESE TWO LOTS AND THEY WANTED TO DO -- THEY WANTED TO DO MORE UNITS.

BUT THEN AS I DID THE RESEARCH ON ZONING WE REALIZED THIS IS AS MANY UNITS AS WE'RE ALLOWED TO MORE DO IN THE ZONING CODE. EVERYTHING YOU SEE THERE IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING. UNDER CONDITIONS THETHE UNIT WE WERE SEEKING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL FOR THE THIRD UNIT BASICALLY. THEY WON'T BE PLOTTED OUT SEPARATE. THEY WON'T BE CONDOED.

THEY WILL MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP AND RENT THEM.

>> EXCUSE ME.

>> I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT IN A NUTSHELL. THERE'S NO INTENTION FOR STUDENT HOUSING. WE'RE PROVIDING OFFSTREET PARKING. IT'S JUST PARKING PADS, DRIVEWAY SITUATION. I'VE GOT ENOUGH ROOM FOR REALLY ABOUT FOUR VEHICLES PER HOUSE. THEY'RE THREE- BEDROOM HOUSES.

>> OKAY.

>> YES, SIR.

>> WE ALL READ YOUR LETTER. IT'S VERY GOOD.

>> THANK YOU.

>> JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW WE GOT IT.

>> THANK YOU. MISS TAYLOR WAS KIND ENOUGH TO CALL ME AND ASK SOME QUESTIONS TOO. YOU BUT I WANTED -- THERE WAS A LOT OF MISCONSTRUED INFORMATION AT PLANNING AND I WANTED TO CLEAR THE AIR.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION IF I MAY.

>> YES.

>> ARE YOU PLANNING TO RENT BY THE BED?

>> NO, SIR. THEY'LL BE RENTED BY THE UNIT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANYTHING ELSE? >> NO, BUT IF WE HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS -- GO AHEAD, I'M SORRY.

>> YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE RENTING THEM BY THE BED. YOU'VE GOT THREE BEDROOMS AND 3 1/2 BATHROOMS. OKAY. BUT IF I DECIDED THESETHESE RENTALS, IF I RENT AND -- WELL, LET ME JUST ASK THIS QUESTION FIRST. SO DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE RENTAL FEES ARE GOING TO BE? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA AS TO HOW MUCH YOU'RE RENTING THESE THINGS FOR?

>> NO, MA'AM. I IMAGINE THE CLIENT WILL DETERMINE THAT FEE BASED ON MARKET RATE AT THE TIME CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE.

>> OKAY. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID I DON'T THINK EVEN IF YOU RENT THEM OUT, I MEAN, WHAT GUARANTEES THE NEIGHBORS THAT THEY WON'T BE RENTED OUT BY THE ROOM IF THEY DON'T -- IT COULD BE -- I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD STILL COULD RENT THEM TO STUDENTS. I MEAN, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DETERMINE I GUESS --

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE ARE ZONING ORDINANCES IN PLACE IN THE CITY AND A NEIGHBOR COULD REPORT SAID RESIDENTS IF THERE'S MORE THAN TWO PEOPLE UNRELATED IN THAT HOUSE, THEY COULD REPORT IT AND THE CITY CAN ADDRESS IT.

>> WHO'S GOING TO KNOW IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WHETHER THEY'RE RELATED OR NOT?

>> I DON'T HAVE -- I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THERE.

BUT THERE ARE -- THERE ARE SAFEGUARDS TO PREVENT THAT FROM

HAPPENING. >> MEGAN, IF A NEIGHBOR MADE A COMPLAINT --

>> THEY'D MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THE CITY AND THEN IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE CITY TO INVESTIGATE. ALL THE NEIGHBOR HAS TO DO IS SAY THEY'RE CONCERNED AND THEN WE INVESTIGATE THAT AND FOLLOW UP, THAT IT WOULDN'T FALL ON THE PROPERTY OWNER EITHER.

HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY OWNER, IF IT WAS FOUND TO BE TRUE, THEN THERE ARE ISSUES FOR BOTH THE TENANTS AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS AT THAT TIME.

>> NOR WOULD IT FALL ON THE NEIGHBOR TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE --

>> NO. THEY JUST HAVE TO SAY WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS AND THAT HAPPENS LY FREQUENTLY ALL OVER AUBURN.

SO. AND I WOULD SAY TO THE POINT OF RENT BY THE BEDROOM IS I THINK THIS COUNCIL'S BEEN THROUGH THE PACES WITH THAT. AND NOT SAYING THAT THIS PROPERTY OWNER DOESN'T INTEND TO STICK WITH THAT.

I WILL REMIND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY REGULATORY CONTROL OVER HOW THEY RENT THEIR UNITS.

AND FROM A FAIR HOUSING PERSPECTIVE STUDENTS ARE PEOPLE AND YOU JUST RENT UNITS TO

[00:45:03]

PEOPLE.

>> YEAH.

>> YET THE COMPLICATION REMAINS THAT THERE ARE THREE BEDS AND THREE UNRELATED STUDENTS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE INTO THERE. AND THEN THE BURDEN FALLS ONTO THE NEIGHBORS TO POLICE --

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> -- THAT.

>> AND WITH THESE AS SHE INDICATED IF YOU JUST LEFT THESE AS TWO LOTS THEY CAN BUILD A HOUSE ON EACH OF THE LOTS AND TWO HOUSES AND THEY CAN DO THAT PERMITTED BY RIGHT WITHOUT BEING BEFORE YOU.

AND IT'S NOT THAT THEY'RE THREATENING THAT OR WHATEVER.

THIS IS -- THEY'RE LOOKING BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY TO DO THIS. BUT THEY HAVE THAT ABILITY TO BUILD HOUSES BY RIGHT WITH A NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. AND IT CAN BE MORE THAN THREE.

>> YEAH, SO KIND OF SIMILAR TO OUR LAST DISCUSSION, I GUESS THERE ARE NINE BEDS HERE, IF THEY'RE TO BUILD A FOUR- BED AND A FIVE-BED HOUSE AND THEY'RE BOTH SINGLE FAMILY IT WOULD JUST KIND OF BE IN THE RATIO WITH MORE COMMON SPACE THAN PRIVATE SPACE THEY'D ONLY BE REQUIRED TO BUILD THE TWO PARKING SPACES FOR EACH. THEY STILL COULD MEET THAT. I GUESS WE'D RUN BACK INTO THE FAMILY DEFINITION WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RENT BY THE BED AND IF THERE WAS EVER REPORTED TO THE CITY THAT THERE WERE MORE THAN UNRELATED PEOPLE LIVING THERE THEN THE CITY WOULD TRY TO VERIFY THAT INFORMATION AND GO FROM THERE.

>> OKAY. SO I GUESS MY PROBLEM WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT -- AND I GUESS I WANTED TO REALLY MAKE MY COMMENTS PROBABLY AFTER WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL JUST WAIT ON MY COMMENT

BEFORE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE? OKAY. WE MIGHT HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS WE'LL ASK YOU TO COME BACK FOR. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WHO'LL BE NEXT? ANYONE ELSE? WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES, MA'AM.

>> MY NAME IS TANJI SHE'LLY. I'M A RESIDENT OF DONAHUE AND MY MOM IS A RESIDENT OF LUVERNE BUT I'M SPEAKING ON HER BEHALF. I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ON LUVERNE.

AND I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD COMMISSION DENY THE PROPOSAL FOR THE REASON OUTLINED. THE IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND SCALE IS THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APPEARS TO BE A MUCH HIGHER DENSITY HEIGHT AND SCALE BASED ON THE SURROUNDING AREA OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES THAT'S OVER THERE ON THAT STREET. NUMBER TWO, TRAFFIC AND PARKING STRUCTURE CONCERNS. IN ADDITION TO UNITS, MULTIPLE UNITS WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION. IT'S ALREADY A BUSY STREET WITH LIMITED SPACE.

