Jul 09, 2026 Planning Commission

[ROLL CALL]

[00:00:06]

>> GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE JULY 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.

>> HERE. >> HERE.

>> HERE. >> HERE.

>> HERE. >> HERE.

>> HERE. >> THANK YOU.

BEFORE WE START, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS OF THE PUBLIC MEETING OF THE AUBURN PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE COMMISSION WILL BE PRESENTED WITH ITEMS BY THE STAFF REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE AGENDA ITEM WILL THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS AND/OR ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. I WILL THEN OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING 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 I ASK THAT YOU KEEP YOUR TIME TO 5 MINUTES AND YOUR COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE CASE AT HAND.

AFTER EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED AND A REPRESENTATIVE AND/OR STAFF WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP DURING THE PUBLIC MEETING. THE COMMISSION WILL VOTE BASED ON STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2030 AND IN THE GENERAL GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY.

I WOULD LIKE TO SUMMARIZE THE ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY RELATED TO APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION PLANS BY THE ALABAMA STATUTE, MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION SUCH AS OURS IS THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION PLATS.

THE COMMISSION ACTS AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY AND IS BOUND BY STATE LAWS, ORDINANCES AND ZONING REGULATIONS.

OUR GOAL IS TO CONFIRM THAT THE PLAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS CITY REGULATIONS. IF YOU WILL, PLEASE ALSO SIGN IN AFTER YOU HAVE SPOKEN OR BEFORE, FINALLY I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A POINT OF YOUR ATTENDANCE TO NOTE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, EXCEPT IN CASES OF SUBDIVISION PLATS. THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN CITIZENS INVESTIGATION.

THIS IS SOMEWHERE YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ANYTHING THAT IS NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. SO SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL MOVE

TO OLD BUSINESS. >> BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I DID JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO SOMETHING JUST WHILE WE HAVE A ROOM FULL AND SOMETHING WE'LL DO OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MEETINGS, WE'VE GOT SOME ISSUES WITH SCAMMERS -- THERE'S NOT A BETTER WORD FOR IT, PEOPLE KIND OF GOING THROUGH, PULLING A LOT OF THINGS FROM THE STAFF REPORT, PACKETS AND REACHING OUT TO PRIVATE CITIZENS, APPLICANTS AND DEVELOPERS REQUESTING PAYMENT.

WE HAD IT THIS WEEK AND SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE PAST MONTHS, INSTEAD I THINK WE'LL EVENTUALLY WORK TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE WEBSITE AS A BIT OF A DISCLAIMER ABOUT COMMUNICATING HOW WE DO RECEIVE PAYMENTS ON THINGS. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, WE DO NOT EMAIL ANYBODY FOR WIRE TRANSFERS, WE DO NOT COME UP WITH BOGUS FEES AND TRY TO GET YOU GUYS TO PAY EXTRA.

LIKE I SAID, WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS AND PEOPLE REACH OUT TO US FOR CLARIFYING AND ASKING US IN GOOD FAITH, I'M TRYING TO MAKE THIS PAYMENT. THOSE ARE PHISHING ATTEMPTS, DO NOT DO THAT, WE DO NOT WANT YOU GUYS TO FALL VICTIM TO THAT.

BUT I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT WE DO NOT SOLICIT PAYMENT THROUGH EMAIL AND WE DO NOT SOLICIT PAYMENT THROUGH WIRE TRANSFER OR ANY OF THOSE THINGS. WE HAVE THE OFFICIAL PORTAL AND ALL OF OUR APPLICANTS ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT.

IT IS VERY DETAILED, THEY'VE COPIED LOGOS, THEY'VE COPIED A LOT OF THE THINGS WITH A LOT OF ACCURATE INFORMATION.

BUT PLEASE CHECK THOSE AND VERIFY AND IF YOU DO GET AN EMAIL LIKE THAT, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL A STAFF MEMBER WHO YOU ARE FAMILIAR WORKING WITH AND TALK TO SOMEBODY OR VERIFY THAT IT IS A LEGITIMATE EMAIL I WANTED TO SAY THAT, I WILL SAY THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE THIS HAS BECOME MORE FREQUENT. WE WILL EVENTUALLY PUT SOMETHING ON THE WEBSITE WITH A DISCLAIMER LETTING PEOPLE KNOW AND CLARIFYING ABOUT HOW WE ACTUALLY GET PAYMENT.

[1. Conditional Use – Celebration Event Center – PUBLIC HEARING]

THAT IS IT. >> OLD BUSINESS.

>> FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE CONDITION ENTERTAINMENT USE OF THE EVENT CENTER LOCATED AT 1000 MAIN STREET IN THE MIDTOWN MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENT. THIS WAS POSTPONED IN THE LAST MEETING, AND THEY ARE LOOKING INTO THE BUILDING TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE ADEQUATE FACILITIES THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN RESOLVED.

I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM.

>> YES. I THINK IT CAME UP IN PACKET MEETING, THE TYPES OF EVENTS AT THIS EVENT CENTER AND THE TIMES

OF OPERATION. >> I DON'T THINK I HAVE THE TIMES, BUT I BELIEVE THAT BUSINESSES, SHOWERS, THOSE SORTS OF EVENTS. SMALLER EVENTS.

[00:05:03]

>> ALSO THEY CAN SPEAK TO WHAT THE AMBITIONS WOULD BE ON WHAT THEY WANT TO DO FOR THE FACILITY.

>> MY QUESTION WAS DO THEY HAVE AN OUTSIDE AREA OR IS THIS JUST

CONTAINED INTO THIS? >> IT IS JUST CONTAINED WITHIN

THE BUILDING. >> GREAT.

OKAY. THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF YOU HAVE ANYONE YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE DO. THE CELEBRATIONS EVENT CENTER.

SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COMMISSIONERS? >> WE NEED THE APPLICANTS TO

COME ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS. >> IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

REPRESENTATIVE? >> THEY SHOWED UP AT THE LAST ONE, DIDN'T THEY? I GUESS THEY ARE NOT HERE

TONIGHT. >> I GUESS WE WON'T GET THAT ANSWERED, WILL WE? WEATHER OUTSIDE OR JUST INSIDE.

>> I THINK THAT IS AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.

>> THE QUESTION FOR ME WAS, ARE THE EVENTS BOUNDED BY TYPE? BECAUSE SECTION 512 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE HAS A LOT OF

USES AND TIMES. >> SO I GUESS IF YOU ALL WANTED TO ADDRESS IT THROUGH CONDITIONS AND SET THOSE PERIMETERS LIKE THEY HAD TO BE DONE BY NINE, I THINK IF YOU FOLLOWED THE TATTOO PARLOR, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID DO, IT HAD TO BE CLOSED AT 9:30 AND THEN WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION INTERNALLY ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE AND HOW IT WAS ENFORCED. BUT YOU GUYS ARE FREE TO KIND OF SET CONDITIONS ON IF IT CAN BE OUTSIDE AND ALSO IT SHOWS THAT INSIDE, THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN COMMUNICATED TO US, THEY'RE HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR THEMSELVES OR EXPLAIN WHAT THEIR INTENT IS WITH THE FACILITY. THIS IS WHY PEOPLE SHOULD COME

TO THEIR PUBLIC HEARINGS. >> I WOULD FEEL A LOT BETTER HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT VERSUS JUST PUTTING THE

CONDITIONS ON. >> CONDITIONS ARE NEXT DOOR

CACTUS THAT HAVE A TIME? >> I DON'T THINK IT DOES.

SO NOT ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY SAID, SINCE WE HAVE HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION.

AND Y'ALL COULD POSTPONE IT AGAIN BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION WITHIN 35 DAYS, PRETTY MUCH.

THAT'D BE IN THE NEXT MEETING AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE VOTED UP OR DOWN AND MOVED TO COUNTY COUNCIL.

>> IT'S NOT LIKE IT WAS 50 ACRES.

>> SO I WAS JUST SAYING, THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS.

WE CAN POSTPONE IT AGAIN BUT YOU WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO MAKE A DECISION AT THE NEXT ONE. IF YOU HAVE ANY CONDITIONS YOU WOULD LIKE TO PLACE ON IT, YOU CAN.

BUT I THINK THE UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THERE WERE CONCERNS THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE ACCOMPANIED WITH CONDITIONS.

OR THEY WOULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH CONDITIONS.

>> THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN ANY INDICATION OF THE TYPES OF

EVENTS EVEN? >> LIKE I SAID, I THINK WHAT REED WAS TALKING ABOUT, SHOWERS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

PEOPLE WANT CLARITY, I GUESS NEIGHBORS WANT CLARITY ON OUTDOOR EVENTS, THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED I GUESS THEY HAVE ENOUGH TO PROVIDE SPECIFIC ANSWERS TO.

>> VOTING ON THIS, UNLESS WE HAVE SOME SORT OF CONDITION SET OR WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, WE ARE JUST GUESSING RIGHT NOW.

>> I THINK THAT IS FAIR. >> THEN I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST MEETING. >> AUGUST 13TH.

>> ON AUGUST 13TH FOR THIS CASE. >> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[CONSENT AGENDA]

OF MEETING REGULAR FROM JUNE. >> MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT

AGENDA. >> SECOND.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND ALL IN FAVOR?

[3. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment – Travel Center/Truck Stop – PUBLIC HEARING]

NEW BUSINESS. >> WE HAVE A GOOD BIT OF STUFF TO SAY ON THIS ONE. I'LL WRITE, THIS IS A REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF AUBURN TO AMEND ARTICLE TWO, WHICH IS

[00:10:03]

AND ARTICLE FOUR, GENERAL REGULATIONS, TABLE 4-1, SECTION 406.03, MISUSES AND SECTION 408.02, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND TABLE 4.3, STANDARDS FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES BY DISTRICT. AND ARTICLE FIVE, USE REGULATIONS, SECTION 513.2 POINT A, MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND SECTION 513, MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL USES IN THE CITY OF AUBURN ZONING ORDINANCE.

THIS ZONING AMENDMENT IS FOR TRAVEL CENTERS AND TRUCK STOPS.

THE FUNCTION OF THIS ZONING AMENDMENT IS PRIMARILY DESIGNED TO, NUMBER 1, CREATE DEFINITIONS FOR HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS, EXTENDED PARKING, TRAVEL CENTERS AND TRUCK STOPS.

NUMBER 2, ALLOW TRAVEL CENTER AND TRUCK STOP USES CONDITIONALLY WITHIN THE INTERSTATE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OR THE ICD. NUMBER 3, ESTABLISHED SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TRAVEL CENTERS AND TRUCK STOPS, SPECIFICALLY. NUMBER 4, CREATE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THOSE TRAVEL CENTERS AND TRUCK STOPS.

AND NUMBER 5, ESTABLISH MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR ROAD SERVICE USES AND OTHER TRUCK STOPS.

TRAVEL CENTERS WILL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE SHOWER STATIONS AND EXTENDED PARKING AND THE TRUCK STOP USES WILL NOT, THAT IS THE BIG DISTINCTION RIGHT HERE. BY OPTING TO ALLOW THESE NEW USES THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE IN THE ICD, THIS ALLOWS STAFF, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO REVIEW IN EACH CASE ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. THERE HAS BEEN A GREAT DEAL OF RESEARCH THAT HAS GONE INTO THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.

