[00:00:05] >> AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE APRIL 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER. CAN WE HAVE ROLLCALL, PLEASE. BEFORE WE START I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE PRESENTED WITH AGENDA ITEMS BY THE STAFF. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE OPENED AS APPROPRIATE AND THIS WILL BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE AGENDA ITEM AT HAND. WE WANT EVERYONE TO BE HEARD AND WE ASK THAT YOU KEEP YOUR TIME TO FIVE MINUTES AND YOUR COMMENTS RELEVANT TO THE CASE AT HAND. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT A Q & A AND THE QUESTIONS THAT ARISE ONCE THE HEARING IS CLOSED WILL BE ADDRESSED. PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO SIGN IN AFTER YOU SPEAK. ONCE EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED AND ONCE CLOSED THE PUBLIC WILL NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT AND STAFF WILL THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS BROUGHT UP DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL AS COMMISSION. WE WILL THEN VOTE BASED ON STATE AND LOCAL LAWS AND THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2030 OUR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY RELATED TO THE APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION PLANTS BY ALABAMA STATUTE, THIS COMMISSION, SUCH AS OURS, IS THE FINAL APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION. WE ARE BOUND BY THE LIMITATIONS OF STATE LAW, CITY ZONING ORDINANTS. ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE REQUIRED. THIS IS LIMITED TO THE PLAT MEET OR EXCEED THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS CODIFIED IN LAWS AND REGULATIONS. WE ARE ALSO AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF SUBDIVISION PLATS. [CITIZENS’ COMMUNICATION] AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN CITIZENS "A" COMMUNICATION WHICH IS, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON AN ISSUE THAT MAY NOT BE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, PLEASE COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M THOMAS SMITH, A RESIDENT OF FARMVILLE ROAD. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS SINCE I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THE CITY FOR THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION AND I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW ALL OF IT WORKS. YOU ALL HAVE BEEN GREAT. WHEN I HAD AN ISSUE, I COULD GO TO THE PLANNING AND GET SOME ANSWERS BUT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP FOR ME WAS AS WE SIT THROUGH SOME OF THE MEETINGS ON MONDAY PACKET MEETINGS, THE PROCESS OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND HOW DOES A CITIZEN GET A COPY OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? HOW ARE WE ALLOWED TO SEE WHAT THE CITY AND THESE DEVELOPERS ARE ACTUALLY PUTTING ON PAPER THAT THEY BOTH AGREE TO? AS I LOOK BACK OVER SEVERAL MONTHS OF WHAT THE AGREEMENT WAS ON SOME MORE THAN ONE PROJECT AND WHAT WAS BEING DONE CANNOT SEEM TO BE THE SAME BUT I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE AGREEMENT. AND HOW DOES A CITIZEN GET THAT? I WAS TOLD THE MAPS OR PLATS ARE EXAMPLES OF WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED WHEN A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS BEING ANNEXED IN OR REZONED IS JUST REPRESENTATIVE. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME FROM THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS PUT OUT THERE FOR THOSE NEEDS THAT DON'T LINE UP WITH WHEN IT COMES TIME FOR REAL PLATS AND IS THERE A WAY THAT THAT CAN BE MORE CORRELATED OR IS IT BETTER TO NOT EVEN PUT ANYTHING OUT THERE? BECAUSE AS A CITIZEN, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF ANNEXATION AND REZONING THAT I HAD AN IDEA OF WHAT WAS COMING. AND THEN WHEN A PLAT COMES OUT, IT WAS NOT EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT. AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THE SECOND TIME, IT WAS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR. AND AS A PLANNING COMMITTEE AND AS WE DO ALL OF THIS, HOW DO WE ADDRESS SO THAT AS A CITIZENS, WE TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S COMING BEFORE WE DON'T SPEAK OUT MORE IN THE ORIGINAL MEETINGS? BECAUSE IF SOMETHING SHOWS UP LATER ON THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE WERE EXPECTING, IT'S KIND OF TOO LATE TO FUSS ABOUT ANNEXATION OR FUSS ABOUT REZONING BECAUSE WE'RE ALLOWING A ZONING AND AS LONG AS THEY FIT IN THAT ZONING CRITERIA, IT'S ALLOWED TO GO THROUGH AND AFTER MONDAY'S MEETING, PRELIMINARY PLATS TYPICALLY TEND TO A GET A RUBBER STAMP WITH RECOMMENDATION AND IS VERY FEW ARE EVER JUST VOTEDED DOWN NO WHICH WAS A SURPRISE TO ME. THOSE WERE JUST SOME OF THE POINTS THAT IT'S GOT ME [00:05:03] QUESTIONING HOW ALL OF THIS WORKS SO THAT WE LOOK OUT AFTER THE CITIZENS, THE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND STILL MANAGE TO WORK THAT IN COORDINATION WITH PRIVATE LANDOWNERS. I JUST THINK THAT THERE'S STILL SOME PROCESSES THERE THAT I WAS USED TO DEALING WITH WITH PUDS AND LARGE UNITS AND THINGS CHANGE BUT TO SEE THIS HAPPEN IN A FOUR TO SIX-MONTH PERIOD, I WAS TAKEN ABACK THAT THERE COULD BE THAT MUCH CHANGE IN PRETTY DRASTIC IN HOW THIS PROCESS WORKS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS CITIZENS COMMUNICATION. IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANYTHING THAT'S NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE CITIZENS COMMUNICATION. LOOKS LIKE QUESTION ARE GREETED THIS EVENING BY A CLASS WHICH IS ALWAYS EVENTFUL. [1. Preliminary Plat – Farmville Oaks – PUBLIC HEARING] I'M EXCITED TO HAVE YOU HERE. AT THIS TIME WE'LL MOVE TO OLD BUSINESS. >> GOOD EVENING. THIS FIRST REQUEST IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR 48-LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 47 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ONE OPEN SPACE LOT. THE PROPERTY IS NORTH OF MRS. JAMES ROAD AND SOUTH OF WEST OF FARMVILLE ROAD IN THE LLRD. IT WAS REZONED FROM RURAL IN NOVEMBER OF 2025. THE PROPERTY IS UNDER 60 ACRES AND DENSITY PERMITTED IS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE AND THE PROPOSED PLAT WILL BE JUST UNDER THAT AT .8 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE. THE PLAT HERE SHOWS THE 47 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITH ONE OPEN SPACE LOT WITH A CONNECTION ON WEST FARMVILLE AND ONE ON MRS. JAMES. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT IF YOU DO APPROVE THIS PLAT, IT IS WITH THREE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. THE FIRST BEING THE PRIMARY ROAD THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION SHOULD BE CONNECTED AND DESIGNED AS A RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR WITH A REQUIRED RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH OF 60 FEET. THERE SHOULD BE A WATERMAIN EXTENSION TRAVELLING THROUGH THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THAT RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR AND WE ARE ALSO GOING A STUB-OUT ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. I'M HAPPY TO ANY ANY QUESTIONS. >> THERE ARE A SERIES. ONE THERE THE CONNECTIVITY IS FROM THE ENGINEER BUT ALSO THERE IS A 1200 MAXIMUM WALK LENGTH THAT 24 WILL RUN AFOUL OF SO TO GET OUT OF THAT WOULD BE THE SUB OUT. ON THE BLOCK LENGTH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF'S BEEN LOOKING AT, RECENTLY THIS IS ONE OF THE RARE PROJECTS THAT ACTUALLY EXCEEDS THAT WHERE WE MIGHT ACTUALLY SHORTEN THAT AND CHOKE IT DOWN A PRETTY GOOD BIT AND THEN PROBABLY MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN URBAN AND SUBURBAN ALSO. >> SO THESE CONDITIONS WERE -- THESE ISSUES WERE PRETTY MUCH RAISED LAST MONTH AND WE DELAYED IT AND IT SEEMS LIKE THOSE ISSUES ARE STILL OUT THERE. AND MY QUESTION IS HOW COME THOSE THINGS HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED SUFFICIENTLY? >> SO UPON THE RESUBMISSION, THE APPLICANT JUST SAID THIS WOULD BE THEIR PREFERENCE AND THIS IS THE WAY THEY WANTED TO GO. JUST FROM TLIR PRO FORMA AND DEVELOPMENT PROFILE WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. STAFF'S POSITION HADN'T CHANGED ON THE REQUIRED RIGHT OF WAY, ON THE CONNECTIVITY. OUR POSITION WAS JUST MORE THESE NEED TO BE FIRM CONDITIONS BEFORE GOING IN THE DRT THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, THE DESIRE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. >> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF YOU'D LIKE IT COME FORWARD ON PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FARMVILLE OAKS, WE'LL OPEN THAT NOW WILL YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL ADDRESS THIS TIME. >> TOM SMITH, 3799, LEE ROAD 72. [00:10:03] WHICH IS ALSO KNOWN AS FARMVILLE ROAD. THERE'S SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE ABOUT THIS PROJECT NOW. WE KIND OF START OFF WITH -- SO IS THE CONNECTOR ROAD GOING AWAY OR IS THE CITY GOING TO REQUIRE IT? AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE STUB OUT IS ON THE PLAT FROM A REQUEST FROM THE CITY. IF THE STUB-OUT IS PUT IN BOTH LOCATIONS AND BECAUSE I GOT INTO THIS IN SHADOW WOODS, WILL IT BE TAKEN CARE OF AND PAVED AND PREPARED TO THE PROPERTY LINE? THAT'S WHAT THE CODES USED TO SAY. AND IT WASN'T DONE THERE. AND UTILITIES STUBBED OUT TO THAT POINT ALSO. I'M LOOKING OVER THE PLAT AND I HAVEN'T FOUND A