NUMBER THREE, ALSO THERE'S ELDERLY PEOPLE AND CHILDREN ON THAT ROAD.

THE KIDS COME OUT AND PLAY AND RIDE THEIR BIKES. I DO OPPOSE THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED BUT I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF SINGLE- FAMILY HOMES. IN CONCLUSION I URGE THE COMMISSION TO UPHOLD THE INTERESTS OF CURRENT RESIDENTS AND PRESERVE THE LIVEABILITY AND CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO MY COMMENTS AND I TRUST THAT YOU'LL MAKE A VALUED DECISION FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> REAL QUICK CAN WE JUST GET YOUR ADDRESS ON DONAHUE FOR THE

RECORD? >> 608 LUVERNE.

>> OH, 608 LUVERNE. OKAY.

PERFECT. THANK YOU.

>> WHO'LL BE NEXT? ANYONE ELSE? YES, SIR.

>> GOOD EVENING TO THE COUNCIL. MAYOR ANDERS, NICE TO SEE YOU.

MAX, GOOD TO SEE YOU. CHARLES CAMPBELL, 767 DONAHUE DRIVE. MY WIFE AND I'S PROPERTY IS -- OUR BACK YARD DIRECTLY IS RIGHT BEHIND THIS PROPERTY WHERE IT FEEL FACES THIS PROPERTY AND MAYBE THE REAR SIDE OF AT LEAST TWO OF THESE UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED.

AND SO JUST -- AND AFTER KIND OF HEARING EVERYTHING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TWO WEEKS AGO AND HAVING A CONVERSATION AFTERWARDS WITH THE PRESENTING PART I WHY I THINK OUR CONCERNS WERE JUST, YOU KNOW, WHERE THERE WAS A LOT -- DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, I UNDERSTAND PROGRESS AND GROWTH. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ORDINANCES ARE FOLLOWED IN THE WAY THEY ARE AS

[00:50:02]

BEING DESIGNATED FAMILY HOUSING. I KNOW THERE ARE CONCERNS BECAUSE I THINK THE OTHER SIDE OF DONAHUE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE HAS BEEN DESIGNATED FOR MULTIUSE. SO WE'RE -- MOVED IN 2009.

THERE WERE SINGLE- FAMILY HOMES ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET. THOSE ARE MULTIPLE UNITS, MORE STUDENT FACING. MORE TRAFFIC, MORE NOISE THERE THAN IT USED TO BE. BUT ON THIS SIDE OF THE STREET COMING DOWN LUVERNE IT'S ALL FAMILIES. I THINK THERE'S A HOUSE NEXT TO US ON THE CORNER OF LUVERNE. THERE'S A FAMILY THERE THAT MAY BE RENTING BUT THERE'S A LOT MORE TRAFFIC THERE, A LOT MORE CARS, AND SO I THINK JUST A CONCERN OF MORE CONGESTION.

I THINK WHAT I SEE, WHAT MY WIFE NOW DISCUSSED IS MORE COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEVELOPERS OR BUILDERS, COULD UNDERSTAND BETTER WHAT'S GOING ON AND LIKE MY NEIGHBOR JUST SAID AS WELL AS LONG AS IT'S SINGLE-FAMILY USE I DON'T THINK THERE'S AN ISSUE, JUST MAKING SURE EVERYTHING IS CONVENIENT AND BEING RESPECTFUL OF THE FAMILIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN THERE, BEING RESPECTFUL OF THE SIZE HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S BEEN THERE BUT IF IT WERE TO GO INTO MULTIPERSON USE AND WHATNOT THAT WOULD BE OUR BIGGEST CONCERN, IS MORE PARKING, MORE STRAIN ON AN ALREADY STRAINED INFRASTRUCTURE. WE'VE SEEN GROWTH. TREMENDOUS GROWTH IN AUBURN.