STAFF HAS LOOKED AT DIFFERENT TRAVEL CENTERS AND HAS ALSO TRAVELED TO THEM. SPECIFICALLY ONES SUCH AS LOVE'S, KWIK TRIP AND THE PILOT TRAVEL CENTER.

ALL TO DOCUMENT VARIOUS THINGS SUCH AS PARKING, GAS PUMPS, TRUCK PARKING AS WELL, SHOWERS AND DIFFERENT AMENITIES.

AND INPUT FROM NUMEROUS DEPARTMENTS AROUND VARIOUS MEETINGS HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AND THE ZONING AMENDMENT HAS BEEN REFLECTIVE OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED.

THERE IS AN AMENDMENT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED AS A TEXT AMENDMENT THAT I CAN TALK ABOUT AS WELL.

SPECIFICALLY TO THE EXTENDED PARKING DEFINITION THAT ADDS A FEW WORDS AND ALSO REMOVES ONE SECTION AT THE END THAT PROHIBITS ALL EXTENDED PARKING EXCEPT IN THE ICD.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE MORE.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE OPEN THE FLOOR? ALL RIGHT, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE TRUCK STOP. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK TO THIS AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE DO SO.

SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COMMISSIONERS? >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE TRUCK STOPS. TRAVEL CENTERS THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, CARS, TRUCKS, CORRECT? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BOTH? WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT TRACTOR TRAILERS WHEN I SAY TRUCKS, I'M SORRY.

>> YOU MEAN LIKE HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS, 18-WHEELERS? REFERRING TO BOTH, THOSE ARE BOTH ALLOWED WITHIN TRUCK

CENTERS AND TRUCK STOPS. >> AND THEN TRUCK STOP, WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT 18-WHEELERS, ARE WE?

>> PRIMARILY, YES. THERE WOULD BE SPOTS FOR GETTING GAS BUT BOTH CARS AND TRUCKS ALLOW BOTH.

BUT YOU WILL HAVE EXTENDED PARKING AS WELL AS SHOWER

FACILITIES AND TRAVEL CENTERS. >> TRAVEL FACILITIES BUT NOT TRUCK STOPS? SO THERE IS NO OVERNIGHT PARKING

AT TRUCK STOPS? >> NO, MA'AM.

THOSE ARE PRIMARILY JUST FOR FUELING UP.

BUT YOU CAN STILL HAVE A CONVENIENCE STORE, PER SE.

>> IS THERE OVERNIGHT PARKING AT TRAVEL CENTERS?

>> YES, EXTENDED PARKING. >> FOR TRACTOR TRAILERS?

>> FOR HEAVY DUTY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, YES.

>> THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAD.

>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IS FOOD SERVICE ALLOWED IN TRUCK STOPS? OR IS IT JUST TRAVEL CENTERS?

>> I THINK THE DIFFERENTIATION IS CONVENIENCE STORE VERSUS

[00:15:01]

TRUCK STOPS. >> OKAY.

>> DID YOU ASK YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING? I HAD TALKED TO MR. GRIFFITH BEFORE SO I HAVE THAT TAKEN CARE OF. SO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER -- COMMISSIONERS, ANYTHING ELSE? MORE MOTIONS?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ALL IN FAVOR?

>> WO. IT NEEDS TO BE AMENDED.

THAT IS THE THING THAT -- YEAH. >> MOTION AS AMENDED?

>> SO I GUESS WHAT I HAD YOU GUYS FOR THE AMENDED DEFINITION FOR EXTENDED PARKING, SO WITH THE AMENDED DEFINITION OF EXTENDED PARKING, THAT IS WITH THE RED TEXT THAT YOU GUYS HAVE AND ALSO THAT REMOVES THE EXTENDED PARKING IN THE DISTRICT EXCEPT FOR INTERSTATE AND COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

>> LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN. >> IT IS PROHIBITED IN EVERY

ZONING EXCEPT INTERSTATE? >> THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.

THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING. THE AMENDMENT NEEDS TO BE WITH THE RED TEXT AND THE REMOVAL OF JUST THE LAST SENTENCE IN THE DEFINITION. ESSENTIALLY JUST THE AMENDED DEFINITION OF EXTENDED PARKING, THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDED DEFINITION OF EXTENDED PARKING.

>> THEN I HAVE GOT A QUESTION. IF EXTENDED PARKING IS PROHIBITED -- NEVER MIND. I READ IT AGAIN.

NEVER MIND. OKAY.

WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> IF YOU COULD -- YOU HAVE TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM, MOTION TO APPROVE THAT RECONSIDER AND THEN YOU HAVE THE MOTION TO APPROVE -- APPROVE THE AMENDMENT AND THEN APPROVE THE MOTION AGAIN. SO FIRST, MOTION TO RECONSIDER.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER CT2026.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

LET'S RECONSIDER. >> SO THEN -- YOU NEED TO MAKE THE MOTION TO SUPPORT THE ITEM -- TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS OF THE EXTENDED PARKING DEFINITION. SO THAT IS THE RED TEXT AND THEN REMOVING THE EXTENDED PARKING IS PROHIBITED IN THE DISTRICT EXCEPT FOR COMMERCIAL. SO IF YOU CAN READ -- PLEASE READ THAT DEFINITION AND THEN SAY IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO AMEND IT AND THEN YOU CAN AMEND AND MAKE THE MOTION.

>> I MAKE THE MOTION. TO AMEND IT, EXTENDED PARKING SO THAT ANY OCCUPIED VEHICLE, PERSONAL OR COMMERCIAL OR ANY HEAVY DUTY TRUCK EITHER OCCUPIED OR NOT, THAT IS PARKED FOR A DURATION OF TIME OF 12 HOURS OR OVERNIGHT THAT IS BEYOND WHAT IS

CONSIDERED ADEQUATE PARKING. >> SECOND.

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

>> NOW A MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED?

THERE WE GO. >> MOTION TO APPROVE THE

AMENDMENT AS AMENDED? >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR?

ANY OPPOSED? >> THANK YOU.

>> WE'VE GOT TO WRITE A CHEAT SHEET DOWN FOR THESE...

[4. Preliminary Plat – Heritage Ridge – PUBLIC HEARING]

IT'S A PRETTY GOOD CASE STUDY. >> SO THE NEXT ITEM IS A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THE OPEN SPACE LOTS LOCATED IN THE TERMINUS IN THE RD ZONING DISTRICT, THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 76 ACRES AND WITHIN THE TUSCANY VILLAGE PD D..

THE SMALLEST RESIDENTIAL LOT IS 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND THE LARGEST IS 28,000 SQUARE FEET, THE MAXIMUM IS EIGHT DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE WHICH REQUIRES 15% OF THE SPACE.

THIS PHASE HAS DWELLING UNITS AND 70% OPEN SPACE WHICH EXCEEDS THE REQUIREMENT. WE DID RECEIVE RESPONDENTS ABOUT THIS. I CAN READ THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WERE ASKED AND THEN ANSWER THEM IF YOU WANT TO.

>> I WOULD JUST GO OVER THE DETAILS AND I GUESS YOU JUST

[00:20:01]

WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT. >> THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WIDTHS AND SIZES AND THE AVERAGE IN COMPARISON TO THE ADJOINING SUBDIVISION ON HERITAGE RIDGE LANE.

WHICH I THINK IS THE ASHTON LAKES SUBDIVISION.

THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE FOR THIS NEW SUBDIVISION IS APPROXIMATELY 12,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN THE LOT WIDTH SITS ON A CURVE OR ON THE CORNER, THE AVERAGE IS IN THE MID-TO-UPPER 70S. SO 75-80-FOOT LOT WIDTHS.

IN COMPARISON TO THE LOTS ON HERE, THESE ARE SMALLER, BUT IT IS ALSO NOT A PART OF HERITAGE RIDGE LANE, I THINK THAT IS WHERE SOME OF THE CONFUSION CAME IN.

MOVING FORWARD IT WILL NOT BE NAMED HERITAGE RIDGE.

IT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE CALLED THAT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSES.

THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THE TUSCANY VILLAGE PD IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LOTS WITHIN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE WON'T BE A BUFFER BUT THERE IS A 70-FOOT -- APPROXIMATELY 70-FOOT WIDE OPEN SPACE LOT THAT SEPARATES THESE TWO, PLUS THE ADDITIONAL SETBACKS OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT AND THE HOUSES THAT WILL BE BUILT.

THE REAR SETBACK FOR THOSE HOUSES WILL BE 20 FEET.

STORMWATER ANALYSIS AND TRAFFIC WILL ALL BE DISCUSSED BUT IF ENGINEERING WANTED TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, THEY CAN. HOW CLOSE WILL HOMES BE BUILT TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND ALSO WILL FENCES BE PERMITTED FOR MOST LOTS ON HERITAGE RIDGE LANE? LIKE I MENTIONED, THERE IS A 70-FOOT WIDE OPEN SPACE LOT, LOTS NINE AND TEN, WHICH ARE RIGHT HERE, DO DIRECTLY ABUT THOSE TWO LOTS WITHIN ASHTON LAKES, THAT ONE LOT THAT IS NEXT TO TEN IS AN OPEN SPACE LOT FOR ASHTON LAKE AND THEN LOT NINE IS UP TO A LOT WITH A HOUSE THAT IS SET 100 FEET FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE.

WE WILL NOT REQUIRE FENCES BUT I'M SURE THERE WILL BE ALLOWED TO BE BUILT AND THE DEVELOPER CAN TALK ON THAT.

HOW MANY EXISTING TREES WILL BE PRESERVED AND THE CONSTRUCTION IMPACT, I WILL LET THE DEVELOPER ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS THAT THE CITIZEN HAD. BUT I CAN ANSWER ANY OF Y'ALL'S

QUESTIONS. >> THERE WAS A QUESTION YOU ANSWERED, AN ACCESS EASEMENT TO OPEN SPACE TO BE REQUIRED, IS

THAT -- >> YES.

FOR THAT PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION, THERE IS NO ACCESS EASEMENT -- THE OPEN SPACE HAS TO BE USABLE AND AN ACCESS EASEMENT.

>> THAT IS A DRT SORT OF THING? >> IT IS A COMMENT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED AND WOULD BE DONE DURING THE PROCESS OF.

>> THERE IS A CONNECTION TO ASHTON LAKES, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. >> AND THAT IS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY

REASONS? >> THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HERITAGE RIDGE, WHICH WILL BE RENAMED.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD NOW, PLEASE DO SO.

AND PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO SIGN IN.

>> MY NAME IS MATT, I WAS HERE FOR THIS PLAT APPROVAL ABOUT A YEAR OR TWO AGO. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WHILE THIS MEETING MAY BE A MERE FORMALITY, WE ALL KNOW THE ISSUES REGARDING THIS PLAT AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE BALD EAGLE'S NEST ON THIS PLAT. SO MY QUESTION IS, IF THAT BALD EAGLE'S NEST WERE STILL THERE, WOULD THIS PLAT, AS SHOWN HERE, BE APPROVED? I DON'T THINK SO.

THAT IS MY QUESTION. >> AT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT A Q AND A BUT WE CAN ADDRESS THAT AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING IS

CLOSED. >> OKAY.