DETENTION POND ON THIS FOR ANYWHERE WITH THIS MUCH ROAD AND HARD SURFACE. AND IF THEY'RE PLANNING ON USING THE ORIGINAL POND THAT'S THERE, WILL THE MODIFICATIONS TO IT BE MADE BEFORE ANY CLEARING AND GRUBBING? BECAUSE THE DAM WAS ERODED AWAY WHEN SHADOW WOODS DAM BUSTED TEN YEARS AGO. SO THERE IS A PART OF IT THAT'S ERODED AWAY. ACCESS TO LOT 31 WHICH IS THE BIG LOT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE POND, I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE CALLING OPEN SPACE. I DIDN'T SEE IT LABELED ON THIS PLAT. IF SO, WOULD THE 20-FOOT EASEMENT GOING THROUGH 33 AND 34, IS THAT 20-FOOT EASEMENT TAKEN OUT OF PROPERTY DIMENSIONS? WILL THAT AFFECT THOSE LOT SIZES? AND THEN WOULD THAT BE AN ACCESS TO THE OTHER SIDE, THAT OPEN SPACE LOT? SINCE THE INCREASED WATER FLOW COMING DOWN THAT STREAM BED, ALSO TOPS THAT DOWN BECAUSE IT'S SO MUCH MORE WATER SINCE SHADOW WOODS WAS PUT IN. IS THERE GOING TO BE A STRUCTURE PLACE SO THAT THAT CAN BE USED IN HIGH RAINFALL EVENTS? I HADN'T SEEN THIS BEFORE BUT I SAW A NOTE THAT SAID THEY WERE WANTING TO CLOSE MY DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS -- THEY'RE SUPPOSEDLY PUT A TWENTY-FOOT EASEMENT OUT. THIS IS A BRAND NEW HIGH PRESSURE DRIVEWAY FOR MY FARM EQUIPMENT TO GO IN AND OUT OF AND THE CITY'S GOING THAT THAT BE CLOSED. NONE OF THAT'S ADDRESSING THE NEXT LOT BESIDE ME WHICH IS MY SISTER'S LOT. SO WE HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS SIDE BY SIDE. MINE'S PAVED. HERS IS NOT. SO WE STILL WON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT. I'M ASSUMING THAT'S BECAUSE OF A LANE TO TURN INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WOULD THAT ROAD GOING IN, THERE'S A HUNDRED-YEAR-OLD CULVERT UNDERNEATH FARMVILLE ROAD AT THAT EXACT LOCATION IS THAT GOING BEEN ADDRESSED AND WHAT'S THE WATER FLOW TO GO UP UNDERNEATH THAT PIPE AND IS IT UP TO STANDARD TO HANDLE THE WATER FLOW? WHAT'S THAT EFFECT GOING TO BE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FARMVILLE ROAD? ALSO WITH THE ROAD THAT THEY HAVE PREPARED NOW COMING WITHIN TEN FEET OF MY CURRENT RESIDENCE, IS THERE ANY WAY TO HAVE SOME KIND OF NATURAL VEGETATION BUFFER PUT IN THERE TO MITIGATE THE NOISE FROM THIS ROAD? GOING RIGHT BY MY HOUSE? THOSE WERE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAD AT THIS TIME. WITH JUST THREE DAYS TO HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK OVER AND REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS SINCE A PACKET MEETING AND SUCH A DRASTIC CHANGE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WAS ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PLAN THAT THEY'VE PRESENTED FOR YOU ALL TO BE APPROVED, DISAPPROVED OR CHANGED. >> THANK YOU, SIR. PLEASE SIGN IN IF YOU HAVEN'T. ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM IN THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR RESPONSE TO COMMENTS. APPLICANT IS HERE. >> I WROTE DOWN ELEVEN DIFFERENT COMMENTS. >> ME TOO. >> AND I'M KIND OF QUESTIONING WHETHER WE'RE READY TO HAVE A LOOK IT I OR IF THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, POSTPONED AND ADDRESSED A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAIL. BECAUSE THOSE ALL WERE -- MOST OF THOSE WERE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL IN NATURE IN MY VIEW. >> SO I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE. IF YOU WANT TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT, THAT'S FINE. STAFF CAN ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS [00:15:01] THAT ARE MORE FOR US. >> YOUR NAME. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S DYLAN COOKE. I'M THE SURVEYOR ON THE PROJECT WITH SANFORD GROUP. I CAN'T GO INTO DETAIL ON THE INTRICACIES OF THE DESIGN. I'M NOT INVOLVED WITH THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT. THE ENGINEER IS NOT PRESENT. BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I CAN REGARDING TO THE PLAT. >> YOU HAVE ELEVEN QUESTIONS. >> IT SEEMED LIKE A LOT OF THOSE WERE -- >> THE QUESTIONS THAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE, I DON'T THINK ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE SURVEYOR. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD NEEDS TO BE HERE ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS. >> DEFINITELY. >> I WILL SAY THAT WITH MY TALKS WITH THE OWNER, WE HAVE NO ISSUE WITH STAFF COMMENTS AND MAKING THAT CONNECTION AND STUB-OUT TO THE WEST AS WELL. >> THEN WHY HAVEN'T YOU MADE THOSE CHANGES? >> WELL, IT WAS HIS DSHT OWNER'S PREFERENCE THAT WE DIDN'T MAKE THAT CROSSING OF THE CREEK JUST FROM A CONSTRUCTABILITY STANDPOINT AND ALSO JUST -- >> IT MAY BE THE PREFERENCE, BUT I THINK SOMEBODY'S BEEN GIVING YOU FEEDBACK AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE FEEDBACK IS GIVEN. THEN IT GIVES US A MORE REALISTIC VIEW OF WHAT THIS DEVELOPMENT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. FOR US TO BRING IT FORWARD. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S REALLY GOING TO LOOK LIKE ONCE YOU MAKE THOSE CHANGES. >> IT LOOKS LIKE WITH ALL OF THESE -- WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED AND WITH WHAT MR. SMITH, HIS QUESTIONS, THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO SEE MORE. IT LOOKS LIKE THE FINAL PLAT WILL NOT EVEN LOOK LIKE THIS. >> THE THREE CONDITIONS, THOSE LOOK REASONABLE AT SOME LEVEL. DO THEY TAKE CARE OF ALL OF MR. SMITH'S CONCERNS? >> IF YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, KIND OF FOR THE APPLICANT. >> WE DON'T. >> THANK YOU. >> WE NEED THE ENGINEER. >> SO LET'S GO ONE BY ONE. IF YOU WANT TO START WITH WHAT YOUR QUESTIONS WERE, PHIL. WE CAN GO FROM THERE. >> I TOOK SOME NOTES. I WENT DEEPER ON WHAT THE NOTES WERE ABOUT, BUT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A CONNECTOR ROAD AND STUB-OUT. ARE THEY GOING TO DO THAT STUB-OUT? >> I CAN SPEAK TO THAT. ON THE CONNECTOR ROAD AND THE UTILITIES AND JUST THE CONNECTIONS, SO THAT HAS BEEN PART OF THE POLICY AND THAT HAS BEEN WHAT WE'VE DONE, WHATEVER THERE IS, VACANT LAND IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO LAND THAT IS BEING SUBDIVIDED IS SOMETHING WE REQUIRE THAT THERE IS STUB-OUTS AND IT DOES ALL THE WAY. IN SITUATION AS WHERE IF HAS BEEN DEDICATED AND HAS BEEN CONNECTIONS, THOSE ARE THE OUTLIERS IN UNIQUE SITUATIONS TO THOSE DEVELOPMENTS. IN THIS SITUATION, THIS IS PART OF THAT COMMENT WHERE IT IS REQUIRING THAT STUB-OUT AND IT'S FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD. FOR THE CONNECTION STANDPOINT, THAT'S TWO-FOLD. THAT'S MAKING IT UP TO THE RIGHT OF WAY REQUIRED UP TO THE ROAD STANDARD AND THEN THAT IS ALSO FOR THE PROVISION OF THE UTILITY CONNECTION AS WELL FOR THE WATERMAIN THAT'S GOING THROUGH IT. SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF WITH THE STORMWATER -- >> THE STUB-OUT. MR. SMITH HAD MENTIONED HOW IS THAT GOING TO BE DONE? IS IT GOING TO BE FINISHED AND PAVED? I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE NORMALLY DO. >> WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR IS THAT THERE BE ACTUAL INFRASTRUCTURE NOT A PAPER SUBOUT WHERE IT'S JUST UNFINISHED AND RIGHT OF WAY IN BETWEEN. ENGINEERING WOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT. >> WHAT'S OUR STANDARD? >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD IF IT'S A RIGHT OF WAY, YOU BUILD IT TO THE END OF THAT PLAT RIGHT OF WAY FOR THAT STUB-OUT. WE COULDN'T ACCEPT UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAYS. >> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. >> THERE WAS ALSO A COMMENT MADE ABOUT HIS DRIVEWAY. CLOSING IN. CLOSING THE DRIVEWAY. >> SO THAT WAS -- THAT WAS ENGINEERING COMMENT THAT WE DECIDED TO LEAVE AS A COMMENT AND NOT A CONDITION AND SO ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT WAS JUST KIND OF ON A ROAD OF THE CLASSIFICATION THAT IS WEST FARMVILLE ROAD ARTERIAL, THE DRIVEWAY SPACING AND THE SIDE DISTANCE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT [00:20:04] WOULD BE THE PREFERENCE. THIS WAS RAW DEVELOPMENT, JUST ALL OF THIS WAS COMING IN AT THE SAME TIME, THERE WOULD BE ONE DRIVEWAY AND THEY WOULD HAVE AS TO TAKE ACCESS OFF THE LESS INTENSE ROAD. >> NOT TO DO AWAY WITH HIS DRIVEWAY BECAUSE IT'S HIS PRIVATE HOME. >> POSSIBLY. >> WELL, IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE A BRAND NEW COLLECTOR RIGHT NEXT TO PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS. IF YOU'RE SUBDIVIDING, WE WOULD WANT THIS PROPERTY TO STEPPED INSTEAD OF HAVING A DRIVEWAY THERE CONNECTED TO ANOTHER. HOWEVER, YOU CAN'T FORCE SOMEBODY TO CLOSE A DRIVEWAY. BUT WE WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE PROVIDED FOR THAT PERSON TO CONNECT INTO THAT LOCATION. >> WHO WOULD PAY FOR THAT? WOULD THAT BE THE DEVELOPER WHO WOULD PAY FOR THE REDIRECTION OF THE DRIVEWAY LIKE THAT? >> SO THE REDIRECTION OF THE DRIVEWAY WOULD BE -- IF THEY WERE TO MOVE IT AND DO IT, IT WOULD BE AT THEIR OWN COST. THAT WOULD BE A PRIVATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND THAT OWNER IF THEY WANTED TO MOVE IT. >> IF THE OWNER WANTED TO MOVE IT? >> RIGHT. >> IF SOMEBODY HAS PERMITTED ACCESS THAT'S PRIVATELY SEPARATE FROM A DEVELOPER, WE CAN'T GO IN AND SAY, NO, YOU LOSE YOUR DRIVEWAY. THEY HAVE TO MAKE THAT CONDITION UPON THEMSELVES. WE WOULD HIGHLY, HIGHLY SUPPORT THAT DECISION. >> THEN THE QUESTION OF -- I CAN'T REALLY TELL BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF INFORMATION ON HERE -- THE