'99 AS A FRESHMAN. BEEN NOW WORKING AT THE UNIVERSITY AND GOING ON TO OTHER PARTS OF MY CAREER.

WE KNOW THAT AUBURN'S GROWN A WHOLE LOT.

AND WE'RE PROUD OF IT. AND DEFINITELY PROUD OF THAT AS WELL. PROUD OF WHAT'S HAPPENING ININ NEIGHBORHOOD, MY WARD AND DISTRICT.

MY WIFE AND I DEFINITELY WANT TO RAISE OUR FAMILY HERE AND KEEP MOVING. WE DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE THAT. THE CITY HAS PLANS ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, TRAFFIC, PARKING, ALL THOSE THINGS THAT GO FORTH. THOSE WERE OUR CONCERNS, JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE HONORING THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT'S ALREADY THERE.

>> THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING TO US. WHO WILL BE NEXT? ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MISS TAYLOR, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU.

>> OKAY. WELL, ACTUALLY, I PRETTY MUCH UP IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OVER BY LUVERNE.

I ACTUALLY LIVED IN RIDGECREST AND OTHER AREAS IN THAT VICINITY. AND LUVERNE -- ACTUALLY, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THE STREET WAS NAMED LUVERNE UNTIL THIS DEVELOPMENT CAME UP. I ALWAYS THOUGHT BECAUSE THE STREET OPPOSITE OF IT IS HUTCHERSON. SO BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'VE ALWAYS KNOWN IT TO BE A REALLY, REALLY QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD.

I EVEN REMEMBER HOUSES, THE HOUSES THAT USED TO BE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD BEFORE SOME OF THE HOUSES THAT WAS BUILT NOW. AND I HAD SOME CONCERNS AND I THINK SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS MAY BE A LITTLE SHY ABOUT STANDING UP BUT I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE CAME TO ME AND THEY TALKED TO ME ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS.

AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING -- THAT THE DEVELOPERS ARE TRYING TO PUT THERE, FIRST OF ALL, THE LOT IS PRETTY SMALL. EVEN THOUGH IT'S TWO LOTS, THEY ARE PRETTY SMALL LOTS.

AND TO GET THREETHREE ON THOSE -- ON TWO LOTS WITH THETHE OF THE LOTS, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS GOING TO -- IS REALLY NOT COMPATIBLE.

AND IT'S REALLY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBOR HOUSES THAT'S THERE NOW.

EVEN THE TYPE OF HOUSES THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE BUILT.

I CAN UNDERSTAND WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO PARKING AND I CAN ALSO RELATE WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO TRAFFIC. UNTIL I WENT OVER AND I ACTUALLY LOOKED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THEY'VE GROWN A LITTLE BIT AND MORE HOUSES IS OVER THERE, NEW HOUSES AND STUFF. I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A GATEWAY TO THE CEMETERY.

SO THERE'S AN OPENING AND A GATE THERE. SO YOU ALREADY HAVE PEOPLE MAYBE SOMETIMES VISITING THE CEMETERY THAT MAY PARKPARK SOMETIMES. AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, OTHER NEIGHBORS. AND IF YOU GET A WHOLE LOT OF HOUSING PARKS IN THAT AREA IT'S GOING TO BRING ON MORE TRAFFIC.

BECAUSE I DON'T CARE IF YOU DECIDE TO BUILD TWO, THREE HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ESPECIALLY TALKING ABOUT THREE BEDROOMS, 3 1/2 BATHS, WITH FOUR -- I GUESS THESE ARE DRIVEWAYS THAT HOLD FOUR PARKS.