BY APPROVING THIS PLAT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, YOU WOULD BE REWARDING THE PAST BAD BEHAVIOR OF ALL OF THE PARTIES WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AT BEST, YOU WOULD BE IGNORING THE PAST BAD BEHAVIOR WITHOUT OPPOSING PENALTIES. I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE DENYING APPROVAL FOR THIS PLAT AND, IN EFFECT, BEGIN TO REBUILD PUBLIC TRUST FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

[00:25:04]

I CONTEND THOSE NOTES SHOULD ALSO APPLY TO LOT TEN, THAT IMPOSES -- THAT IS OVERLAPPING WETLANDS.

AND EVEN POSSIBLY, LOT 11, DEPENDING ON THE BOUNDARIES OF THE UPDATED WETLANDS STUDY. MY SECOND QUESTION IS, WHO WILL BE ENSURING THE WETLAND BOUNDARIES WILL BE ADHERED TO? HOPEFULLY NOT THE SAME PEOPLE THAT APPROVED THE EAGLE'S NEST DESTRUCTION. AND FINALLY, I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THERE IS A POLLING LOCATION FOR THE AUGUST 25TH, 2026 LOCAL ELECTIONS NEXT TO ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY. IF THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT IS APPROVED, AS IS, I ENCOURAGE ALL CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY TO VOTE AGAINST ANY INCUMBENT SEEKING AN ADDITIONAL TERM FOR CITY SEATS. THANK YOU.

>> WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD ON THIS AGENDA I ITEM? SEEING NO ONE -- SORRY.

>> I'M BRENDAN MEADOWS AND I LIVE IN ASHTON PARK --

>> YOUR ADDRESS? >> 1822 NORTH ASH.

IF YOU HAVE THAT FIRST DIAGRAM, I'LL SHOW YOU RIGHT WHERE MY LOT IS. YOU SEE THAT NC 20? I'M RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE THERE. MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THE RUNOFF? BECAUSE THEY CAN CLEAR EVERYTHING LIKE THEY ALWAYS DO, IT'S GOING TO RUN RIGHT DOWN INTO THE SIDE THERE. IT RUNS RIGHT BY THE GOLF COURSE RIGHT THERE AND THEY HAVE ALL BEEN FLOODED OVER THERE.

WE HAVE BEEN FLOODED. WHEN IT FLOODS, IT GOES UP IN THOSE WOODS 30 YARDS. WE'VE SEEN IT.

AND MY QUESTION IS WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT.

HOW THEY ARE GOING TO KEEP IT OUT.

BECAUSE ALL IT DOES IS BRING MORE SIT SIFT AND SAND IN THERE THAT'S ALREADY THIS DEEP AND IT JUST PILES UP.

THAT IS MY QUESTION. >> GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS ALAN MEYER AND I AM ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AS MR. MEADOWS, MY ADDRESS IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, 1920, NORTH ASH COURT. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE ANSWERS TO ANY OF MY QUESTIONS TODAY SINCE THIS IS NOT A Q AND A. BUT I DO HAVE FIVE QUESTIONS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GO OVER. MY FIRST QUESTION, WHICH I DO BELIEVE DESERVES AN ANSWER IS IS THE DEVELOPER HERE TODAY?

>> WE WILL FIND OUT AFTER YOUR PUBLIC HEARING IS COMMENCED.

>> THANK YOU. THE REASON I ASK THAT IS BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD THAT THE DEVELOPER COULD ANSWER SEVERAL OR WOULD ANSWER SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT ISSUES SUCH AS PLANS FOR TREES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT I'M NOT SURE I'M GOING TO HEAR THAT TODAY OR WHEN I'M GOING TO HEAR THAT.

BUT MY OTHER QUESTIONS ARE WHICH FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAP WAS USED FOR THIS PLANNING. THE LAST TIME I CHECKED, THERE WAS AN EXISTING FLOODPLAIN MAP AND A FLOODPLAIN MAP.

AND THE DIFFERENCE IN THE TWO FLOODPLAIN MAPS IS CONSIDERABLE.

AND SO IF YOU PLAN THIS OR ACCEPT THIS PLAN BASED ON THE EXISTING FLOODPLAIN MAP, THEN SEVERAL OF THESE RESIDENTS MAY BE AT RISK OF FLOODING. MY NEXT QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH PLANS FOR THE FLOODPLAIN, WHETHER IT WOULD BE CLEAR CUT, WHETHER VEGETATION WOULD REMAIN. I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON THIS BUT I DO KNOW THAT CLEAR CUTTING OR CUTTING BACK ON THE FLOODPLAIN WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT DOWNSTREAM, WHICH AFFECTS NOT ONLY OTHER COMMUNITIES BUT ALSO COMMUNITIES -- NEIGHBORHOODS

[00:30:05]

HERE. >> THANK YOU.

>> IF YOU HAVE THOSE, YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY ASK THEM.

>> YOU MEAN THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> YES.

>> DO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO GO ON THE RECORD,

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO SAY THEM. >> NO I DO NOT.

>> WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD ABOUT THE AGENDA ITEM AT HAND? GOOD EVENING.

I'M HOPE SCARBOROUGH, I LIVE IN TIVOLI, THE NEIGHBORHOOD --

>> YOUR ADDRESS? >> 2227.

>> WELCOME. >> I'M SO SHORT! MY FIRST QUESTION IS, HOW WILL THE RESIDENTS OF THIS PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD ENTER? WILL THEY ENTER OFF OF OUR MAIN STREET GOING IN? SI HAVE BEEN THERE LIKE 15 YEARS, TUSCANY? THE MAIN ENTRANCE OFF HIGHWAY NORTH COLLEGE. HOW WOULD THEY ENTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD? AND MY SECOND QUESTION IS, OUR POOL IS PRETTY MUCH AT FULL CAPACITY SO WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE POOL. THAT'S IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS ADAM GREER, I FIGURED THESE QUESTIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO HAVE ON RECORD.

I'M AT 141 GRAZIA LANE. MY LOT DOES NOT BACK UP, JUST A REALLY SIMILAR QUESTION FROM ASHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOODS, JUST SIMILAR QUESTIONS ABOUT MY NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET BACK UP TO THIS PROPERTY, THE CONSTRUCTION IS NOWHERE NEAR THIS, THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT WHEN A FLOOD HAPPENS ALREADY.

SO JUST EVEN THOUGH IT'S RELATIVELY FAR AWAY, JUST GIVE US AN INSIGHT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHERE THE BUILDING IS GOING TO BE, IT'S ALL UPHILL.

SO AGAIN, JUST THINKING ABOUT FLOODING IN THOSE TYPES OF THINGS AND QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT THERE SINCE IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

JUST THE FLOODING ON THE OTHER SIDE, MAYBE IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT IMAGE, IT'S WHERE THE SEWER LINES -- WHERE THAT IS.

BASICALLY ANYTHING BETWEEN THAT AND THE WAY, THE HOMES, THERE'S DEFINITELY A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FLOODING THAT HAPPENS ON A REGULAR. THAT'S ALL I GOT, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR THE PUBLIC

HEARING? >> HELLO, I'M BERNIE.

JUST A FEW QUESTIONS. I WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE VIDEO FROM THE PREVIOUS REQUEST IN JUNE OF 24.

AND MY FIRST QUESTION WAS WERE THE ANSWER IS PRESENT IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, WERE THOSE EVER ANSWERED? BECAUSE I KNOW THE HOA WAS A CONCERN, THE POOL NOT BEING BIG ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE ADDITIONAL 48 ISLANDS.

SO ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS, THOSE ANSWERED, WHO WAS THE BUILDER OF THE HOMES? MAYBE WE CAN FIND THAT OUT FROM THE DEVELOPER. WHAT WILL BE THE SIZE AND THE PRICE RANGE OF THE HOMES? AND WHEN WILL CONSTRUCTION BEGIN IF THIS IS APPROVED? AND ALSO, I THINK ONE OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE PREVIOUS HEARING WAS HOW -- AS FAR AS ENTRANCES GO, I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS NOT A CONSTRUCTION THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO COME OFF OF NORTH COLLEGE.

SO WITH CONSTRUCTION -- CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES B THROUGH

[00:35:04]

HOW DOES AN ENTRANCE GOING THROUGH ASHTON LAKES, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT SAFETY? THE REASON I ASK IS I HAVE LIVED IN SUBDIVISIONS WITH ONE ENTRANCE, THERE IS A SAFETY FACTOR IN THAT. SO ONE OF THE REASONS WE CHOSE IS BECAUSE OF THE ONE ENTRANCE AND THE SAFETY FACTOR OF ONLY BEING ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT ONE WAY.

BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN INSTANCES WHERE THAT PROVIDES A SAFETY

FACTOR. >> THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE? THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL

OPEN. >> YOU CAN ONLY SPEAK ONCE.

SO IF THERE IS ANOTHER ITEM YOU WERE FREE TO SPEAK, SINCE YOU ALREADY SPOKE AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING, YOU CANNOT SPEAK AGAIN.

>> CAN I ASK SOMEONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON MY BEHALF?

>> THAT'S FINE, YEAH. >> IS ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL SAY THAT THE HOA QUESTION, THE POOL QUESTION, THE STYLE TYPE BUILDER PRICE, NONE OF THAT IS WITHIN OUR PURVIEW THIS EVENING.

SO THAT WILL BE A QUESTION FOR SOMEONE ELSE OR CALL THE BUILDER OR APPLICANT AT HAND. I THINK MAYBE ENGINEERING CAN

ADDRESS RUNOFF AND STORMWATER? >> I WAS GOING TO SAY, WE CAN PROBABLY START WITH I GUESS THE QUESTIONS THAT STAFF CAN ANSWER.

THEN WE CAN SHIFT TO ASK THE DEVELOPER QUESTIONS THAT THEY WANT. SO WHICHEVER YOU'D LIKE TO START

WITH. >> LET'S TALK ABOUT WETLANDS AND SPRING BUFFERS FIRST. THAT WILL BE HANDLED BY OUR WATERSHED DIVISION, WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AS PART OF ANY STANDARD DEVELOPMENT PRACTICE, WE REQUIRED THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE WHAT LAND DELINEATIONS THAT IDENTIFY ANY WETLANDS ON SITE AS WELL AS ANY STREAMS, WE EVALUATE THOSE THROUGH THE WATERSHED BASIS AND ESTABLISHED STREAM BUFFERS, ALL OF THAT IS OUTLINED IN OUR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANUAL.

ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS IN TOWN HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE RULES SET FORTH WITHIN THAT MANUAL. IT ALSO INCLUDES THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL, THERE'S QUESTIONS ABOUT RUNOFF AND THE CREEK. ALL OF THAT IS HANDLED THROUGH OUR DIVISION, WE MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPER SILT FENCING, MAKE SURE THOSE THINGS ARE PUT IN PLACE.

>> FLOODING ON OTHER PROPERTY. >> THE FLOODING PORTION OF IT, WHEN IT COMES TO EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL, WE DO HAVE A SMALL ROLE IN THAT, BUT THE OVERALL FLOODING WOULD FALL

UNDER MICHAEL'S PURVIEW. >> AND THE MAPS USED ARE THE

MOST RECENT CITY STANDARD? >> THAT IS A FLOODPLAIN QUESTION

AND MICHAEL CAN ANSWER THAT. >> YES, MA'AM.