ROAD NEXT TO HIS LOT IS TRULY NOT VERY FAR AWAY. IS THAT AVERAGE BUFFER DISTANCE? >> THIS IS A ROAD, NOT NECESSARILY -- I GUESS THE USES ARE THE SAME. I THINK THAT'S THE OTHER THING. I KNOW IT'S A ROAD AND DON'T REALLY WANT THERE TO BE A ROAD. LAND USE INTENSITY IS WHAT BUFFER YARDS ARE DERIVED FROM. SO SINCE THE LAND USE INTENSITY WOULD BE THE SAME FROM SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT HOUSES NEXT TO A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT HOUSE, THERE WOULDN'T REALLY BE A REQUIREMENT. THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT, BUT I GUESS MY POINT WOULD BE THIS IS WEST FARMVILLE ROAD. THERE ARE HOUSE THAT IS TAKE ACCESS LIKE THIS HOUSE OFF OF WEST FARMVILLE ROAD. THAT IS JUST THE PROCESS OF LIVING ON THESE BIG ARTERIALS AND THEN IF THERE'S ANOTHER CONNECTION TO IT. THE SHORT ANSWER, THE LAND USE INTENSITY BEING THE SAME, THERE WOULD NOT BE A BUFFER YARD REQUIRED. MY PUSHBACK ON THAT WOULD BE ALL OF THESE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES. WEST FARMVILLE ROAD IS A GREATER CLASSIFICATION OF A ROAD THAN THE ROAD THAT IS BEING CONSTRUCTED. ALSO IT WOULD CARRY HIGHER VOLUMES. >> SO ON THAT NOTE, THE LANE ON THIS END EVEN WITH CONNECTIVITY, IS THERE LANES? >> IT WOULD REQUIRE BOTH. IRREGARDLESS IF THERE WAS A CUL-DE-SAC. EITHER WAY THE DEVELOPER'S ON THE HOOK. >> NO MATTER, HIS DRIVEWAY'S CHANGING? >> IN TERMS, YES. >> BUT NOT NECESSARILY GOING AWAY? >> IT'S OUR RIGHT OF WAY. >> IT'S A DRIVEWAY. >> SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT ALL TIMES IF YOU'RE PRESENTLY ON A RIGHT OF WAY. >> HOW ABOUT THE DETENTION POND QUESTION. >> THE RETENTION POND QUESTION. >> SO I GUESS THOSE DETAILS ARE NORMALLY IRONED OUT THE DRT PROCESS AND YOU GUYS WILL SEE THAT ON THE FINAL PLAT. THE VOLUME AND ALL THAT, ALL OF THAT WOULD BE HANDLED AND ADDRESSED IN DRT. >> ALONG WITH THE DAM. >> THAT WOULD NOT BE LEFT UP TO CHANCE. THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A FIRM ANSWER ON WHERE THE PLACEMENT OF THOSE RETENTION PONDS GO AND ALSO THE CAPACITY OF THEM IF THEY CAN HANDLE THE PROPOSED RUNOFFS. >> IT'S GOING TO BE THERE. IT'S HOW IS IT GOING TO BE DESIGNED? >> THAT'S CORRECT. THE BIGGEST THING THAT HAPPENS WITH STORMWATER IN THESE SITUATIONS IS SOMETIMES THE DETENTION OR RETENTION POND MAY MOVE OR THERE WILL BE ANOTHER LOT THAT MIGHT BE ADDED AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, THIS IS A CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION SO IT DOESN'T AFFECT OPEN SPACE. THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT THOSE CALCULATIONS IMPACT. THAT IS WHEN THE RETENTION PONDS ARE SO GREAT THAT IT EATS UP TOO MUCH OF THE PROPORTION OF OPEN SPACE OR IF THEY NEED MORE OF THEM THEY NEED TO ADD THEM AND RECONFIGURE THEIR LOT DESIGNS FOR THE GREATER DETENTION PONDS THEY NEED. THESE ARE QUESTIONS PRELIMINARY LOCATIONS ON IT, BUT THE DRT, WHETHER IT BE APPROVED ENGINEERING PLANS WOULD THEN FIRM UP WHERE WHAT THE CAPACITY OF THAT WOULD BE AND ALSO WHERE THE LOCATIONS OF THOSE PONDS WOULD BE. >> WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHY THAT WE [00:25:06] ALL KNOW, WHY DRT IS NOT DONE UNTIL AFTER WE ALREADY HAVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT? >> SO AS A GREAT KIND BEHIND-THE-SCENES QUESTION THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE. EVEN STAFF, WHEN WE WORKED ON THE SUBDIVISION REGS WITH OUR EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS, ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARNED FROM THE ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS WAS THAT THEY DO NOT GET SURVEYS ON THE FRONT END. THEY NORMALLY JUST PULL COUNTY GIS DATA AND THEY'RE WORKING OFF AN EDUCATED GUESS. AND SOMETIMES DEPENDING ON WHERE IT IS IN THE CITY, IT'S A BETTER GUESS THAN OTHERS. AND THEN OTHER TIMES IT'S COMPLETELY INCORRECT. SO SOMETIMES THAT DIFFERENCE MIGHT BE TEN FEET, COULDN'T MATTER A LOT. TEN FEET OUT HERE, DOESN'T MATTER A WHOLE LOT. BUT THE REAL THING THAT HAPPENS IS THAT ONCE WE GET A PRELIMINARY PLAT OR THEY GET SOME VESTED APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE, THEY'LL GO OUT AND GET IT SURVEYED AND THOSE BOUNDARIES BECOME FIRM AND THEY REDESIGN THE SITE TO WHAT THE ACTUAL BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY ARE THAT THEY HAVE. SO THEN WHERE THEY GET TO FROM THAT SURVEY, FROM THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS, WHAT THEY MAY HAVE PROPOSED MIGHT BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR THEM TO GET THEIR PREADMIN MEETING WHERE THEY'RE AWARE OF "X," "Y" "Z" NEEDS TO CHANGE, YOU'LL NEED TO DO THIS. THERE MAY BE SOME ADDED OFFSITE IMPROVEMENT COSTS YOU HAVEN'T ANTICIPATED. YOU MIGHT NEED TO RECONFIGURE YOUR LOTS. SO BY THE TIME THEY GET TO THE DRT PROCESS WHERE THEY ARE SUBMITTING, THERE COULD BE -- I DON'T WANT TO SAY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES -- BUT A GOOD BIT OF CHANGES ON THE PLAT FOR THEM TO MEET THE STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE FOR THEM. THAT'S NOT JUST ZONING STANDARDS. THAT'S SUBDIVISION STANDARDS AND ALSO ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS AND WATER RESOURCE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE. THAT DRT PROCESS, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM PROCESS, DOES IRON OUT A LOT OF THOSE AND IT'S A BACK-AND-FORTH DIALOG BETWEEN STAFF, THE APPLICANT AND THE ENGINEER AND REALLY ADDRESSING THOSE AND SO THEN THE FINAL PLAT CONFORMS TO THOSE APPROVED ENGINEERING PLANS THAT REFLECTS THE STANDARDS OF MULTIPLE MANUALS THAT WOULD NOT BE REFLECTED ON A PRELIMINARY PLAT. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS REALLY A RESULT AND REFLECTION OF WHAT THEY THOUGHT FROM THAT INITIAL EDUCATED GUESS, WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO AND THEN IN THAT FINAL PLAT IS IRONCLAD OF NO, NO, IF I WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS, HERE ARE THE STANDARDS FOR ME TO DO "X" "Y" AND "Z." WHETHER THAT BE DETENTION, STORMWATER, INGRESS, EGRESS, ACCESS, LOT SIZES. THAT'S WHY THE FINAL PLAT'S REALLY AN EVOLUTION ON FIRM DATA THAT THEY HAVE THAT IS THEN RECORDED. THAT'S WHY THERE'S A GAP IN BETWEEN THEM. >> THANK YOU. >> ALSO THE REASON WHY STORMWATER IS A DIFFICULT TOPIC TO ADDRESS RIGHT NOW. >> THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. SO EVEN IF THE ENGINEERING RECORD IS HERE, THEY CAN TELL YOU THEIR CONFIDENCE IN IT BUT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE LOOKED AT IT AT THIS POINT TO GIVE YOU A FIRM ANSWER ON IF THAT IS GOING TO BE THE PERMANENT LOCATION OF THIS OR IF THEY'RE GOING TO NEED MORE. >> OKAY. >> I WAS LOOKING AT THE DRIVEWAY. >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WAS THE LOT MANORIAL THEY WERE DOING THAT FOR ANOTHER REASON. THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT RE PROBABLY WILL GET AN ANSWER TO. THAT'S ONE THING THAT MIGHT CHANGE ONCE THEY ACTUALLY TRY TO MAKE IT THROUGH DRT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE JUST A COMMENT ABOUT -- THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE ABOUT APPROVING SUBDIVISION PLATS AND THAT THEY'RE ALL APPROVED. VERY RARELY ARE THEY TURNED DOWN. BUT THE REASON IS BECAUSE WE'RE REQUIRED BY LAW TO VOTE FOR THEM AS LONG AS THEY MEET REQUIREMENTS, SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS AND THERE'S SOME OTHER RULES. THIS IS OUT OF THE ORDINARY THAT WE'RE SEEING ALL THESE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO ADJUST AND FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE FIT INSIDE THOSE RULES? >> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT. THE PRELIMINARY PLATS IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA, FROM THE TIME OF SUBMISSION, FROM THE TIME THEY ARE HEARD, THEY MUST BE APPROVED IN THIRTY DAYS UNLESS YOU GUYS MAKE AN AFFIRMATIVE DECISION TO NOT APPROVE THEM PRETTY MUCH. IF THEY MEET OUR STANDARDS, THEY ARE GRANTED A -- THEY'RE [00:30:01] ESSENTIALLY -- THEY HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY ALABAMA STATE LAW. THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WHERE WE . >> UNCONDITIONAL USE. >> RIGHT. WHEN SOMEONE SUBMITS A PRELIMINARY PLAT, IF IT MEETS OUR STANDARDS FOR THE MOST PART, WE HAVE A THRESHOLD AT THE CITY, NUMBER OF COMMENTS, WE HAVE A LOT OF NOTATION A.M. COMMENTS, THAT'S ONE THING. IF WE HAVE SUBSTANTIAL CRITICAL COMMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THEN WE POSTPONE THEM, WE MIGHT DENY THEM OR KIND OF BEHIND THE SCENES, THERE'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WORK TOWARDS. A LOT OF TIMES, THE ISSUES ARE WORKABLE AND SHOULD BE PASSED THROUGH TO DRT FOR US TO IRON OUT A LOT OF THE NUANCE AND IS -- NUANCE AND IS DETAILS WITH THEM. >> ON THAT NOTE, DOES THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT MEET WITH CONDITIONS THAT YOU'VE PUT ON? >> YES. SO ONE OF THE THINGS -- THEY DID DSHT NUMBER OF COMMENTS THAT THEY HAD FROM THE INITIAL ONE, LAST MONTH WERE A LOT MORE THAN THIS MONTH. JUST THE THREE BIG ONES THAT WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WERE NON-NEGOTIABLE GOING INTO DRT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES TO CONFORM TO THOSE POSITIONS ON STAFF. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WANTED TO GO PACK AND FORTH ON DRT. >> THE SUBOUT, COLLECTIVELY AS A MUNICIPALITY WE MIGHT MAKE A CHANGE. >> WHEN I SAY MAKE A CHANGE, I THINK ON THE CONNECTIVITY. IT'S LOOKING AT THE BLOCK LENGTH. BLOCK LENGTH IS THE AMOUNT -- THE LENGTH OF CONTINUOUS HOUSES WITHOUT INTERRUPTION OR SIDE STREET. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. RIGHT NOW IT'S 1200 FEET. WE'RE LOOKING AT DIFFERENT WAYS TO ANALYZE CONNECTIVITY THROUGH CHANGING OUR BLOCK LENGTH BUT ALSO NODES AND OTHER THINGS. >> IT WOULD STILL BE LONGER. >> YES. STILL BE TOO LONG. >> OKAY. >> COMMISSIONERS. >> STILL LOTS TO FIGURE OUT BUT NOT ENOUGH TO HOLD IT UP FROM MOVING THEM FORWARD. >> THAT WOULD BE MY POSITION, YES. >> WELL THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE PP2025-004 WITH THE THREE CONDITIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. DO I NEED TO READ THEM ALL? >> IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T HURT TO READ THEM INTO THE RECORD. >> THE PRIMARY ROAD THROUGH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE A RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR WITH A RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH OF 60 FEET TO CREATE A CONTINUOUS CONNECTION BETWEEN MRS. JAMES ROAD AND WEST FARMVILLE ROAD. TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL STREET STUB-OUT TO THE WEST FROM THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. NUMBER THREE: A WATERMAIN EXTENSION CONNECTING MRS. JAMES ROAD WITH FARMVILLE IS REQUIRED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT PER THE WRM DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANUAL, THE PREFERRED LOCATION OF INSTALLATION IS WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> MAY I OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. THAT WE ALSO ELIMINATE ALL FLAG LOTS. >> SO DO YOU MEAN ALL WOULD BE -- THAT'S THE ONE ON THE TOP THAT TAKES ACCESS FROM FARMVILLE AND ALSO WHATEVER THE PROPOSED ROAD WOULD BE. THE OPEN SPACE LOT. OUR REGS ON FLAG LOTS ARE THAT YOU CAN HAVE IF IT'S LESS THAN 10 PERCENT OF YOUR DEVELOPMENT PRETTY MUCH, IS WHAT WE'VE CAPPED THEM AT. WE'VE GOTTEN HARD ABOUT ELIMINATING THEM. I'LL SAY ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE LOT, THEY MIGHT END UP DESIGNATING THAT ONE AN OUT LOT AND IT WOULDN'T BE SUBJECT TO THAT. BUT WE PROBABLY WILL MAKE THEM ERASE THE STEM. I'M NOT REALLY PUSHING BACK ON THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. I'M FINE WITH IT. I'M SAYING IF THE OPEN SPACE WERE TO STILL REMAIN AND STILL LOOK LIKE THAT, IT WOULD BE DESIGNATED AN OUTLOT. >> I HAVE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT DOES NOT HAVE A SECOND. >> I SECOND. >> MOTION SECOND ON THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ADDED TO APPROVAL FOR CASE PP-2025-044 WITH CONDITIONS, PLEASE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. NOW WE NEED TO VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS. [00:35:01] >> YOU APPROVED THE AMENDMENT SO IT'S THE ORIGINAL MOTION AS AMENDED BY THE AMENDMENT. >> AS AMENDED BY THE AMENDMENT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. [2. Conditional Use – The Boulevard Phase 9 – PUBLIC HEARING] OLD BUSINESS. NUMBER 2. >> THIS NEXT CASE IS A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 547 BRYANT CIRCLE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITIONAL PHASE OF THE BOULEVARD. THIS WILL ADD ARE -- THIS PHASE WILL ADD FOUR UNITS TO PHASE SIX SOUTH AND 34 UNITS TO PHASE 6 NORTH. THE ADDITIONAL UNITS TO FACE 6 SOUTH WILL BRING THE DENSITY TO 9.54 AND THE TOTAL DWELLING UNITS TO 23. 34 ADDITIONAL UNITS PROPOSED FOR PHASE 6 NORTH WILL BRING THE TOTAL UNIT COUNT TO 62 AND THE DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE TO 11.68. THE BOULEVARD IN ITS ENTIRETY WILL BE 193 TOTAL UNITS AND A DENSITY OF 10.76. WE DO HAVE ONE STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND THAT IS THE VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY ON BRYANT AVENUE. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I THINK THERE WERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC. I'LL POINT THOSE TO ENGINEERING. >> WHO WANTS THE RIGHT OF WAY ON BRYANT AVENUE? >> THE CITY. >> WHO OWNS THE RIGHT OF WAY? >> THE CITY. >> WE'RE WANTING THEM TO VACATE A CERTAIN PORTION OF IT TO MAINTAIN ACCESS TO SOME OF THE LOTS THAT ARE STILL THERE. >> THANK YOU. THERE WAS A COMMENT AT MONDAY'S MEETING ABOUT ADDING THEIR PORTION OF TRAFFIC TO DRT. >> THAT IS CORRECT. SO THERE WILL BE LIKELY A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR WHAT THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO THE TRAFFIC MITIGATION NEEDS TO BE. I THINK WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE COMMENT AND THEN WE'VE BEEN IN ACTIVE DIALOG WITH THE APPLICANT. >> WOULD YOU -- WOULD YOU EXPLAIN BECAUSE THIS WAS THE QUESTION ASKED ON THE LAST ONE, AND IT WASN'T ANSWERED, WOULD YOU EXPLAIN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHO DOES THAT, HOW IT'S APPROVED. >> YEAH. THERE'S MULTIPLE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. THERE ARE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. WE'RE TALKING INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THIS WOULD BE PAYING IN LIEU OF PERFORMING AGREEMENTS SO THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE FUNDS THAT THEY'LL BE ALLOCATED TO SHARE IN THE COST OF MAKING FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS. SOMETIMES WE CAN IDENTIFY THINGS THAT ARE NEEDED IN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EARLY ON. THIS ONE IS A CASE WHERE WE REALLY NEED TO GET THROUGH DRT, THROUGH THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND IN ORDER TO LOOK AT WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE GOING TO BE, WHAT THEIR CONTRIBUTION MAY BE. THE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER TO PERFORM THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. THE COUNCIL APPROVES THOSE. THAT'S FULLY IN THE COUNCIL'S COURT. HOPEFULLY THAT WAS SUFFICIENT INFORMATION AND NOT TOO MUCH. >> USUALLY ANY CITIZEN CAN SEE THAT IN THE CITY COUNCIL'S PACKET. >> IT'S ALWAYS IN THE PACKET. IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A COPY OF THAT, THEY CAN SUBMIT A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST BECAUSE IT IS A PUBLIC RECORD. >> THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING SO IF YOU'RE HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON CONDITIONAL USE OF BOULEVARD PHASE 9, PUBLIC HEARING'S OPEN NOW. >> GOOD EVENING. LEE THARPE, KADRE ENGINEERING. ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC, DIRECT THAT TO MICHAEL. I'M JUST KIDDING. WE'RE HAPPY TO HELP ANSWER ANY SPECIFICS Y'ALL HAVE AFTER THIS. I WANT TO THROW THAT OUT THERE. AND REINFORCE THAT JUST MENTIONED AN OPEN DIALOG WITH THE DEVELOPER FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEY'RE AWARE OF ALL THIS. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS SINCE LAST MONTH WHEN IT GOT TABLED. THEY'VE DONE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN PREVIOUS PHASES FOR THIS ONE AND THEY'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH IT AGAIN ON THIS ONE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, LET ME [00:40:04] KNOW. >> I HAVE A KWECHLT WE GOT TO QUIT RUNNING OFF. >> BEFORE YOU RUN AWAY. SO IF I RECALL, THERE IS A RESIDENT OR TWO ON THE PLATTED AREA -- RESIDENCE OR TWO. ARE THOSE EMPTY? IS THAT AN EMPTY HOUSE? >> YES AND NO. IT DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> I PROBABLY WOULD BE BETTER TO ANSWER THAT. THAT'S WHY -- ON THE CURRENT LAYOUT, IF YOU -- PRETTY MUCH WHAT'S HAPPENING -- IF YOU CAN GET BACK TO THE SITE PLAN. GO TO THE SITE PLAN. ALL RIGHT. SO TO POINT THIS OUT, THEY ARE ACQUIRING THE PIECES THAT YOU SEE WRAPPED WITH THE DARK GREY PIECES BUT WHAT IS HAPPENING IF YOU SEE ON THE LEFT OF THAT WHERE THAT'S AN ENCLAVE THAT'S BEEN MAINTAINED AS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, THAT IS SOMEONE'S HOUSE. TECHNICALLY THAT PERSON -- THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY OWN. SO THAT HOUSE, VACANT OR NOT, STILL NEEDS ACCESS TO PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THERE'S STILL MULTIPLE PARCELS IN THERE THAT NEED ACCESS TO PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THAT WAS ON THE EARLY ON THE FRONT END OF THIS THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS BECAUSE THAT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED BECAUSE THAT PERSON STILL NEEDS CITY SERVICES. THAT'S PART OF IT. THERE'S A VACATION. A LOT OF THE INTRICACIES TO THAT AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE DYNAMICS OF THAT PERSON AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT. BUT THE DEVELOPER IS CONFIDENT THAT THEY CAN ACQUIRE THAT, THAT THEY WILL ACQUIRE THAT IN THE FUTURE. THEY ARE JUST NOT ACQUIRING IT RIGHT NOW AND IT'S NOT A PIECE OF THIS PHASE. >> YOU'RE SPEAKING DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT. IT'S NOT Q & A. BUT YOU ARE THE ENGINEER ON THIS PROJECT, NOT THE ACTUAL APPLICANT. >> CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ENGINEER? OKAY. THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN IF ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? >> IF YOU COULD SWITCH BACK TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MAP. WE WERE ABLE TO QUANTIFY SINCE WE DID HOLD THIS UP FOR A MONTH, WHAT THE TRAFFIC WAS AND I DID WANT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN ANSWER OF WHAT STAFF CAME TO. >> CERTAINLY. WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT, WE HAD A LOOK AT IT FROM WHERE DID YOU START AND WHERE ARE YOU TRYING TO END? BECAUSE IF YOU COME IN INCREMENTALLY OVER TIME, IT'S REALLY HARD AND COMPLICATED TO LOOK AT. SO WE WANTED TO KEEP IT STUPID SIMPLE. WE STARTED BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT OCCURRED AND STARTED AND LOOKED AT IT AFTER WHAT PROPOSED WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. AND SO THAT PRE AND POST IS WHAT WE LOOKED AT AND WHAT WE IDENTIFIED IN THAT TRAFFIC STUDY WAS PRETTY UNIQUE IS BECAUSE WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT WE'VE MOVED PEOPLE FROM CERTAIN LOCATIONS ALONG THE NETWORK SYSTEM TYING INTO THE SITE INTO SUMMER HELEN GLEN. THAT'S WHERE WE SENT MOST OF THE PEOPLE. IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE FROM PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE AND THE TRAFFIC THAT IS ALREADY PRESENTLY THERE, THEY'RE TRYING TO FIND SOMEWHERE WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR A TURN MOVEMENT. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT TOMORROW MORNING. WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THAT ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THAT TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND THAT COMPONENT WAS ABOUT 29% INCREASE IN TRAFFIC ALONG THAT STREET. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS IN ON AND THAT MAY BE THE TALK OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT SCOTT ALLUDE TO. AT THOSE TRAFFICS STUDIES, DO WE LOOK AT WHAT IF TURNS OUT TO BE AN ULTIMATE NIGHTMARE WHAT THE CONTINGENCY PLAN IS OR YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU KNOW? >> IF YOU'RE PRESENTLY IN A LEVEL OF SERVICE AND IT SPEAKS TO IT IN OUR ENGINEER DESIGN MANUAL, THAT IS ALREADY BAD, IF YOU'VE INCREASED THE BAD TO EVEN WORSE, YOU'RE STILL RESPONSIBLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT WORSE INCREASE, BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN INCREASE, THEN THAT'S WHERE YOU HAVE TO SAY, HOW MUCH OF AN INCREASE DID YOU DO? WE BASE OURS OFF THE CAPACITY OF VEHICLES IN THAT TIMEFRAME. IT DOESN'T LOOK AT OTHER THINGS. IF IT'S LEVEL OF SERVICE E, WHICH IS REALLY BAD, IT'S STILL LEVEL OF SERVICE E. HOWEVER, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS HOW MUCH MORE DID YOU MAKE IT WORSE AND QUANTIFY? IT'S MUCH EASIER WHEN IT'S A BIGGER DEVELOPMENT WITH A HUNDRED LOTS THAT SAYS IT GOES FROM LEVEL OF SERVICE A TO C. WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT IN THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE E OR F, WE STILL HAVE TO QUANTIFY IT. THAT'S WHAT WE DID WITH THIS STUDY. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE [00:45:10] CU-2026-007, THE BOULEVARD PHASE 9 WITH THE ONE COMMENT -- ONE CONDITION OF VACATING THE RIGHT OF WAY ON BRYANT AVENUE. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. [CONSENT AGENDA] NOW, ONTO CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING, ONE, DO I NEED TO REMOVE ANY ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? FOR A RECUSAL FROM A COMMISSIONER? SEEING NONE, COULD NOT'S CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PACKET AND REGULAR MEETING, FINAL PLAT FOR MIMMS TRAIL 15-5, FINAL PLAT FOR WOODSON HILLS, WOODWARD OAKS PHASE 6, FINAL PLAT FOR CHEROKEE ROAD SKWIGS SUBDIVISION AND PHASE 1 >> MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. [8. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment – Consumable Hemp Products – PUBLIC HEARING] NEW BUSINESS. OKAY. YOUR FIRST ITEM UNDER NEW BUSINESS IS A ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT. IT IS A REQUEST FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS AND ARTICLE IV, GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THIS IS TO PROVIDE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CONSUMABLE HEMP PRODUCTS. DOES ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WOULD DO THREE THINGS. IT WOULD BEGIN THE INDIVIDUAL TYPES OF RETAILERS OF CONSUMABLE HEMP PRODUCTS, THOSE BEING A SPECIALTY RETAILER, A PHARMACY AND A RETAIL FOOD STORE AND THIS CAT 4-1, THIS CATEGORY WOULD BE ADDED TO TABLE 4-1 AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER THEM CONDITIONAL USES IN, UCC URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, SOUTH COLLEGE, ICD, THEY WOULD BE PERMITTED -- CONDITIONAL USES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER ONLY AND LDD. AND THE AMENDMENT WOULD ALSO CREATE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE RETAILERS MAINLY JUST THAT THEY WILL COMPLY WITH THE MUNICIPAL CODE AS WELL AS THE CODE OF ALABAMA AND ANY REGULATIONS OF THE ABC BOARD. >> THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK ON ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, CONSUMABLE HEMP PRODUCTS, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS. >> THIS WAS BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA CODE CHANGED. >> THAT'S CORRECT. SO THE CITY'S ALREADY UPDATED THE MUNI CODE BUT THERE IS NO PROVISIONS RIGHT NOW IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE SO WE'VE BEEN HANDLING ALL OF THESE AS ALL OTHER USES IN COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT AND SO WE JUST CREATED AN EXTRA LINE ITEM TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS WITH ITS OWN SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. >> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE ZT-2026-001. CONSUMABLE HEMP PRODUCTS ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? NEXT IS. [9. Annexation – Owens Family Remnant] >> ALL RIGHT. OWENS FAMILY REMNANT. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRES INTO THE CITY LIMITS. SO THIS IS TWO ACRE PARCEL THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. THIS IS HIGH PRIORITY TO ANNEX. IT IS IN BETWEEN THE FUTURE SCHOOL SITE. IT IS WEST OF THE FOUNDRY AND IT IS NORTH OF THE LONG SLIVER. SO HOW THIS HAPPENED, WHEN THE ORIGINAL ANNEXATION HAPPENED, IT WAS ANNEXED BY SECTION LINE THAT LET THIS PIECE OUT AND WHEN THOSE OTHER PIECES WERE SUBDIVIDED AND THOSE LOTS WERE CREATED, IT LEFT THIS PIECE OUT. SO THIS IS JUST A REMNANT PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS GOING TO BE A PART OF A GREATER DEVELOPMENT FURTHER ON OUR AGENDA. THIS IS TWO ACRES THAT KIND OF FITS INTO THE REST OF THE [00:50:01] PROJECT. SO IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> AS AN ANNEXATION, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? MOTIONS? >> TWO ACRES OR THREE ACRES? >> TWO ACRES. >> THERE'S THREE ACRES MENTIONED IN THE DOCUMENTS. THIRD PAGE. ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO APPROVE CASE AX-2026-009, OWENS FAMILY REMNANT. >> SECOND. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. [10. Rezoning – Shug Jordan Commercial – PUBLIC HEARING] >> SO THEN THE REZONING OF THIS PIECE FROM RURAL TO CDD SO PRETTY MUCH THE LAST ONE, THIS IS PART OF A LARGER DEVELOPMENT. ANNEXATIONS ARE NORMALLY ON CONSENT AGENDA UNLESS THEY HAVE ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THE ITEM ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ONE IS THIS REZONING SUBSEQUENT REZONING AND THE CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST AS WELL AND SO EVEN THOUGH THIS ONE, I GUESS, THE OLD SECTION LINES HAVE JUST KIND OF HOW DDH HAVE KIND OF INTENT OF IT IS THAT DDH WAS THE BUFFER BETWEEN CDD AND NC. SOUTH OF SHUG JORDAN PARKWAY. THAT IS HOW THAT STRIP OF DDH GOT IN THERE. THAT IS REZONING THE CDD, MAKING IT CDD ACROSS ALL OF THAT. IT'S MORE OF A DENSITY THING. THE TWO ACRES REALLY DOESN'T -- SINCE THEY'RE NOT DOING RESIDENTIAL ACROSS THE ENTIRE THING, IT DOESN'T IMPACT THE DENSITY A WHOLE LOT. THAT'S WHY IT'S REQUESTED CDD. IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SPECIFIC REZONING, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON IT. >> BECAUSE WE KNOW FARTHER DOWN THEY'RE GOING A PDD. >> YES. SO MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO APPROVE THE PDD, I WOULD NOT APPROVE THIS. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. THE REZONING FOR SHUG JORDAN COMMERCIAL DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME. >> LEE THARP, KADRE ENGINEERING. NOT THIS DRAG THIS OUT. AGAIN, I THINK JUST DID A GREAT JOB OF EXPLAINING WHY WE'RE GOING TO CDD OR GOING TO GO TO CDD. IF YOU GOT ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. PLEASE LET ME NE. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS. >> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE RZ-2026-002. COMMERCIAL CDD. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THIS IS THE FUN STUFF. SO THIS IS -- THERE'S A LARGER [11. Rezoning – Shug Jordan Commercial PDD – PUBLIC HEARING] ITEM ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PIECE. SO I THINK THESE NEXT TWO HAVE A LOT MORE OF THE NUANCES TO IT. THESE ARE THE REZONING THAT APPLY THE PDD OVERLAY TO 59.2 ACRES AT SHUG AND NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE. SO THE BULK OF THE PROPERTY IS CDD AND A STRIP OF DDH AND THE ISLAND THAT YOU RECOMMENDED THE APPROVAL FOR THE REZONING. IF YOU CAN GO TO THE SITE PLAN HERE. THERE'S A LOT GOING ON. THERE'S REALLY JUST THREE COMPONENTS TO THIS. WE CAN BREAK IT DOWN. THERE IS THE LARGE SHOPPING CENTER, GROCERY STORE, THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE FOOTPRINT TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THERE IS THE CENTRAL PARK AREA IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THERE'S AGE RESTRICTED HOUSING TO THE FAR EAST OF THE PROPERTY. SO LIKE THE STAFF REPORT MENTIONS, FROM A SQUARE FOOTAGE STANDPOINT, A HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FEET TO 499,999 SQUARE FEET IS THE COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER DESIGNATION IN OUR ZONING DISTRICT SO IN CDD THIS IS A USE THAT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT. THE REASON THAT THEY ARE OPTING FOR THE PDD IS THAT THE ACREAGE UNDER THE DIRT OF THE AGE RESTRICTED HOUSING WOULD NOT GIVE THEM THE DENSITY TO REALIZE 200 UNITS. SO THEY ARE OPTING TO GO THE PDD ACROSS THE OVERLAY TO SPREAD THE DENSITY SO THEY CAN ALLOCATE IT TO THOSE 200 UNITS. THE DENSITY FOR THAT NEGLIGIBLE. THE DENSITY IN CDD THAT IS ALLOWED IS NINE AND A HALF. I THINK THIS IS -- IT'S NOT NINE AND A HALF. IT'S 3.4. [00:55:01] IT'S PRET LOW. THE MAIN POINT OF THE PDD ALLOWS US TO HAVE CONTROL OVER THE USES ACROSS THE BOARD. AND SO THEY REQUESTED A LIT NORTLITNY OF USES. IT ALLOWS THEM TO ALLOCATE THE DENSITY. THEY ARE TAKING THE DENSITY OF ALL THE ACREAGE WHICH WOULD BE ROUGHLY ABOUT 400 UNITS, USING ONLY ROUGHLY ABOUT HALF OF THAT AND ALLOCATING THIS TO THE AGE RESTRICTED HOUSING ON THE FAR EAST SIDE. SO THEN FROM THE COMMERCIAL STANDPOINT, THERE IS THE KRUEGER THAT'S ABOUT 99,000 FEET, THE TWO BUILDINGS THAT ARE THERE SHOWING IN THE PARKING LOT, THAT THAT HE INTEND TO BUILD IMMEDIATELY AND THEN THERE ARE THE PADS ASSOCIATED IN THE PARK. THOSE ARE PADS, NOT REALLY ANY BUILDINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE. THERE ARE THE ROUGHLY TWELVE OUTLOTS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE. SOME OF THEM LOOK THEY DO NOT HAVE FRONTAGE BUT SINCE THESE ARE COMMERCIAL LOTS, THEY WILL BE PRIVATE STREETS INCORPORATED AND SUBDIVIDE OFF OF PRIVATE STREETS. THOSE ARE THE BIG THREE COMPONENTS. THERE'S ALSO THE MAJOR STREET SOO THE DEVELOPMENTS ACTUALLY A BENEFICIARY OF THE DEVELOPMENTS AROUND IT ARE NOT ON THE HOOK FOR THE MAJOR STREET GOING THROUGH IT. THEY'RE JUST DEVELOPING EVERYTHING SOUTH OF THAT. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE THE COMMERCIAL, THE GAS STATION AND THEN THE PARK AREA AND THEN THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE AGE RESTRICTED HOUSING TO THE FAR EAST. HAVE YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, I CAN GET TO THE CONDITIONS THERE. >> I GUESS IT'S TIME TO ASK. I'VE GOT ONE QUESTION ABOUT YOUR ROW FARMS BOULEVARD. IS IT GOING TO -- IS THE DEVELOPER PAVING THIS ALL WAIT TO THE PROPERTY LINE IN OTHER WORDS TO THE CREEK? >> THIS DEVELOPER, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUTSIDE OF THIS. SO THIS IS OF THE SCHOOLS DEVELOPMENT AND THE FOUNDRY. THEY'RE THE BENEFICIARIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT GOING ON AROUND THEM. THEY DON'T REALLY -- THEY'VE TAKEN ACCESS BUT NOT REALLY. >> IS THAT GOING TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE -- ACCESS THING FOR CONSTRUCTION. IS THAT A WAY TO GET IN THERE? >> I'M PRETTY SURE IT WILL BE. I THINK THIS DEVELOPMENT'S A BENEFICIARY OF A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT GOING ON AROUND IT. EVEN THOUGH THE MAJOR STREET GOES THROUGH, THE ACTUAL LINE THAT'S BEING CONSTRUCTED, THEY'RE NOT REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR. I'LL GET TO THE CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. SO THERE WERE FIVE CONDITIONS AND I GUESS ONE OF THEM SPEAKS TO THE USES, BUT THE NUMBER ONE CONDITION WAS THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME STAYS, SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. WE REALLY WANT THIS TO BE A HARD CORNER FOR COMMERCIAL. IN THE STAFF REPORT IT TALKS ABOUT A FUTURE LAND BEING GATEWAY COMMERCIAL AND MASTER PLAN MIX USE MEDIUM INTENSITY SO THE POINT OF THAT WAS HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIALLY FOCUSED HARD CORNER TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THIS NODE TO PROVIDE AMENITIES AND RESOURCES FOR THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AS WE ALL KNOW, I THINK THE MOST EXPLOSIVE GROWTH WE'VE HAD IN AUBURN HAS BEEN THIS NORTHWEST CORNER ALONG DONOHUE, COLLEGE AND RICHLAND ROAD. THIS WOULD BE A HARD CORNER FOR A LOT OF THOSE RESIDENTS TO THEN COME HERE TO DO GROCERY SHOPPING ET CETERA AND DIFFERENT USES THAT GET DEVELOPED HERE. THEN SITE CONDITION TWO, SIDEWALK CONNECTIVITY TO ALLOW PEDESTRIANS A SEPARATED PATH TO THE FRONT DOOR OF KROGER FROM NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE. THERE ARE SEVERAL INTERSECTIONS JUST ALONG NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE. WE REALIZED FOR THOSE WHO TRAVEL IN THIS AREA, NORTH DONOHUE CURRENTLY FOR PEOPLE GETTING TO THE WAL-MART, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WALK THERE, BUT THERE IS NO CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE EXISTING WAL-MART AND THEN THE COMMERCIAL THAT'S ALSO ALONG SHUG ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT AND THERE'S ALSO NOT A LOT OF SIDEWALK CONNECTIVITY FOR THOSE PEOPLE CROSSING SHUG TO GO TO THE GAS STATION. AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES UP THERE, I THINK WE TALK ABOUT IT INTERNALLY, THERE'S A LOT OF MORE PEOPLE WHO WALK AND BIKE THAT. INSIDE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT PEOPLE WHO DO CHOOSE TO WALK CAN GET FROM NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE TO KROGER SAFELY IN AN EXCLUSIVE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, LET THE DEVELOPER KNOW WHAT WE WANTED. THIRD CONDITION, INTERNAL NORTH-SOUTH STREET THAT CONNECTS YARBROUGH FARMS BOULEVARD AND SHUG JORDAN PARKWAY MUST BE A PUBLIC ROAD. THAT'S THE ONE THAT GOES IN BETWEEN THE PARK AND THE KROGER. SO THAT IS THE ROAD THAT MUST BE PUBLIC. THEN THERE'S THE NORTH-SOUTH GREENWAY ON THE FAR EASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY. SO IT IS ON OUR GREENWAYS AND [01:00:01] GREEN SPACE MASTER PLAN THAT ENDS UP CONNECTING THIS GREENWAY ACROSS THE STREET TO HICKORY DICKRY PARK. YOU GUYS CAN SEE IT IN THE FLOODWAY, FLOOD PLAIN OVER THERE. THAT PORTION NEEDS TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY TO EVENTUALLY MAKE A CONNECTION TO HICKORY DICKORY PARK. THERE'S A UTILITY CONDITION, A MINIMUM TWELVE-INCH TRANSMISSION WATERMAIN CONNECTING SHUG JORDAN AND YARBROUGH FARMS BOULEVARD IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS TO PROVIDE REDUNDANCY AND FIRE PROTECTION TO THE DEVELOPMENT. DESIGN DETAILS WILL BE DETERMINED. AND THEN A 6-1 OVER THE PDD IS TO CONDITION THAT THE MULTI-FAMILY IS AGE RESTRICTED TO 55 PLUS. IT'S MENTION IN THE STAFF REPORT, MENTION IN THE WRITE-UP. THAT DOES NEED TO BE A CONDITION. IT IS CONTROLLING OVER THE MUD THAT IS A PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. SO THERE'S SIX CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT USES, USES ARE THE CONDITIONAL USE, THERE'S A LOT THERE. >> SO THE ONE QUESTION THAT I HAVE -- DO WE HAVE TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING FIRST? >> THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING REQUEST SHUG JORDAN COMMERCIAL PDD. IF ANYONE WOULD HIKE TO COME FORWARD. YOU SHOULD SIT CLOSER. >> I CHOSE POORLY TONIGHT. LEE THARP, KADRE ENGINEERING FOR THE APPLICANT. EXCITING. I WANTED TO POINT OUT AGAIN MENTIONED A LOT OF CONDITIONS, THE STAFF COMMENTS. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE FOR A WHILE. SO WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT'S IN THERE. NO REAL ISSUES THAT STILL -- FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE FROM A USE STANDPOINT THAT WE FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH WITH THEM OUTSIDE OF WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. I KNOW THERE WERE SOME SCHEDULE QUESTIONS. THE INTENT -- THIS IS GOING TO BE A LONG BUILD JOB. I KNOW Y'ALL DEALT WITH SOME THAT HAVE ON THE FOUNDRY PDD TO THE EAST. THE INTENT WOULD BE FOR EVERYBODY'S KNOWLEDGE, THE KROGER IS THE ANCHOR. THAT'S WHAT'S SHOWN EXPLICITLY ON THE SITE PLAN. THE INTENT THERE IS FOR THAT TO OPEN AT HIGH SCHOOL OPENING OR IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER. AND THEN THE OUT PARCELS WHICH BY THE WAY ARE -- THEY'RE PRETTY LARGE WITH RESPECT TO OUTPARCELS. USUALLY AN ACRE IS KIND OF MAXIMUM FOR WHAT YOU GOT. WE GOT A BUNCH THERE, AN ACRE AND A HALF. THERE'S A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY THERE FOR WHAT THOSE USES MIGHT BE IN THE FUTURE. WHICH I THINK IS COOL. SO THOSE WILL BUILD OUT OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS AS THEY SELL AND GET TENANTS FROM HERE. THIS IS GOING TO BE -- OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE A VERY HIGH PROFILE CORNER. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THEY WILL BE ATTRACTIVE FOR PEOPLE TO WANT TO GO THERE. SIMILAR TIMEFRAME, IT MAY DRAG A LITTLE BIT ON THE 55 PLUS HOUSING TO THE EAST. SCHEDULE WISE, ALL THAT'S GOING TO TIME OUT WELL. THE ROAD WIDENING WILL BE DONE AT THAT POINT AS WELL ON NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE. JUSTICE MENTIONED A BUNCH OF CONNECTIVITY CONCERNS WITH PEDESTRIANS AND BIKES. WE GOT A MULTI-USE PATH AND SIDEWALK WITH CROSSWALKS ALL OVER THE PLACE. IT'S GOING TO PROVIDE REALLY GOOD CONNECTIVITY TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF THE NORTH. I KNEW I WAS GOING TO GET UP HERE AND FORGET SOMETHING. I KNOW YOU GUYS WILL PROBABLY HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. THERE'S SOME MORE USE STUFF. I KNOW ON THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. BUT EVERYTHING THAT JUSTICE LAID OUT, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH. TO THIS POINT. OTHER THAN THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. I MAY SIT A LITTLE CLOSER THIS TIME. >> I JUST WANT TO ASK ONE THING. THIS PUBLIC ROAD THAT CONNECTS BETWEEN YARBROUGH AND SHUG, HAVE YOU ALREADY PRESENTED THAT -- THAT'S LDOT? >> WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO THEM. MICHAEL'S BEEN TALKING TO THEM AS WELL ON SOME OF THAT. THEY'RE AWARE OF THE REQUEST FOR THE ACCESS POINT. WE'VE ACTUALLY GOT PRETTY GOOD SPACING FROM THE EXISTING INTERSECTION SO WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH GETTING THAT ACCESS POINT. AND ESPECIALLY WITH IT BEING A FUTURE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE ISSUES WITH IT. >> THANK YOU. [01:05:01] >> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? >> IT'S A GREAT PROJECT. THE QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED. >> OKAY. WELL >> I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE RZ-2026-002 SHUG JORDAN COMMERCIAL PDD. >> SECOND. >> WITH CONDITIONS. >> WITH THE SIX CONDITIONS THAT WERE STATED. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE CASE RZ-2026-002 SHUG JORDAN COMMERCIAL PDD WITH CONDITIONS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. [12. Conditional Use – Shug Jordan Commercial – PUBLIC HEARING] >> ALL RIGHT. THIS ONE IS LONG. THE SHUG JORDAN COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTS. THIS IS CONDITIONAL USE FOR COMMERCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT USES, ROAD SERVICE USES AND OTHERS. THE STAFF REPORT, IT'S HALF THE PAGE. IF WE WANT TO GO TO THE SITE PLAN. ALL RIGHT. SO LIKELY MENTIONED THERE ARE MULTIPLE LARGE OUTPARCELS HERE. THE INTENT IS THAT THIS BECOME A COMMERCIAL NODE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE AREA. THAT IS WHY THEY ARE GOING A USE. KIND OF WITH CDD, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE LIKE TO PAIR A LOT OF THOSE BACK, LOOK AT THE INTENSITY OF THINGS. WE WOULD LIKE THOSE TO STILL BE CONDITIONAL AND REVIEWED ON THE THEIR OWN. ARE THERE ANY CONDITIONS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THOSE THEN WE WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO REVIEW THEM AND COUNCIL TO SEE THEM. THAT IS WHY THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PAIRING BACK. I WILL SPARE US WHAT THEY HAVE REQUESTED BUT I WILL READ WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDED USES ARE. SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDED USES ARE THE BANKS, BANK DRIVE-THROUGH, BARBERSHOP, BEAUTY SHOP, BOOK, HOBBY STORE, BREW PUB, BUILDING MATERIAL, DRY CLEANERS, ELECTRONICS REPAIR, FLORIST, GARDEN SUPPLY, GENERAL MERCHANDISE STORE, GROCERY STORES, HARDWARE STORES, HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE STORES, OFFICE SUPPLIES, STATIONERY, GIFT STORES, PET SUPPLY STORE, PROFESSIONAL STUDIOS, RESTAURANTS, SPECIALTY FOOD STORES, VETERINARY OFFICE, INDOOR KENNEL. I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT DISTINCTION. INDOOR KENNEL. ATMS, CONVENIENCE STORES, SMALL GROCERY LESS THAN 3,000 SQUARE FEET WITH NO FUEL. FAST FOOD RESTAURANT, MOBILE VENDOR FOOD COURT, MEDICAL OFFICE, GASOLINE SERVICE STATION, PRIVATE LIBRARIES, MUSEUMS, BILLIARDS, BOWLING ALLEYS, GYMNASIUM, INDOOR ATHLETIC FALSE, SKATING RINK, PARK AND A MULTIPLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THOSE ARE THE STAFF RECOMMENDED USES LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE REASON FOR THAT -- I THINK ONE OF THE MAIN USES THAT WE GET A LOT OF PUSHBACK ON WILL BE DRIVE-THROUGHS. NORMALLY AT CENTERS LIKE THIS, THESE THINGS MAY SHARE A PROPERTY LINE ARE BE IN IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF RESIDENCES. THAT IS NOT THE CASE HERE. THE RESIDENCES ARE ACROSS THE STREET AND THEY'RE ACROSS NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE. ALSO THERE IS A TACO BELL OVER THERE. THAT'S A GUTHRIES AND ALSO A LOUNGE THAT IS ALSO OVER THERE AS WELL WITH MARCO'S THAT HAS A DRIVE THROUGH AND I THINK THAT GAS STATION'S 24/7. THIS IS A HIGH INTENSITY INTERSECTION. IN THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, THIS LOCATION WAS IDENTIFIED FOR THE GATEWAY COMMERCIAL AND SO EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, WHAT WE WANTED TO SEE FROM A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IS THIS LEVEL OF FOCUS ON COMMERCIAL, THIS HIGH INTENSITY, THIS IS PERFECT FOR IT FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT, YOU GOT TWO MAJOR ARTERIALS WITH NORTH DONOHUE DRIVE, SHUG JORDAN PARKWAY AND A COLLECTOR GOING THROUGH IT WITH THE FARMS BOULEVARD. BEING BOUNDED BY THREE MAJOR ROADS TO CARRY ALL THAT TRAFFIC AND BEING AT THIS INTERSECTION ALONG MAJOR POINTS ON THE GREENWAY TRAIL IN CONNECTIVITY TO THE FOUNDRY TO THE EAST WHERE THERE'S MANY UNITS. THAT'S WHY THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY WAS SUCH A MAJOR POINT AND EMPHASIS FOR STAFF TO JUST KIND OF MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE WALKING ALONG THIS PEDESTRIAN SHED WOULD BE ABLE TO GET TO THESE AREAS PRETTY EASILY. FROM A USAGE STANDPOINT, I THINK THE MAIN THING IS WHEN WE EXAMINE THE USES THAT PEOPLE ASKED FOR, IT'S THINKING THROUGH FROM A PERMITTED USES AREA WHAT THE AMENITIES ARE NEEDED AND ALSO WHAT THEIR INTENSITY LEVEL ARE. NORMALLY WE WOULD HAVE A LOT OF SCRUTINY ON THE DRIVE-THROUGH. WITH NO RESIDENCES IN THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF THESE AND ALSO WITH THE EXISTING ONES, WE DIDN'T FEEL IT WAS SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE PULLED OUT. SOME OF THE OTHER ONES LIKE THE NO OUTDOOR DISPLAY, THAT'S A PRIMARY FOCUS ON THIS CORNER. [01:10:02] ALSO SECTION 429, THE CLADDING AND MATERIAL STANDARD WILL APPLY TO THIS. SO THAT WILL ALSO BE A PART OF THIS. ALSO WE DIDN'T MENTION ON THE PDD BUT THERE WILL BE A MASSIVE LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT IS REQUIRED AND THEN ALSO THE OUTPARCELS WILL MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS AS THEY NEED. THIS WILL HAVE A LOT OF GREENERY LIKE IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE MASTER PLAN. IT'S FROM THE USES STANDPOINT, THE INTENT IS FOR THIS TO BE A MAJOR COMMERCIAL NODE AND TO BE AN AMENITY AND RESOURCE TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY TO THIS. >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. YOU KEPT MUDS BUT MY QUESTION WAS, DOES IT NEED TO ADD AGE RESTRICTED? >> NO. SINCE THAT'S A CONDITION OVER THE TOP ONE, THIS IS A BINDING DOCUMENT. THEY CAN'T COME BACK AND ASK FOR, WELL, WE ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO ADD ANOTHER 200 UNITS. NO. THEY HAVE 200 AGE RESTRICTED UNITS IS WHAT THEY HAVE AND THAT'S THE CONDITION THAT'S OVER THE PDD. >> THAT BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION THEN FOR ME. WHEN IT COMES TO THE USES. NOW, I COMMEND YOU FOR CALLING DOWN THE LIST OF USES. I THINK THAT WAS A GREAT JOB. HOWEVER, APPROVING THIS, HOW DOES IT GO ALONG WITH THE PDD? I'M ASKING BECAUSE LET'S SAY IN FIVE YEARS, THE APPLICANT COMES BACK AND SAID, I WANT A HOTEL ON THAT CORNER. IS THAT JUST BECOME A CONDITIONAL USE THAT WE ADDRESS? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THIS DOESN'T IS NOT IRONCLAD LIKE A PDD? >> GOOD QUESTION. THE STAFF RECOMMENDED USES, THESE ARE THE USES THAT WILL BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT. SO THIS IS THE CURRENT TIME TO EXAMINE THEM. IF YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH ANY OF THESE USES, I WOULD RECOMMEND -- >> ANYTHING ELSE THAT WOULD COME BACK WOULD BE ANOTHER CONDITIONAL USE? >> EVERYTHING UNDER PDD IS CONDITIONAL. SOME OF THE HIGHER INTENSITY USES THAT WE THINK NEED TO BE EXAMINED AS STAND ALONE USES, THEY WILL BE AND THEY'LL HAVE TO FIRE A CONDITIONAL USE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. IT WOULD BE -- FOR SOME OF THEM, IT WOULD BE A NO AT A STAFF LEVEL LIKE THE NUMBER OF UNITS ON AN MUD. OTHERS, YOU NEED TO FILE A CONDITIONAL USE. >> THANK YOU. >> THERE WAS A BIT OF REDUNN TENANCY -- REDUNDANCY WITH THE CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ONE. JUST ONCE AGAIN, JUST THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND HOME STAYS AND RESIDENTIALS ARE EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. INTERNAL NORTH-SOUTH STREET THAT CONNECTS YARBROUGH FARMS BOULEVARD AND SHUG JORDAN PARKWAY MUST BE A PUBLIC ROAD. A NORTH-SOUTH GREENWAY ON THE FAR EASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY. THE TRANSMISSION LINE AND AGE RESTRICTED, THOSE WERE HANDLED ON THE OTHER ONE. >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR STAFF. FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING. WOULD YOU REITERATE WHAT YOU TOLD US IN PACKET MEETING ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS TO NORTH DONOHUE. >> YES, MA'AM. SO THERE IS A CAPITAL PROJECT THAT'S PLANNED HERE AND SO AT THE INTERSECTION OF SHUG AND DONOHUE, THERE IS A PROTECTED INTERSECTION. SOME PEOPLE REFER TO IT AS A DUTCH STYLE INTERSECTION BUT IT'S PRIMARILY USED FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLISTS TO CROSS. IT TAKES THEM OUT OF THE TRAVEL LANE INTO THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT LANE. IT HELPS WITH SOME OF THE TIMING ALONG WITH THOSE CORRIDORS. THE WIDENING WOULD CONTINUE ALL THE WAY NORTH TO THE CREEK PER THAT ONE PHASE. AND DURING THIS TIME, WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR AND THEY'RE AT DIFFERENT TIMEFRAMES, BUT MORE THAN LIKELY THEY WILL HAVE TO COME IN AS A PERMIT AND APPLY THEIR CHANGES, WHATEVER WE APPROVE AT THAT POINT IN TIME IS PART OF THAT PROJECT. WE'RE STILL PROCEEDING FORWARD WITH OUR PROJECT FOR CAPACITY STANDPOINT AND INTERSECTION CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS. FOR MULTI-MODAL. >> WHAT'S THE TIMING ON THAT? >> SO I'VE TOLD EVERYBODY OUR TIMEFRAME IS TO GET TO COUNCIL NEXT MONTH FOR THE START. STILL LOOKING LIKE WE'RE ON THAT SCHEDULE. THIS SUMMER, WE'RE STARTING THAT CAPITAL PROJECT. >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONERS? MORE MOTIONS? >> MOVE TO APPROVE CU-2026-008. >> WITH CONDITIONS. >> WITH CONDITIONS. >> YOU HAVE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I DID. I THOUGHT I DID. THERE WAS A LOT. [01:15:06] >> THERE WAS A LOT OF TALKING. >> AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAL USES SHUG JORDAN COMMERCIAL. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. >> NO ONE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. YOU GOT OUT OF THAT ONE. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, I'M SORRY. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. WE HAVE A MOTION. >> SO MOVE APPROVE KC U-2026-008 WITH CONDITIONS. >> SECOND. >> TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? >> THIS NEXT ITEM IS A [13. Conditional Use – Bent Creek Office – PUBLIC HEARING] CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR COMMERCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT USE, OFFICE USE AND COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USE. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2272 BENT CREEK ROAD IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 3.39 ACRES AND IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY AS GATEWAY COMMERCIAL. THIS PROJECT WAS INITIALLY GIVEN APPROVAL IN 2023. THAT APPROVAL THEN EXPIRED IN 2025. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH FOUR BUILDINGS TOTALING 29,000 SQUARE FEET. THE TWO BUILDINGS ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE SINGLE STOREY OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE. THE TWO BUILDINGS TO THE NORTH WILL BE A RESTAURANT AND TWO-STOREY OFFICE BUILDING. THERE WILL BE A TEMPORARY YARD FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THE FIRST THREE BUILDINGS. THAT LAY-DOWN YARD WILL BE SCREENED. I THINK I SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT ON THE SCREENING MATERIAL. I MADE A COMMENT ON WHAT TYPE OF SCREEN TO USE AND WE'VE COME UP WITH USING A WIND SCREEN AND JUST AN OPEN ACHE WIND SCREEN, NOT NECESSARILY WITH THE SLATS THAT I MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT. THERE IS ONE STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITION FOR APPROVAL AND THAT IS A PLAT AT THE SOUTHERN MOST DRIVEWAY TO ALLOW FOR FUTURE SHARED ACCESS. THIS IS IN THE AIRPORT HIGH NOTIFICATION ZONE AND NOISE IMPACT ZONE. ALL OF THAT WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF AT THE DRT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS CONDITIONAL USE DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME FOR BENT CREEK OFFICE. >> I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANYONE ELSE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? MOVE TO APPROVE CASE CU-2026-01. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 3 ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? [14. Conditional Use – INFAC North America Project – PUBLIC HEARING] GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. THIS NEXT REQUEST IS FROM INFAC NORTH AMERICA. APPLICANT IS GOING CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR AN INDUSTRIAL USE WHICH WILL BE AUTOMATICIVE MANUFACTURING. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2250 RILEY STREET AND IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL. YOU CAN SEE BY THE MAP THIS PROPERTY HAS DIRECT ACCESS OFF OF RILEY STREET. IF YOU CAN RECALL ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO WE APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. THAT IS THE SAME AREA. HERE'S THE FUTURE LAND USE. IT IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS A SITE PLAN RIGHT HERE. THESE TWO "X"S ARE FROM AN OLDER PLAN, SO THEY'RE KIND OF CROSSING OUT JUST TWO DIFFERENT BUILDINGS, THOSE DO NOT CURRENTLY EXIST. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT HERE IS JUST THIS HIGHLIGHTED RED EXISTING BUILDING WITH ALL THE PARKING THAT'S ALSO INTACT. THIS USE IS PROPOSING TO ALREADY EXIST WITHIN THE 158 SQUARE FOOT EXISTING BUILDING. NO NEW ADDITIONS OR STUFF WILL BE NEED TO BE ADDED. WE DID LOOK AT PARKING. WE DID LOOK AT HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ON SHIFT. THAT HAS ALL BEEN FIGURED OUT. THIS IS AN ADAPTIVE REUSING OF THE CURRENT BUILDING. WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. THIS DOES ALSO A CONDITIONAL USE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. [01:20:01] COMMISSIONERS? >> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE CU-2026-011. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? >> WELCOME BACK. >> THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA [15. Waiver – D&K Taylor Subdivision – PUBLIC HEARING] IS A WAIVER REQUEST FROM DAVID TAYLOR. THE APPLICANT IS GOING A WAIVER TO ALLOW A SUBDIVISION OF LAND INTO LOTS CONTAINING LESS THAN THREE ACRES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 7755 LEE ROAD. XHOR COMMONLY KNOWN AS PEAR TREE ROAD. I CAN SHOW YOU THE MAP. THIS IS VERY FAR NORTH OF AUBURN, ALMOST THE 280. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THESE TWO PARCELS ARE NOT ANNEXED OR ZONED. BUT THEY ARE WITHIN THE BOUNDARY AS WELL AS THE PLANNING JURISDICTION. THE DISCUSSION AROUND THIS IS THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT PARCELS OF LAND IS IT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO MOVE THIS CURRENT LOT LINE WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW OVER TO WHERE IT IS NOW GOING TO BE IN GREEN. THAT'S THE PROPOSAL. IT IS GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF LOTTAGE AWAY FROM THE OTHER AND SHIFT. THAT HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND AS A REMINDER, WE DO REQUIRE THAT LOTS WITHIN -- IF IT'S ANNEXED, IT'S REQUIRED TO BE THREE ACRES. WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS A WAIVER REQUEST. >> WAIVER REQUEST. PRETTY MUCH AN ADMIN PLAN CAME IN. WE SEE A NUMBER OF THOSE EVERY MONTH. I HAVEN'T SIGNED IT YET BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MEET THE THREE ACRE LOT MINIMUM. IT NEEDS A WAIVER FROM YOU ALL. MY REASONING FOR THAT, YOU ALL WERE HERE WHEN THE -- WHAT WAS IT, THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION WITH THE LOT MINIMUMS UP ON HEATH ROAD CAME THROUGH. JUST INCREDIBLY HOSTILE. I THINK THOSE PEOPLE ARE VERY INVESTED IN THE LOT MINIMUM STAND THREE ACRES UP IN THAT AREA. AND FOR ME, I THINK THE DIFFERENCE ON THIS ONE, AND I THINK WHY STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE GENERALLY OF THIS, THESE HOUSES ARE EXISTING. THEY'RE ALREADY THERE. THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO ANNEX OR REDEVELOP. THIS IS SOMEONE TRYING TO GET THEIR AFFAIRS IN ORDER, TRYING TO CLEAN UP LOT LINES PRETTY MUCH. >> THEY HAVE THE SHED THAT'S ENCROACHING. >> AMONGST OTHER THINGS, YES. >> OKAY. >> IN BOTH OF THESE ARE LESS THAN THREE ACRES FOR SURE. >> THIS WAIVER DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING? >> YES. >> THIS WAIVER REQUEST REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING FOR D AND K TAYLOR SUBDIVISION IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK TO THIS. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED? [CHAIRMAN’S COMMUNICATION] THANK YOU. NOW, ANY COMMUNICATION? >> I THINK WE GO BACK TO THE OFFICE CU-2026-009. I THINK THERE IS A CONDITION ON THAT ONE. YOU WERE CORRECT, JENNIFER. I THINK WE NEED -- >> RIGHT AGAIN. >> SO THERE WAS A CONDITION JUST KIND OF PAGED THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT ON IT. PLATTED CROSS EASEMENT SHOULD BE PROVIDED AT THE SOUTHERN MOST DRIVEWAY TO ALLOW FOR FUTURE SHARED ACCESS. >> WE NEED TO GO BACK AND REDO IT? >> YES. THAT'S IT. >> THE PROPOSAL NEEDS TO FIRST BE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. IF THAT MOTION PASSES, THEN YOU WOULD BE FREE TO MAKE A NEW MOTION. >> MOTION TO RECONSIDER. >> I SECOND THAT. >> RIGHT. 2026-009. >> MOTION TO RECONSIDER ANNEXATION OF OWENS FAMILY REMNANT. >> NO. NO. >> MOTION TO REWE HAVE THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER ON THE TABLE. [01:25:01] YOU NEED TO VOTE ON THAT. SO THEN YOU DON'T NEED TO TAKE A VOTE TO RECONSIDER. >> ALL IN FAVOR OF MOTION TO RECONSIDER? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CU-2026-009 WITH CONDITIONS. >> THAT WILL WORK. >> SECOND. >> SECOND TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THERE WE GO. THOSE ARE MY ONLY NOTES. >> ANY OTHER COMMUNICATIONS? [STAFF COMMUNICATION] >> NO. I DO NOT THINK SO. LIKE I SAID, I THINK WE'LL BE IN TOUCH JUST KIND OF ABOUT THE INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS' MEETINGS FOR THE ZONING REWRITE. THAT IS IT. THAT IS IT. >> I NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN, PLEASE. >> MOVE TO ADJOURN. >> SECOND. >> THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.