[00:55:02]

THREE AND FOUR, THAT'S 12 CARS. THAT'S GOING TO BE PARKED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I DON'T THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE A PROBLEM WITH DEVELOPMENT THERE. BUT I DON'T -- I KNOW THAT THEY DON'T -- THEY'RE NOT WANTING 12 EXTRA PARKS ON A STREET ON A CUL-DE- SAC THAT IS PROBABLY ABOUT AS LONG AS THIS MONITOR HERE. I DROVE OVER THERE, PASSED BY THERE A LOT OF TIME, AND IT'S ALREADY CONGESTED UP IN THERE.

SO TO ADD THREE MORE HOUSES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT FEASIBLE. IT'S NOT FEASIBLE FOR THE STREET OR THE NEIGHBORS THAT ALREADY LIVE THERE, THAT ARE THERE ARE HAVING PARKING PROBLEMS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. ONCE AGAIN THEY MENTIONED CHILDREN. THERE'S CHILDREN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS -- WE JUST DISCUSSED ABOUT SAFETY.

TRAFFIC. TALKING ABOUT SAFETY. IT'S NOT REALLY SAFE FOR -- IT AIN'T LIKE THE STREET GOES FROM -- YOU COME IN AND YOU GO OUT IN ANOTHER DIRECTION.

YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO TURN AROUND AND COME BACK OUT THE SAME WAY. SO IT'S REALLY TIGHT.

IT'S REALLY TIGHT UP IN THERE RIGHT NOW.

I'M NOT GOING TO -- I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THIS PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW I DON'T THINK THAT -- I'M NOT GOING TO -- I'M NOT GOING TO AGREE WITH THIS

DEVELOPMENT. >> THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE? YES, TYLER.

>> JUST WANT A CLARIFICATION ON SOMETHING THAT JUST WAS SAID JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS. IF THIS COUNCIL WERE TO DENY THIS PROPOSAL THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD BUILD A FOUR- BEDROOM AND A FIVE- BEDROOM HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY AND HAVE TWO STRUCTURES AND GET THE SAME NUMBER OF BEDS BUT ONLY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE TWO -- FOUR PARKING SPOTS TOTAL?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. LIKE I SAID, SO THE DISTINCTION IN SINGLE- FAMILY HOUSING AND ADDUS IS THE COMMON AND PRIVATE SPACE WITHIN THE STRUCTURE. AND SINGLE- FAMILY HOUSING, AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE RATIO, WOULD ALLOW THEM TO ONLY BUILD TWO PARKING SPACES. SO FOR PLACES THAT DON'T HAVE GARAGES IT'S REALLY KIND OF THE DRIVEWAY TO THE DOOR PRETTY MUCH AND THAT MEETS. THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAVE THAT DESIGNATES WHAT PARKING IS IS LIKE THE ACTUAL AREA OF IT. SO THE LENGTH AND WIDTH OF A PARKING SPACE PRETTY MUCH, IF YOU HAVE TWO OF THOSE FROM A SQUARE FOOTAGE STANDPOINT YOU HAVE TWO OFF- SITE PARKING

SPACES. >> AND THEY CAN DO THAT BY

RIGHT? >> YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

YOU CAN DO THAT BY RIGHT AND

DDH. >> THEY CAN ALSO THEORETICALLY BUILD MORE PARKING THAN THE TWO SPACES. IT WOULD BE UP TO THEM. AND IT'S ALSO A FUNCTIONFUNCTION OF RATIO AND SOME OTHER THINGS. BUT YES, THEORETICALLY THEY ONLY HAVE TO BUILD TWO SPACES PER SINGLE- FAMILY DETACHED HOUSE.

>> SO JUST TO MAKE SURE THE EXPECTATIONS ARE SET, WE COULD DENY THIS AND RENTAL HOUSES COULD STILL GOGO THERE AND THEY COULD BE LEASED TO THE SAME -- YOU HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE LIVING IN THEM AS YOU WOULD THE THREE HOMES AND POSSIBLY THE SAME NUMBER OF

CARS. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

TECHNICALLY, I MEAN, THERE COULD BE MORE.