THERE'S AN ACCEPTED FLOODPLAIN MAP THAT IS ACCEPTED AS A STUDY ZONE. ANY CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IS PRESENTED DURING THE PROCESS WOULD HAVE TO PROPOSE ANY CHANGES AND SUBMIT THAT TO OUR OFFICE IN ORDER TO ACCEPT IT. SO IF IT DOESN'T MEET THOSE CONDITIONS ANY CONDITION THAT IS PREVALENT LIKE LOTS ONE IN 48 AS MENTIONED, THOSE HOMES WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE, THAT IS HOW WE VERIFY THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY NOT IN THE FLOODPLAIN STRUCTURE AND NOT SUBJECT TO FLOODING AT THAT TIME. SO THEY HAVE TO COMPLY.

IF WE FIND DURING DEVELOPMENT THAT THIS MAP IS NOT CORRECT, THEY HAVE TO CORRECT THAT. THERE IS NO FREE PASS WITH THAT.

>> JUST TO MAKE SURE I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID, SO THERE WAS AN ISSUE BETWEEN THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN MAPS AND AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, -- WHICH ONE IS CURRENT?

>> THAT IS THE CURRENT MAP. THIS ONE THAT IS PRESENTED RIGHT

HERE. >> WHAT ABOUT THE PROPOSED ONE?

>> THIS PROPOSED ONE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT TO CHANGE IT IF THEY WANTED TO CHANGE IT.

BUT I DON'T SEE A SUBMISSION TO CHANGE IT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

>> THE DEVELOPER WOULD SUBMIT IT.

>> I DO WANT TO PROVIDE SOME CLARITY.

SO THIS LAST SUBMISSION HAPPENED BEFORE MICHAEL CAME ON.

SO THAT WAS WHEN THERE WAS SOME PEOPLE SHIFTING MAPS FROM 2011 TO THE UPDATED 2025. SO AT THAT TIME, EVERYBODY WAS MADE AWARE THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A CHANGE IN THE MAPS AND PEOPLE WERE TRYING TO GET SUBMISSIONS IN UNDER THE OLD MAPS. BUT THEN WHEN THEY WERE SUBMITTING THEY WERE BEING TOLD HEY, THERE'S A MAP ADJUSTMENT, THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR.

SO THAT IS WHAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT.

[00:40:01]

THERE'S NO DISCREPANCY IN MAPS, THERE IS ONE FLOODPLAIN MAP THAT WE HAVE AND THEN THE PROCESS THAT MICHAEL IS REFERENCING IS ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES PEOPLE CAN CONTEST AND SAY HEY, I THINK THERE WAS AN ERROR HERE AND THERE WAS A PROCESS TO PROVE THAT YOU CAN ON INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES.

I THINK MICHAEL WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT.

>> JUST IN FRONT OF THE ITEM WE HAVE HERE, IF THEY WERE TO SUBMIT TO TRY TO MODIFY ANY CONDITION OR MAP REVISION?

>> AGAIN, I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THIS.

IS IT EXISTING OR THE PROPOSED MAP THAT WE ARE USING IS GOING TO BE IN THOSE TERMS, THE PROPOSED MAP?

>> THAT IS THE EXISTING MAP TODAY.

>> THAT IS THE MAP. >> YES.

>> THAT LEADS ME TO ASK THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED ABOUT

PREVIOUS APPROVED PLAT IN WIN. >> THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN 2024 AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PEOPLE PUT ON NOTICE THAT THE MAPS WERE

CHANGING. >> AND THE REASON THEY ARE BACK

TODAY IS BECAUSE? >> THE PLAT EXPIRED.

SO EVERYONE IN THE AUDIENCE, WE HAVE AN 18 MONTH CYCLE FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS THAT THEY ARE HONORED ON, THAT YOU MOVE FORWARD AND CONSTRUCT UNDER THOSE.

AND THEN WE HAVE AN AUTOMATIC EXTENSION FOR PLATS THAT ARE MADE IN GOOD FAITH. SO ACTIVELY SUBMITTING PLANS WITH APPROVED ENGINEERING PLANS, ACTIVELY DOING CONSTRUCTION EXTENDS TO 36 MONTHS. AND THEY HAD NOT DONE ANYTHING, THEY HADN'T APPROVED PLAT AND THEY JUST KIND OF SAT ON IT.

SO IT EXPIRED AND NOW THEY ARE BACK.

SO I THINK THERE MAY BE A LOT OF CONSTERNATION ABOUT THAT BECAUSE AT THE ENDING THEY HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEY REMEMBER EVERYONE SHOWING UP WITH THE SHIRTS AND EVERYTHING AT COUNCIL. AND THEY LET THE PLAT EXPIRE.

AS I SAID, IT WASN'T SOMETHING WHERE THEY WERE TRYING TO AVOID ANYTHING, IT JUST EXPIRED. AND AS I SAID, THERE WAS NO GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO MAKE GOOD OR REALIZE ANY OF THE LOTS ON THE PLAT TO MOVE THROUGH THE FINAL PLAT.

>> SO THIS IS THE PLAT? >> CORRECT.

>> AND IS THE DEVELOPER HERE TODAY?

>> I STILL HAVE ONE QUESTION. STAFF QUESTION.

I STILL HAVE ONE QUESTION FROM A QUESTION THAT CAME FROM ONE OF THE CITIZENS. AND THAT WAS ABOUT COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY WE WOULD RATHER HAVE ANOTHER CONNECTION?

>> IN TERMS OF... >> ONE WAY IN, ONE WAY OUT.

>> INTERCONNECTIVITY IS A BENEFIT TO PROVIDE WAYS TO GET IN AND OUT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD IN CASE OF ANYTHING THAT OCCURS OR ROAD WORK THAT MAY OCCUR ON A POTENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

LIKE IN THIS INSTANCE, THEY ONLY HAVE ONE WAY OUT FOR THE OVERALL PLAN. SO IDEALLY, YOU WOULD TRY TO MAKE A CONNECTION IF THIS PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED OR IF THEY'RE PREPARING NOW, IT'S ALL FLOODPLAIN.

SO WE DON'T ALLOW THE FILLING OF THAT.

SO TO HELP OFFSET AND MITIGATE THAT, THESE ARE ABOUT THE ONLY CONNECTIONS THAT THEY CAN MAKE. SO IT PROVIDES MORE THAN JUST ONE WAY IN AND OUT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AND ALSO ONE OF THE DECISIONS HAD A COMMENT ABOUT CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. IF WE ONLY PROVIDED ONE WAY IN, THAT ROADWAY AT THAT POINT IN TIME EXPERIENCES MUCH HEAVIER TRAFFIC LOAD. SO WE ARE KIND OF DIVVYING UP THE CONSTRUCTION LOAD AS MUCH AS WE CAN BETWEEN BOTH OF THESE ENTRANCES. BECAUSE THEY ARE PUBLIC ACCESS

POINTS. >> THAT BRINGS UP A QUESTION FOR ME. BOTH NEIGHBORHOODS CURRENTLY HAVE SERVICES. SO WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ADDITIONAL CLEAR SURFACE WHEN IT TEARS UP -- IF CONSTRUCTION TEARS UP THOSE ROADS? WHO FINANCIALLY IS RESPONSIBLE?

>> ANY TIME WE ARE DOING CONSTRUCTION LIKE THIS WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO GET SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO BE ABLE TO TRACK THAT. IT WOULD BE ON THE CITY TO ATTEMPT TO ATTRACT THAT IF WE SEE ANYTHING BEING CAUSED BY THAT. THERE IS CURRENTLY NOTHING IN THAT THAT WOULD KEEP THEM FROM THAT.

BUT TO YOUR POINT, THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE DELAY THE

SURFACE AS FAR AS WE CAN. >> LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.

I HEAR MANY TIMES WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH PRELIMINARY PLATS, COMMENTS WILL COME BACK AND THEY'LL SAY THAT PLACE FLOODS EVERY TIME IT RAINS. SO THIS IS ANOTHER OF THOSE SITUATIONS. THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH AND TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT, IF IT FLOODS NOW, THE IDEA IS WE DON'T WANT IT TO FLOOD AFTER ALL THIS BUILDING IS DONE.

SO WE DO SOMETHING ON PURPOSE TO MITIGATE THESE CURRENT PROBLEMS.

[00:45:06]

>> I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I THINK FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IS FLOODPLAIN. SO THEY AREN'T WRONG ABOUT THAT, I THINK THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVERYTHING THAT IS HAPPENING, JUST WITH THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, THAT IS CORRECT.

BUT I GUESS SOME OF THIS OTHER STUFF, WITH JUST BACKING UP THE CREEKS, IT'S KIND OF A RISK. AND AS I SAID, THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT FLOODPLAIN, THAT IS WHY MOST OF THIS LAND IS ACTUALLY NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.

BUT, YEAH, THAT IS THE STANDARD WHEN WE DO GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF. THAT WHATEVER -- YOU ESSENTIALLY CANNOT LEAVE -- DEVELOPMENT CANNOT MAKE IT WORSE ESSENTIALLY IS WHERE WE HAVE IT. SO WHETHER THAT IS THE TENSION ADDING INFRASTRUCTURE AND THOSE THINGS, WHEN THERE'S COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION VERSUS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION OR IF IT IS GREATER THAN AN ACRE OR LESS THAN AN ACRE.

BUT WITH THIS BEING OVER AN ACRE, THERE ARE STORMWATER RETENTION AND THINGS THEY WILL HAVE TO MEET.

>> THE NORMAL DELIBERATION? >> IT'S ALL A PART OF THE PROCESS THAT WILL BE IRONED OUT IN THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WHEN THIS COMES BACK FOR -- IF AND WHEN THIS COMES BACK FOR THE FINAL PLAT AND JUST SOME THINGS ARE JUST -- IF YOU LIVE IN PROXIMITY TO A CREEK, YOU REALLY GET TO FIND OUT IF THAT CREEK FLOODS AND IF YOU LIVE IN PROXIMITY TO A FLOOD POINT.

JUST SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF. >> I THINK HE BRINGS UP A POINT THAT MAYBE WE NEED CLARIFICATION ON BUT ALSO MAYBE THE PUBLIC DOES AS WELL. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FLOODING, I KNOW THAT IT FLOODED ONCE ON CHRISTMAS YEARS AND YEARS AGO.

BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES OR HOW OFTEN IT HAS FLOODED SINCE THEN. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT FLOOD THEN IS WHERE THE FLOODPLAIN HAD ITS ADJUSTMENT.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT WOULD BE A FLOODPLAIN

QUESTION. >> OBVIOUSLY WAS BEFORE YOUR TIME, BUT IT WAS MAYBE EIGHT OR NINE YEARS AGO I'M THINKING?

>> I WOULD HAVE TO KNOW THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OR WATER ELEVATION AND WHERE IT WAS AT AND THE MAPS THAT ARE REFLECTIVE HERE AND WHAT YOU SEE WHEN WE FLY OUT, THAT IS AVAILABLE FROM THE OFFICE, THEY UPDATE THE MAPS WITH THE LATEST INFORMATION THAT IS AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME. AND THEY RUN THESE MODELS AND GENERATE THESE MODELS AND UPDATE THESE MAPS FREQUENTLY BECAUSE AS CITIES DEVELOP, THESE MAPS CHANGE AND REFLECT THOSE CHANGES BASED ON WHAT IS OCCURRED. SO IT IS ON OUR SIDE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ADHERE TO OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T ENCROACH ON THESE AREAS ANY FURTHER.