HONESTLY LIKE IF THERE WERE SIX PEOPLE IN EACH HOUSE, IF IT WAS LIKE A FAMILY AND THEY HAD FOUR KIDS EACH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT YES. SO YEAH.

THE ONLY THING THAT STOPS THAT IS IF IT WAS UNRELATED AND THEY REPORTED THAT TO THE CITY AND THEN WE FOUND THAT INVESTIGATION AND KIND OF GOING FROM THERE.

>> CAN WE SPEAK TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP? IDENTIFIES THIS AREA AS NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT MEANS.

>> YEAH, CERTAINLY. NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION KIND OF SPEAKS TO WHAT THE EXISTING CHARACTER IS OF A NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO THAT REALLY KIND OF GOES FROM USE, SIZE, LIKE LOT SIZE, GREEN SPACE, CANOPY. JUST REALLY KIND OF HOUSING TOPOLOGY.

CAN FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STANDPOINT WHAT INFORMS THAT FOR THE FUTURE IS THE EXISTING HOMES ON THAT STREET. SO THERE'S A LOT OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES OVER THERE THAT ARE EITHER CLOSE TO THE STREET, CANOPY AND THINGS LIKE THAT, REALLY DON'T TRY TO DISTURB THE CHARACTER BY ADDING IN A DIFFERENT USE OR MORE INTENSE OR SOMETHING THAT IS JUST COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM

[01:00:02]

THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE STREET. NORMALLY THAT'S MIRRORED OVER OUR DDH NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR NC NEIGHBORHOODS.

>> IS THAT MORE LIKE AN OVERLAY DESIGNATION OR

-- >> NOT AN OVERLAY.

IT'S THE FUTURE LAND USE. THE FUTURE LAND USE IS WHAT WE LOOK AT ON SOME OF THE CONDITIONAL USES AND REZONING.

SO FROM A CONDITIONAL USE STANDPOINT WHEN WE GET THAT THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CONSIDER AND THIS IS ONE OF THE POINTS OF OPPOSITION FOR THETHE PLANNING COMMISSION. THEY DID NOT THINK THIS WAS IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER. THEY DID NOT THINK -- THEY THOUGHT IT WAS COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE WITH THE REST OF LUVERNE STREET PRETTY MUCH.

OR LUVERNE AVENUE.

>> AND FOCUSING ON THE LAND USE PLAN YOU GUYS HAVE TAKEN A HARD LOOK AT IT. AND YES, FOR UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY OR PROPERTY THAT IS REDEVELOPING IT'S SUPPOSED TO HELP PROVIDE A GUIDE FOR WHAT'S TO COME. SO.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> MY CONCERNS ARE SIMPLE TO COUNCILWOMAN TAYLOR'S.

DDH IS ONE LESS -- JUST SLIGHTLY LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION. THE DESIGN AS PRESENTED HERE I DON'T THINK IS IN KEEPING WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.

WHILE I APPRECIATE THE SENTIMENT THAT THE OWNER MAY BE PRESENT AND RENT THE OTHER STRUCTURES, TIME IS A COMPLICATED FACTOR HERE AND ANY -- ALL SORTS OF CONDITIONS COULD ALTER THOSE PROPOSED GOALS.

AND THEN WE'RE LEFT WITH THREE BUGGS THAT ARE NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO FOR THOSE REASONS I DON'T FEEL CONFIDENT OR COMFORTABLE SUPPORTING THIS PROPOSAL.

>> ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.

>> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED

PLEASE SAY NAY. >> NAY.

>> THAT ITEM DID NOT. ITEM 4.

[10.a.4. Country Club Cottages. Performance residential development use (multiple-unit development). Property located on the west side of Country Club Drive.]

>> 10A4 IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL USE, A THREE- UNIT MULTIPLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON APPROXIMATELY .