WHICH OUR FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE PREVENTS ENCROACHING UNLESS YOU WANT TO REALLY MITIGATE IT WHICH COSTS A LOT OF MONEY.

AND A LOT OF ENGINEERING TO MITIGATE THAT.

IN THIS CASE OR IN THIS REGARD, THOSE FLOODPLAINS ARE ESTABLISHED TODAY BASED ON THE LATEST DATA SETS THAT ARE PROVIDED AND THEN WE HELP ENFORCE THAT.

>> JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT CONSTRUCTION AND THE FLOODPLAIN.

YOU KNOW THOSE DEVELOPERS, IT IS A LOT OF WORK TO ACTUALLY DEVELOP IN THE FLOODPLAIN. OFTENTIMES THEY DELIBERATELY TRY TO STAY OUT OF THERE TO KEEP OUT OF IT, EVEN IF IT PUTS UP ANY FOOTPRINT OF. SO TWO DISTINCTIONS.

THERE ARE THINGS WHERE YOU CAN BUILD ON THE FLOODPLAIN, BUT THERE ARE PLACES ALSO WHERE IT IS THE FLOODWAY AND YOU CANNOT BUILD ON THE FLOODWAY. ALSO TO THE QUESTION EARLIER, JUST KIND OF ABOUT HAD THIS NOT BEEN CUT DOWN OR HAD THE TREE NOT BEEN CUT DOWN, WOULD THIS BE HAPPENING.

LIKE WE SAID IN THE MEETING THEN, THAT IS NOT THE PURVIEW OF THE CITY. THAT WAS SOMETHING WHERE A PERMIT WAS ISSUED BY A FEDERAL AGENCY AND ALSO WE ARE BOUND LIKE THE COMMENT THAT THE CHAIR READ AT THE TOP OF THE MEETING, WE ARE BOUND TO OUR SUBDIVISION. SO IF THE PLAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS OUR STANDARDS, THEN IT HAS TO BE APPROVED.

THERE ARE LEGITIMATE REASONS TO DENY PLATS AND IF WE FIND THOSE, LIKE I SAID, WE TELL THEM AND LET THEM KNOW HEY, THIS CAN HAPPEN BEFORE AND OFTENTIMES THINGS DO NOT MAKE IT TO MEETINGS BECAUSE WE ARE PRETTY ADAMANT ABOUT IT.

BUT LIKE I SAID IN THAT MEETING IN 24, I WILL SAY IT AGAIN TONIGHT, THAT WAS UNDER THE PURVIEW OF ANOTHER AGENCY.

AND LIKE I SAID, WE WERE NOT ENTITLED -- WE CANNOT DENY SOMETHING THAT MEETS OUR SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS FROM A

SUBDIVISION STANDPOINT. >> WE'RE READY FOR THE APPLICANT. IS THE APPLICANT HERE?

HELLO. >> SAM LESLIE.

>> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> LET'S START WITH -- THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE HOA AND

EXPLAINED THAT. >> SURE.

JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, WE WERE VERY EARLY ON IN OUR DUE DILIGENCE OF THIS PROPERTY. WE HAVE ANOTHER CONTRACT FROM

[00:50:02]

AND JUST TO CLARIFY, WE WERE NOT THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPER.

AND WE HAVE THE LAND UNDER CONTRACT FROM THEM.

AS FAR AS HOA GOES, WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HOA YET. WE ARE VERY EARLY ON AND VERY HAPPY TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM.

OBVIOUSLY THERE'S ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE PART OF THEIR COVENANTS AND REQUIREMENTS THAT NEED TO BE VETTED. BUT HAPPY TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS FOR ANY AMENITIES HERE. ANY ADDITIONAL AMENITIES.

BUT HAPPY TO REACH OUT AND THAT WOULD BE PART OF OUR NORMAL

PROCESS. >> ANOTHER THING THAT HAS COME UP IS THE BUFFER. I THINK YOU SAID THERE WAS A 70-FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN THIS DEVELOPMENT AND HERITAGE LANE BEHIND IT. IS THAT GOING TO BE CUT?

>> NO. ARE CLEARING LIMITS ARE GOING TO BE BASICALLY -- SO ALL OF THE LOTS ARE INSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN. THE LOTS REALLY FOLLOW THE FLOODPLAIN. AND SO OUR CLEAR LIMITS ARE GOING TO BE INSIDE OF THAT. I THINK WE GET OUTSIDE AND THE DESIGN IS VERY EARLY ON. WE MAY GREY OUTSIDE A FEW OF THE LOTS BUT IT'S REALLY IN THE MIDDLE SECTION.

I CAN'T SEE THE NUMBERS BUT IT'S KIND OF NORTH TO SOUTH ROAD THAT WE GET OUTSIDE OF THAT A LITTLE BIT.

BUT THAT BUFFER AND ALL OF THE OTHER BUFFERS ARE GOING TO STAY

WOODED. >> SO EVERYTHING ON THAT FLOOD PART OF THE FLOODPLAIN? THAT'S JUST GOING TO STAND?

>> EXACTLY. THE TOTAL PARTS OF THE 75 ACRES, I THINK WE WOUND UP WITH 58 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE.

SO ONLY A SMALL PORTION OF THIS IS BEING TOUCHED.

>> THE EMAIL WE RECEIVED, ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE AREA WAS ASKING ABOUT CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTES.

TELL US ABOUT THAT. >> I THINK THE STAFF SPOKE TO THAT A LITTLE BIT. AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE GOES, THAT IS TYPICALLY DETERMINED THROUGH DESIGN AND THROUGH DR.. SO I MEAN THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS.

SO I THINK THAT WILL COME OUT THROUGH DESIGN AND WE'RE HAPPY

TO WORK WITH STAFF ON THAT. >> AND I BELIEVE ALSO IN THE EMAIL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS BEHIND THIS ON HERITAGE LANE, THEY WANTED TO KNOW THE CONSTRUCTION HOURS.

>> SO AS FAR AS SITE DEVELOPMENT GOES, I THINK IT IS A CITY

ORDINANCE. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> WE WOULD STICK TO THAT. >> SO THIS IS A SECOND GO AT THIS PLAT IN 18 MONTHS. HOW COME NO PROGRESS HAS BEEN

MADE? >> WE WERE NOT THE PREVIOUS APPLICANT. WE PURCHASED THIS OR WE HAD THIS PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT FROM THE PREVIOUS APPLICANT AND THEY

DECIDED TO NOT MOVE FORWARD. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU ALL.

>> COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING.

[5. Rezoning – Farmville Mixed-Use PDD – PUBLIC HEARING]

THE NEW PLAN REDUCES THE NUMBER OF TOWNHOUSES TO 61, ELIMINATES THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND INCREASES THE COMMERCIAL SPACE FROM 12,000 TO 24,000 SQUARE FEET.

THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL HAD -- THEY USED THE INCENTIVE EXCHANGE TO GET A 10% INCREASE IN THEIR BASE DENSITY IN EXCHANGE FOR A 20-FOOT BUFFER AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE.

THE DECREASE IN THE DENSITY IN THE NEW PLAN REMOVES THE NEED FOR THAT INCENTIVE. SO IT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE

[00:55:02]

WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER OF CORRESPONDENCE FROM MARK AND JENNIFER HERE IN EAST FARMVILLE. AND I WILL JUST SUMMARIZE SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS. THEY REQUESTED THE TRAFFIC STUDY BE CONDUCTED DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR, THEY ASK THAT THE 20-FOOT BUFFER BE RESTORED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE ALONG WITH THE SCREENING AND EVERGREEN PLANTINGS TO KEEP THE HIGHEST IMPACT USES OF THE COMMERCIAL USES ON THE 280 SIDE WHICH INCLUDES THE GAS STATION, DRIVE THRU AND FOOD COURT AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE LOCATE THE COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE ON HIGHWAY 280. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> I DO WANT TO ADD CONTEXT TO THAT. WE DO NOT ALLOW TRAFFIC STUDIES TO TAKE PLACE OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL YEAR.

JUST FOR COMMON KNOWLEDGE FOR EVERYBODY.

>> THANK YOU. THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING AND AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FARMVILLE MIXED USE PDD. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK TO THIS AGENDA ITEM.

SEEING NO ONE, CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS? >> MOVE TO APPROVE THE CASE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. AND THIS NEXT REQUEST IS FOR THE

[6. Conditional Use – Farmville Mixed-Use – PUBLIC HEARING]

THEY INCLUDE INSTITUTIONAL, OFFICE, COMMERCIAL AND ENTERTAINMENT, ROAD SERVICE, NURSERIES AND COMMERCIAL USES.

THESE SPECIFIC USES YOU CAN SEE HERE.

THE PROPERTY, THE COMMERCIAL ASPECT OF THE PD D. IS APPROXIMATELY 3.4 ACRES. AGAIN, IT WILL BE 24,000 SQUARE FEET OF SPACE. STAFF SUPPORTS THE MAJORITY OF THE USES THAT WERE REQUESTED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE VETERINARY OFFICE KENNEL WITH OUTDOOR PENS.

IF RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, STAFF RECOMMENDS AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL, THAT ALL ALL SPECIAL CONDITIONS MUST BE MET.

>> THIS IS A CORRIDOR TYPE PLANNING SITUATION?

>> THOSE WILL BE REQUIRED REGARDLESS.

BUT -- IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED, YOU MAY HAVE A LIST OF USES ON SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THERE WERE SOME INSTITUTIONAL ROAD SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT USES THAT HAVE THOSE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ABOUT THE FARM BILL MIXED USE CONDITIONAL USES, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW.

SEEING NO ONE, WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? >> BRETT HERE.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

AND THAT IS GETTING TO THE ENTRANCE.

WILL ONLY BE ONE OR IS IT GOING TO BE TWO?

I SEE ONE NEAR THE INTERSECTION. >> WE ARE SHOWING ONE OFF OF FARMVILLE AND ONE OFF OF THE NEW CITY STREET WE HAD OVER HERE.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

AND OBVIOUSLY, KNOWING WHAT I KNOW, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THEY WOULD APPROVE YOU TO GET IN THROUGH THE --

>> I CAN TAKE THAT. AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE WASN'T A DESIRE TO HAVE ACCESS. PREVIOUSLY THE CITY FROWNED UPON THAT. REALLY, IF YOU WERE GOING TO GET ANY ACCESS OFF OF THERE, IT WOULD BE DIRECTIONAL JUST BECAUSE OF THE CLOSE PROXIMITY. PLUS IT IS 65 MILES AN HOUR.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WERE TRYING TO CONSOLIDATE OUR

ENTRANCES OFF OF THE EXISTING >> TALKING ABOUT THE CLADDING, BECAUSE IT'S ONTO -- FRONTS TO -- WELL, BACKS UP TO 280.

[01:00:05]

IT OR WHAT? >> I MEAN, THERE WILL BE TREES BETWEEN -- THERE ARE SOME EXISTING VEGETATION BETWEEN THE ROAD AND THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

BUT IN REGARDS -- THE FRONT OF THAT SITE SITS UP ABOVE 280 AND THEN THE BACK HALF FALLS DOWN, SO WE WOULD PROBABLY -- ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE MASS GRADED, RIGHT.

I THINK YOU KNOW, THERE'S A CREEK THAT COMES THROUGH THERE WHERE A LOT OF THAT WILL BE PRESERVED, ALONG KIND OF THE MIDDLE BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL AND THE RESIDENTIAL.

BUT YEAH, I WOULD ENVISION MOST OF THE COMMERCIAL SITE IS GOING TO BE MASK RATED JUST TO GET IN THAT FLAT AREA TO GET A PAD IN

THERE. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> SO COMMISSIONERS, KENNELS WITH OUTDOOR PENS, ARE WE REMOVING THAT FROM THE REQUEST?

>> YES.

>> AND ALSO WITH ALL SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE

ZONING ORDINANCE -- >> CAN I MAKE A MOTION FOR CASE C U2 026-046 TO REMOVE OUTDOOR KENNEL FACILITIES AND -- ALL STANDARDS MUST BE MET -- I'M SORRY, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MUST BE MET UNLESS A WAIVER IS GRANTED TO ALLOW

OTHERWISE. >> YEAH, SO I THINK WE REMOVE THOSE, BECAUSE -- IT WAS IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT WE PULLED THOSE OUT, LIKE THE VETERINARY OFFICE WITH THE KENNELS OR THAT WE KIND OF PUT THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.

>> WELL, THERE WERE A BUNCH OF OTHER USES THAT HAVE --

INAUDIBLE ] >> YEAH, YEAH.

SO WE DON'T NEED THE CONDITION FOR THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SINCE LIKE THOSE ALREADY -- BUT THEN THE OTHER ONE OF THE OUTDOOR KENNELS, YEAH, OUTDOOR KENNELS.

SO THE MOTION IS GOOD. I'M SORRY.

>> CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL. >> YEAH.

>> SO I HAVE A MOTION. >> SECOND.

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

[7. Rezoning – The District at Richland Road – PUBLIC HEARING]

>> GOOD EVENING. THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DISTRICT AT RICHLAND ROAD PDD. THE ORIGINAL PDD WAS APPROVED IN NOVEMBER OF 2023 AND INCLUDED 275 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 8 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE AND APPROXIMATELY 5.5 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL WITH 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA.

THE PDD IS LOCATED ON RICHLAND ROAD AND S [INDISCERNIBLE] THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS NEARING COMPLETION AND THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THIS AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE FLOOR AREA OF THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT, FROM 20,000 TO 30,000 SQUARE FEET.

THIS IS AN ELEVATION OF WHAT THE COMMERCIAL PORTION WILL LOOK LIKE. THIS IS THE PROPOSED PDD, THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT OF IT. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S BUILDINGS ALONG THE FRONTAGES OF THAT PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THIS CASE AND STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL.

AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET SOME KIND OF STANDARD FOR THE BACKS OF THOSE BUILDINGS, THAT FACE -- I KNOW [INDISCERNIBLE] THEY WOULD. HOW ABOUT RICHLAND ROAD?

>> YES, WE WILL NOT ALLOW THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND ANY KIND OF --

>> CLADDING? >> OH, THE CLADDING, YES, IT WILL DEFINITELY HAVE TO MEET THE 429.

>> DELIVERIES I DO NOT KNOW. >> YEAH, I THINK THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS ADDRESSED IN THE INITIAL PDD, THAT WAS A CONDITION SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO BE TALKED OUT, THAT WILL BE IRONED

OUT IN DRT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[01:05:05]

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

I WOULD LIKE OPEN THAT AT THIS TIME.

FOR THE DISTRICT AT RICHLAND ROAD.

IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD? SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

APPLICANT HERE, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> OKAY, GREAT. >> I JUST -- SINCE PART OF OUR TASK IS TO BE DOING WHAT [INDISCERNIBLE] YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE TO EVEN COME UP -- WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CITY AS A WHOLE, I'M CURE CROUSE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN AND THE MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY AND WHERE THE CITY

HOLDS THAT LINE. >> FROM A TIME LINE STANDPOINT

IS WHEN IT WOULD BE -- >> SO THERE WAS A MASTER LANDSCAPING PLAN DONE FOR THE PROJECT OVERALL.

THAT LANDSCAPING PLAN WAS A BIT SCHEMATIC IN NATURE FOR THE COMMERCIAL AREA, AS THE COMMERCIAL AREA GOES THROUGH THE DRT PROCESS, THAT WILL BE DRILLED DOWN AND BE COMPOUNDED UPON GREATLY. BUT IF YOU LOOK RIGHT NOW, IF YOU DRIVE OUT THERE THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ELEVATION CHANGE BETWEEN BOTH THE CORNER OF RICHLAND AND PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRETY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE DEVELOPER'S INTENT IS TO HEAVILY LANDSCAPE THAT. THERE'S ALREADY SOME LANDSCAPING IN PLACE BUT ALL OF THAT WILL BE IRONED OUT DURING THE DRT, WHERE A TRUE LANDSCAPE PLAN HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED AND ENSURE THAT IT

MEETS THE CITY STANDARDS. >> AND I'M ASKING THIS FROM THE DIRECTION -- I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS ANY PLAN TO DO ANY LANDSCAPING AHEAD OF TIME FOR BEAUTIFICATION WHILE SOME OF

THAT'S BEING [INDISCERNIBLE] >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER -- THIS PROPERTY WAS SUBDIVIDED, THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT WAS A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPER.

THEY HAVE CONTRACTED WITH A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER TO PURCHASE THIS. IF THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, MY UNDERSTANDING, IT'S THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER'S INTENT TO MOVE FORWARD IMMEDIATELY WITH THIS AND START PROCESSING THIS THROUGH DRT. I REALLY DON'T THINK YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO ADEQUATELY DEVELOP THIS SITE IF ALL THE NECESSARY LANDSCAPING WAS IN PLACE RIGHT NOW.

>> JUST SOME BASICS THEN, OKAY. >> AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE

SIGN SITUATION? >> THEY DO.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE RR-2026-015.

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

[8. Conditional Use – 805 Gentry Townhomes – PUBLIC HEARING]

>> ALL RIGHT, SO 805 GENTRY TOWNHOMES.

THESE ARE TOWNHOME STYLE -- THIS IS ALL GOING TO BE ON ONE LOT.

>> I HAVE POSTPONE ON THIS. >> OH, YEAH, THERE WE GO.

>> TALKED ABOUT THIS ON MONDAY, THAT THERE WAS JUST A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THE RENEWABLE ROAD PLAN.

I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT.

SO THIS IS LOCATED IN THE CRDS, SO ON GENTRY DRIVE, REALLY CAN'T SEE IT FROM [INDISCERNIBLE] ROAD.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO DRIVE UP THERE TO SEE WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE.

AND SO CURRENTLY -- I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE OCCUPIED ANYMORE BUT THERE WAS A MOBILE HOME PARK THERE.

AND THE GREAT CHANGE FROM OWED BLACK ROAD TO THAT POINT OF GENTRY IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. WE'LL GET INTO IT IN THE [INDISCERNIBLE] IF YOU'RE GOING INTO TOWN AND YOU HAVE TO MAKE A RIGHT THERE ON GENTRY, THERE WERE FUTURE PLANS ALSO TO ADDRESS THAT ACCESS.

YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

ALL RIGHT, SO LIKE I SAID CRDS, SITE AREA ABOUT 1.65 ACRES.

THIS HAS -- TOTAL NUMBER OF BEDS WAS 32 BEDS AND THEY DID SEND US AN UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT HAD THE 36 PARKING SPACES.

BUT THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE KIND OF LIKE OUR DOWNTOWN, LIKE DEVELOPMENT WHERE YOU'LL SEE THE GARAGES UNDERNEATH, ALL YOU GUYS SEE IS THE SURFACE STREET PARKING THAT THEY HAVE.

WITH THAT, I THINK THE BIGGEST THING THAT I RAN INTO WAS THE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT AND HOW YOU GUYS HAVE THE MAJOR STREET PLAN. SO THERE THERE IS NO MAJOR STREET PLAN THAT GOES THROUGH HERE BUT THERE WAS THE RENEW OLD

[01:10:03]

AND THE GOAL WAS TO PROVIDE AN ACCESS -- THERE WE GO, ALL RIGHT. SO AS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE ON THE FURTHER LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN THERE, THE GOAL WAS TO GET ACCESS ROAD FROM NORTH DEAN ROAD ALL THE WAY TO GENTRY DRIVE AND THE RENEW OUT BLACKETT ROAD PLAN HAD A RETAIL A STREET GO THROUGH IT. SO WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT MUCH REDEVELOPMENT OVER HERE. I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT'S HAPPENED IS THERE WAS A NEW [INDISCERNIBLE] THAT WENT UP RECENTLY, AND ALSO ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN.

THERE'S THE U-TURNS YOU CAN DO. I DON'T KNOW THE TECHNICAL TERMS, BUT ESSENTIALLY WHERE YOU GET INTO THE ONCOMING TRAFFIC TO MAKE THE LEFT INTO DERBY STILL SEE PEOPLE MISS AND MESS UP AND MAKE THE LEFT FROM THE OTHER LANE.

THOSE ARE BEEN THE ONLY THING WE'VE HAD HAPPEN.

WE'VE ALL HAD SMALL SLIDERS ON OLD BLACKETT ROAD AS WELL.

SO THIS WAS KIND OF ONE OF THE FIRST PROJECTS THAT REQUIRED KIND OF CONSTRUCTION -- NOT CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAIL A STREET BUT ESSENTIALLY THE CITY GETTING EITHER AN EASEMENT OR RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS KIND OF WHAT'S REQUIRED ON THOSE RETAIL A STREETS.

YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. YEAH, SO THERE IS A LOT OF AMBITIONS IN THIS PLAN. SO THERE ARE 12-FOOT TRAVEL LANES, TWO OF THOSE, ON-STREET PARKING ON BOTH SIDES AND ALSO TREE WELLS. ALL OF THAT JUST KIND OF FROM A HORIZONAL MAP STANDPOINT, THAT IS 50 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS DO WE DO THAT THE ENTIRE WAY, HOW ARE WE GOING TO HANDLE THAT.

SO A LOT OF CONVERSATION OVER THE PAST WEEK ABOUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO SWING THAT WITH THE ELEVATION CHANGE AT GENTRY, AND GUESS THE INTERSECTION OF THIS PROPOSED RETAIL A STREET.

MICHAEL CAN GO INTO THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF IT.

PRETTY MUCH IF WE WERE TO GET 5D NOT HAVE THE LATITUDE TO MAKE THAT A SAFE INTERSECTION. AND SO HE WAS LIKE I THINK WE SHOULD TAPER THIS IF WE CAN, THAT WOULD GIVE ME A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY. LINES ON PAPER, MORE NORTH STAR THAN NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT YOU HARD AND FAST MUST DO, KIND OF COUNT WHERE WE'RE GOING. SO ON THIS, WE WORKED OUT KIND OF -- I GUESS WHAT'S ON THE SITE PLAN IS A 24-FOOT WIDE EASEMENT. I GUESS THE NUMBERS ARE SOMETHING WE CAN GET TO, I THINK ENGINEERING PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL FOR A 35-FOOT EASEMENT THAT WOULD EVENTUALLY START WITH A 35, ALLOW MICHAEL THE LATITUDE TO ADDRESS THE SITE DISTANCE CONCERNS FOR ANYONE COMING INTO GENTRY.