3 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF COUNTRY CLUB LANE IN THE CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SUBURBAN ZONING DISTRICT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY A VOTE OF 7- 0 AT ITS OCTOBER 9TH MEETING. A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED. YOU CAN THINK OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AS A TRIPLEX IN ESSENCE.

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL.

OKAY. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLICPUBLIC HEARINGS. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL? THOUGHTS?

>> I LOOK FORWARD TO IMPROVED ROADS IN THIS AREA.

I THINK THE ROADS ARE NOT GOOD IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.

SO WILL THAT BE PART OF THE

PROJECT? >> I'LL HAVE OUR STAFF SPEAK.

WE HAD AN ADJACENT ROAD TO THIS THAT'S A PRIVATE ROAD THAT'S IMPROVING TREMENDOUSLY.

BUT THIS ONE COUNTRY CLUB LANE. BRANDY.

>> YEAH, SO AS PART OF THIS, YOU KNOW, WE WILL HAVE THEM MAKE UP DATES TO PUBLIC STREETS AS NECESSARY.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE THEM MAKE UP DATES NECESSARILY TO PRIVATE STREETS.

>> YOU CAN HOPE.

>> IS COUNTRY CLUB ROAD PRIVATE OR CITY?

>> IT'S PUBLIC.

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY COUNTRY

>> THE ADJACENT ONE IS NOT?

>> YEAH.

>> YOU APPROVED A DEVELOPMENT OFF DUKE CIRCLE.

AND DUKE CIRCLE IS PRIVATE COUNCILMAN ADAMS DEALT WITH THAT. ON BEHALF OF HIS CONSTITUENTS. A YEAR OR TWO AGO. I CAN'T RECALL EXACTLY.

INSPECTION SERVICES WENT OUT FOR HEALTH SAFETY WELFARE REASONS AND ASKED THE PRIVATE SECTOR OWNER OF THAT TO GET SOME THINGS CORRECTED WHICH THEY DID.

BUT NOW THAT'S REDEVELOPING. AND SO THESE ARE JUST COUNTRY CLUB LANE IS A NARROW PUBLIC STREET BUT IN REASONABLE CONDITION TYPICALLY YOU BUT ANYTHING THE DEVELOPMENT CAUSES THEY'LL HAVE TO CORRECT.

>> YEAH, IF THROUGH THE COURSE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT THEY DEGRADE THE ROAD BEYOND WHAT IT IS EXISTING THEY WOULD

[01:05:01]

HAVE TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS TO BRING IT BACK UP TO PRECONDITION STANDARDS OR BETTER.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

[10.b. Vacation. The Mark at Auburn, LLC. 141 Wright, LLC. Various easements. Property located at 141 Wright Street, 134 Toomer Street, and 140 Toomer Street. Public hearing required.]

>> ITEM 10A-5 WAS WITHDRAWN AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT. SO ITEM 10B THE VACATION OF VARIOUS EASEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH 141 WRIGHT STREET, 134 TOOMER STREET AND 140 TOOMER STREET AND FURTHER AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A QUITCLAIM DEED RELINK WIRNING THE FRAUGHT 141 WRIGHT LLC AND THE MARKET AUBURN LLC. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THE DEDICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW EASEMENTS WAS ALREADY ADOPTED THIS EVENING AS PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 8C1.

A PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED.

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND.

>> HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL? MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT. >> MAYOR, THOSE ARE ALL THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS WE HAVE FOR YOU THIS EVENING.

>> OKAY. AT THIS TIME WE'LL OPEN THE CITIZENS' OPEN FORUM IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT ANYTHING.

THIS WILL BE YOUR TIME TO COME FORWARD. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND WE'VE ASKED THAT YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

AND PLEASE ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

ANYONE? OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE THE CITIZENS' OPEN FORUM. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL?

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

Oct 21, 2025 City Council

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item