AND THEN AS WE GOT FURTHER DOWN INTO THE MIDDLE OF THAT NEW RETAIL A STREET, WHATEVER THAT NAME WOULD BE, IT WOULD PROBABLY OPEN UP, TAPER A LITTLE BIT, GET THE 50-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY.

SO THAT IS HOW WE GOT TO THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONDITION THAT I'M GOING TO PROPOSE FOR YOU ALL, AS I AMEND IT.

BUT WE DID GET TO A SUPPORT WHERE WE CAN SUPPORT THIS.

I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU GUYS THE BACKGROUND OF HOW ON MONDAY -- I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE THIS, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS.

WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

JUST KIND OF FROM THE TECHNICALITIES OF REQUIRING A RIGHT-OF-WAY, ROAD DESIGN, SITE DESIGN, INTERSECTION, ALL OF THOSE THINGS, JUST KIND OF TALK TO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND NOW WE'RE AT A PLACE WHERE WE CAN SUPPORT THIS.

I HAVE A CONDITION THAT I'LL READ.

BEFORE I GET THERE, ANY QUESTIONS FROM ME AND THEN I GUESS WE CAN HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING --

>> SO FOR THIS -- THIS APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY, THAT'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, PLANNING THAT GOES INTO THE COMPLETE STREETS AND ALL THAT STUFF. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN SPECIFICALLY

FOR THIS CASE? >> RIGHT, OKAY, YEAH, YEAH.

SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT THEY WILL -- SO THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT WILL MUTUALLY AGREE TO KIND OF THE LOCATION OR DESIGN OF THE EASEMENT NEEDED FOR US TO REALIZE THE RENEW OLD BLACKETT ROAD PLAN. SO THE REASON THIS WAS SUCH A BIG THING FOR US WAS THAT THIS PROPERTY IS THE BOOKEND OF THAT RETAIL A STREET THAT GOES BETWEEN GENTRY AND DEAN ROAD.

SO IT WASN'T SOMETHING WHERE WE COULD JUST GO, NOT A BIG DEAL, WE DON'T GET THE EASEMENT HERE THEN IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

THERE ARE OTHER THINGS IN THE PIPELINE WHERE POSSIBLY WE COULD REALIZE HAVING THIS ROAD IN ABOUT 45 YEARS WHICH WOULD RADICALLY CHANGE THE COMMERCIAL POSSIBILITIES OVER THERE AND MAKE A LOT MORE OF THOSE PARCELS DEVELOPABLE IF THERE'S A ROAD

[01:15:02]

SO FOR THIS PROPERTY, THIS JUST MEANS STAFF AND THE APPLICANT WILL WORK TOWARDS A SOLUTION ON THE LOCATION AND DESIGN OF THE EASEMENT. THAT IS MUTUALLY AGREED ON.

>> OKAY. SO THEN MY QUESTION IS FOR STAFF COMMENT PLANNING NUMBER 4. THAT STATES IT MUST ADHERE TO

THE 2013 -- >> YEAH, AND I THINK THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION THAT I GUESS I'LL READ WOULD SATISFY THAT. AND LIKE I SAID KIND WORK -- IF WE PUT THE CONDITION OF THE 50-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY, MIKE WOULD HAVE A REALLY IMPOSSIBLE CHALLENGE -- I KNOW ENGINEERS SEE THEM AS OPPORTUNITIES, LIKE [INDISCERNIBLE] THAT THEY CAN DESIGN THE ROAD SAFER BUT LIKE I SAID IT'S JUST -- IT WOULD BE A HURDLE TO MAKE THAT A SAFE INTERSECTION FROM A SITE DISTANCE STANDPOINT, ALSO KIND OF TRAVERSING THE 20 FEET OF FALL ACROSS IT, THAT, THE REALLY NARROW CONDITION OF THAT LOT.

>> YOUR CONDITION WILL REPLACE ALREADY WOULD BE AN ADDITION

TO -- >> WOULD BE AN ADDITION AND THAT WOULD STILL MEET THE OLD BLACKETT ROAD STUFF WITH THAT SO

THAT'S MY -- >> OKAY.

THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD ABOUT THE 805 GENTRY

TOWNHOMES. >> VELMA RICHARDSON.

I LIVE AT 1121 RUSTIC RIDGE ROAD IN AUBURN, THAT'S JUSTICE OFF GENTRY. I DO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR RECOGNIZING THE DANGER OF THAT INTERSECTION AND THE TIGHTNESS JUST TO GET IN OFF BLACKETT ROAD ONTO GENTRY.

IN ADDITION BECAUSE THE UNIQUE STRUCTURE OF THAT LANE IT'S LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO MUCH WITHOUT BEING ABLE GET OFF THE ROAD. IT'S VERY, VERY NARROW.

AND WE DO HAVE CHILDREN IN THE AREA GOING TO SCHOOL AND THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS. THEY ALREADY HAVE ONE PROPERTY THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND, THEY HAVE HEDGES UP TO THE EDGE OF THE ROAD, THE CURB. AND I THOUGHT WE COULD NOT DO THAT IN AUBURN. WE'VE BEEN HERE ABOUT 40-SOME YEARS AND THEY TOLD ME I COULDN'T.

SO I'M ENCOURAGED THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING SOMETHING ABOUT THE PROPERTY SO THAT WE CAN GET DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA AND EXCITED ABOUT THE ROAD. UTTERLY EXCITED ABOUT THE ROAD, BECAUSE I HAVE TO COME OUT THERE AND TAKE MY LIFE IN MY HANDS WHEN I COME THAT WAY. AND SO I THANK YOU FOR THE ATTENTION YOU PAY TO THIS. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THIS MEANS THAT IT'S ALL IN THE FUTURE AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE TO ACQUIRE THE ROAD TO DO A PARALLEL ROAD WITH ON LICK A ROAD. IS THAT NOT CORRECT?

>> I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> ALSO THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WALK AND LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. WILL YOU PLEASE SIGN IN, MA'AM.

>> HELLO. [INDISCERNIBLE] 922 HARVARD PLACE RIGHT OFF OF GENTRY AS WELL.

THE QUESTION WOULD BE THE SAFETY MEASURES THAT WOULD GO INTO THAT. THAT ROAD IS ALREADY USED AS A CUT-THROUGH ROAD. WE'VE HAD A SIGN THERE BEFORE LIKE WATCH YOUR SPEED, BUT FOR OTHER THAN SIDEWALKS, IT WOULD BE THE CONSIDERATION OF SPEED BUMPS, AND MORE CAMERAS, BECAUSE THE FIRETRUCK COMES THROUGH THERE WIDE OPEN AND PEOPLE OFF OF THE MAIN HIGHWAY CUT ALL THE WAY THROUGH AND TWO BLIND CURVES, SO IT WOULD BE THE CONSIDERATION OF ALL THE TRAFFIC SAFETY GOING INTO THOSE COVERAGES, YEAH, AND THEN THE CURVE, THE BLIND SPOT, THE EDGES, EVERYTHING THAT SHE MENTIONED, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ALL IN THE ZONING AREA BECAUSE THE KIDS DO HAVE TO STAND OUT THERE FOR SCHOOL, LIKE LITERALLY STAND THERE THERE'S NO WAY TO STAND BACK OFF THE ROAD AN THERE'S ALSO PARKING ALONG THAT ROAD THAT CREATES FURTHER ISSUES FOR THE CHILDREN TO BE THERE SAFELY.

OR EVEN IT DRIVE AT NIGHT. SO I GUESS THAT INCLUDES LIGHTING TOO. ALL THAT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE OPEN IT UP FURTHER TO THE PUBLIC TO COME THROUGH THERE. SO -- YEAH.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD

FORWARD? >> I'M GOING TO HOPEFULLY REMIND

[01:20:05]

YOU WE'VE BEEN -- >> I DON'T YOU ARE NAME AND

ADDRESS PLEASE. >> DONNA RICHARDSON.

I LIVE ON RUSTY RIDGE ROAD. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT AS YOU'RE ADDING ALL OF THESE ADDITIONAL BEDS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, TRYING TO CHANGE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE DID HAVE A CHILD THAT WAS KILLED NOT THAT LONG AGO, AS THEY WILL REMEMBER IT LIKE IT WAS YESTERDAY. SINCE THAT TIME I'VE ASKED FOR SPEED BUMPS, I'VE WRITTEN ON GENTRY, ON BOND, ON DREW, ON RUSTIC RIDGE ROAD. AND THEY DO USE IT AS A CUT-THROUGH AND I'VE ASKED FOR ROUNDABOUTS.

SO I WOULD HOPE WHEN YOU SERIOUSLY CONSIDER ADDING MORE PEOPLE IN THIS AREA, THIS TIGHT AREA, THAT YOU WOULD FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT SAFER. WE HAVE NO SIDEWALKS.

THE KIDS RUN ON THE STREETS AND MY CONCERN ARE THE LITTLE PEOPLT JUMPED OUT IN FRONT OF ME. SO I IMAGINE HAVING MORE KIDS CLOSER TO ON LICK OPELIKA ROAD. IT WOULD BE MORE DINING DANGERO.

I REALLY HOPE YOU DON'T GET THIS.

I REALLY DON'T. SO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> YEAH, SO I GUESS KIND OF THE -- SO SEVERAL THINGS [INDISCERNIBLE] ENGINEERING QUESTION SO FROM A SIDEWALK STANDPOINT, SO THEY ACTUALLY RECENTLY JUST DID A FORMER PLANNER JUST DESIGNED A PRETTY SOPHISTICATED MODEL TO KIND OF IDENTIFY, PRIORITIZE ALL OF THE PLACES WHERE THEY NEED SIDEWALKS. AND SO MICHAEL WILL PROBABLY HAVE A BETTER ANSWER OF WHERE THIS AREA KIND OF FELL ON THAT SCALE. FROM A SPEED BUMP STANDPOINT, SO YOU CAN REQUEST TRAFFIC CALMING. THAT IS SOMETHING WHAT WE CAN -- I GUESS THAT CAN BE LOOKED AT. SO ONCE AGAIN, SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN KIND OF BRING UP TO STAFF, KIND OF AROUND THAT.

I THINK FROM THE FUTURE STANDPOINT LIKE THE ROAD AND THE RE-ALIGNMENT, UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THAT IS KIND OF THE THING -- EVEN THOUGH WE DO HAVE IMMENSE REDEVELOPMENT PRESSURE AND WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE PROGRESS ON A LOT OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE CAN CLEAN THOSE UP, WE'RE KIND OF BEHOLDEN TO WHEN PROPERTIES DO COME IN AND DO REDEVELOP.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE LOOKING AT AND I THINK KIND OF WITH THE -- LIKE AS THE RENEW OPELIKA ROAD PLAN IS REALIZED I THINK KIND OF CHANGING THAT INTERSECTION, MAKING IT SAFER AND ALSO KIND OF LOOKING AT GENDERRY DRIVE, GENTRY DRIVE. THERE ARE PLACES FROM A CLASSIFICATION STANDPOINT WHERE THOSE ROADS ARE REQUIRED AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF REDEVELOPMENT, BUT FROM A PRIORITY STANDPOINT, THAT HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT ENGINEERING AND STAFF HAS BEEN LOOKING AT, OF IDENTIFYING PLACES WHERE WE DO NEED ADDITIONAL SIDEWALKS IN TOWN. SO -- AND THEN I GUESS MICHAEL, ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT, TRAFFIC CALMING, ANY OF THOSE OTHER THINGS.

>> I THINK YOU KIND OF SAID IT. >> I AM INTERESTED, THOUGH, JUST BRIEFLY ABOUT THE SIDEWALK, YOU SAID THEY CREATED SOME KIND OF A MODEL. LIKE, WHAT'S THE -- WHAT ARE SOME OF THE CRITERIA THAT MIGHT PUT YOU HIGHER UP ON THE DECISION PROCESS TO GET YOUR SIDEWALK FIRST?

>> YEAH, SO IT HAD TO DO WITH THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE LIVING IN PROXIMITY TO THE ZONES THAT DIDN'T HAVE SIDEWALKS, WHAT THE ZONING WAS, IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE HIGH DENSITY AND ITS PROXIMITY TO RESOURCES AND AMENITIES.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS -- I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY DOWN THERE ON EUD, SOUTH COLLEGE, RIGHT ACROSS FROM -- KIND OF GOING UP TO THE HOUSTON CLINIC, THAT ENTIRE STRETCH THERE DOES NOT HAVE SIDEWALK. SO JUST KIND OF -- THAT WAS ONE OF THE HIGHER ONES BUT LIKE I SAID IT WAS EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING DENSITY AND A LOT OF THOSE THINGS WHERE THEY DEVELOPED AND BEFORE WE HAD THE STANDARDS WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE

TO PUT IN SIDEWALKS. >> THERE IS A LOT OF ON-STREET

PARKING IN THIS AREA. >> YES.

>> IS THERE SOMETHING TO CURB THAT, SINCE --

>> THERE IS AN EXISTING POLICY THAT IS A REQUEST THAT CAN BE PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL. THAT IS ACTUALLY UNDER REVIEW RIGHT NOW. WE'VE HAD EXISTING POLICY THAT

[01:25:03]

IT WILL BE REVIEWED BY STAFF. BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE, REMOVING ON-STREET PARKING IN SOME CLASSIFICATION OF STREETS ACTUALLY PROMOTES SPEEDING. SO IF YOU HAVE WIDER ROADWAYS IN AND OF ITSELF AND YOU REMOVE THAT PARKING ON BOTH SIDES, BASICALLY IT TELLS PEOPLE, LIKE OKAY, PROTECTION THE GAS PEDAL, LET'S GO. SO THAT SPEED OR THAT ROADWAY IS 25MPH. THEY CAN CERTAINLY REQUEST OF MY OFFICE TO DO TRAFFIC CALMING. I'M OPEN TO A WHOLE PLETHORA OF THINGS TO ASSESS IT AND LOOK AT IT FROM ITS INDIVIDUAL COMPONENT. BUT WE'RE FOCUS DOLLARS ON THE SITE IN AND OF ITSELF AND THEIR DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS JUST SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SITE AND IF THEY TRIGGER THOSE IMPROVEMENTS OR SET OF IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THAT SECTION OF ROADWAY BUT IT WOULDN'T BE OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS UNLESS IT WAS A VERY BIG GENERATOR OF TRAFFIC.

AND THIS IS MORE OF LIKE A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.

IT'S LIKE NOT A GROCERY STORE OR EQUIVALENT THEREOF.

SO WE WOULD LOOK AT IT ALONG ITS FRONTAGE OF THAT PROPERTY.

>> I GUESS TO BE VERY CLEAR, THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE SEPARATE OF THIS. KIND OF TO WHAT MICHAEL WAS ALLUDING TO, ANY OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE DO REQUIRE HAVE TO HAVE A NEXUS, A TIED IMMEDIATE NEXUS, SO I GUESS TO THE COMMENTS -- THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN ADDRESS SEPARATELY, NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD STICK WITH THE

DEVELOPER TO DO. >> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR, THIS STARTS THE POTENTIAL FOR MOVEMENT.

>> YEAH, YEAH, CORRECT, CORRECT. >> FOR TRAFFIC CALMING, FOR

SPEED BUMPS. >> FOR LIGHTING, FOR

[INDISCERNIBLE] WHATEVER. >> SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SIDEWALKS AND PRIORITIES, WHERE DOES THIS AREA LINE UP IN TERMS

OF -- WHERE ON THE LIST IS IT? >> YOU MAY ANSWER THAT? SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE WE SELECT SIDEWALKS, AND SOMETIMES I THINK IN THE PAST IT WAS DONE SOMEWHAT ARBITRARILY BASED ON CITIZEN DEMAND. SO WE HAD RUN A COUPLE THINGS, A MODEL BASED ON HOW MANY PEOPLE WE COULD CONNECT, DO WE HAVE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE COST AND THOSE METRICS ARE DONE BY ANALYTICS, BASICALLY. AND THAT MATH WE HAVE NOT SHARED YET BASICALLY AND WE'RE LOOKING TO USE THAT TO HELP PLAN FOR SIDEWALK PROJECTS AND IMPLEMENTATIONS IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. BUT THERE ARE A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT CAN BE GENERATED OUT OF THAT BASED ON THE HIGHEST DEMAND OR NEED THAT CAN CERTAINLY BE MODIFIED BASED ON THE METRICS THAT WE HAVE USED TO ANALYZE THAT.

AND IT COMES FROM A GIS KIND OF COMPONENT.

WE HAVE CONNECTIONS BASED ON THE DISTANCE BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS, HOW MANY PEOPLE IT COULD CONNECT.

OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD FOCUS ON HIGHER, DENSER AREAS.

THERE COULD BE A COMPONENT THAT WE INCLUDE IN THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD, HOW LONG IT'S BEEN THERE WITHOUT SIDEWALK.

SO IT'S OPEN TO REVIEW BUT WE HAVE NOT ACCEPTED OR SAID THAT IS LIKE WRITTEN IN STONE AT THIS POINT.

>> OKAY, SO IT'S NOT FUNDED. >> RIGHT.

WELL, WE HAVE BUDGETS THAT WE DO REQUEST AND THOSE BUDGETS ARE MOVED OVER FROM YEAR TO YEAR. SO IT'S NOT ON THE REQUEST BUT IF SOMEBODY CERTAINLY REQUESTS IT, WE CAN ANALYZE IT AND ADD IT

TO THAT LIST, IF NEEDED. >> I GOT TO BELIEVE SAFETY IS

ONE OF THE CRITERIA THAT -- >> OH, ABSOLUTELY.

>> TO ME THIS SEEMS LIKE MORE OF A SAFETY ISSUE THAN A DENSITY

PROBLEM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> SO FATALITIES ARE REALLY HIGH ON THE LIST, IF THERE IS PRESENT ONE THAT -- WE TRACK THAT.

THAT IS SUBJECT TO NON- REVEAL BECAUSE IT HAS INFORMATION BASED ON THOSE PEOPLE, BUT WHEN WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, WE REVIEW IT ANALYTICALLY AND A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AT ME SIDEWAYS WHEN I SAY THIS, THERE IS A VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AND A BENEFIT TO COST BUT IT'S NOT TO IDENTIFY LIKE IS IT WORTH DOING, NO, IT IDENTIFIES THE PRIORITY OF THE BENEFIT OF THE SAFETY THAT WE DERIVE FROM DOING PROJECTS ON THAT ROUTE.

AND SO IF THERE IS THAT, WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT FROM A -- IT'S A HOT SPOT ANALYSIS OF WHAT WE DO AND THEN NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN, IT'S HIGHER PRIORITY PROJECTS BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING

ELSE. >> SORRY, I'M JUST GOING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. I GUESS LOGAN DIDN'T SHARE A MAP WITH IT. HE HAS THE LOCATIONS BUT IT'S ALL LIKE GIS STUFF SO IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE COORDINATESES AND GIS -- SE TO TELL YOU THE ACTUAL STREET NAMES AND ADDRESSES, I WOULD HAVE TO PULL IT UP ON A MAP SO I CAN'T

ANSWER THAT. >> I WAS GOING TO ADD AND PHIL MADE A REALLY GOOD POINT. THESE ARE SOME ISSUES THAT RELATE TO SAFETY AND THINGS AND I KNOW WE'VE DEALT WITH RESIDENTS IN THIS AREA BEFORE. I WAS GOING TO MAKE SURE I CONTACTED THESE RESIDENTS AND GIVE THEM MY BUSINESS CARD AFTER WE CONCLUDE THIS, SO THAT THEY COULD GET IN TOUCH WITH ME AND I'LL SET UP A MEETING WITH CITY ENGINEER AND PUBLIC SAFETY AS

[01:30:01]

NEEDED. >> LET ME ASK YOU ONE QUESTION, BECAUSE THEY TALK ABOUT -- AND YOU SAID THAT GENTRY IS 25 MILES AN HOUR BECAUSE IT'S A RESIDENTIAL STREET.

BUT SHE IS CORRECT, IT IS USED AS A CUTTHROUGH STREET, AND THERE IS A LOT OF TRAFFIC, PARTICULARLY IF DEAN IS FALL AND BACKED UP, PEOPLE WILL CUT DOWN GENTRY.

WHEN DO WE DO -- AND I KNOW WE DO IT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT TRAFFIC COUNTS, BUT WHEN DO WE DO TRAFFIC FOR THESE STREETS LIKE GENTRY, WHICH HAVE -- WERE RESIDENTIAL AND HAVE BEEN FOREVER BUT NOW REALLY ARE CUT-THROUGH STREETS STRAIGHT

THROUGH? >> YEAH.

SO A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE DRIVEN BY COMPLAINTS THAT WE RECEIVE.

SO SOMEBODY CAN PUT IN A REQUEST TO THE TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT, THAT STARTS THE PROCESS. AND SO IF SOMEBODY DISAGREES THAT SOMEBODY IS NOT FOLLOWING THE SPEED LIMIT, WE'LL GET WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEN WE'LL PUT COUNTERS OUT THERE AND WE'LL ACTUALLY SEE WHAT TEAM ARE TRAVELING AT ON THAT HIGHWAY.

SO IF Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR THE 85TH PER TILE, IF PEOPLE ARE TRACKING MORE SO THAN 25MPH AT 10MPH OVER, THAT'S A RED FLAG TO US TO SAY, HEY, THIS STREET IS NOT ACCOMMODATING THE SPEED LIMIT THAT HAS BEEN ASSESSED ON IT, WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS TO REDUCE THE SPEED ON THE STREET? THAT IS A TOLL BOX FOR TRAFFIC CALMING. IT'S A WIDE AREA OF -- ARRAY OF THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO, STRIPING, RAISED ISLANDS, SO WE CAN ASSESS EACH INDEPENDENT SECTION OR NODE AND ADDRESS THOSE IMPROVEMENTS TO REDUCE THAT SPEED, FOLLOW UP WITH ANOTHER SPEED STUDY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ASSESSMENT WAS CORRECT AND OUR IMPLEMENTATIONS DID ACTUALLY WORK.

>> SO AGAIN, IT'S DRIVEN BY RESIDENTS' COMPLIANCE ON THAT

STREET. >> AND STAFF WHEN WE IDENTIFY THEM AND INFORMATION AS WE RECEIVE IT.

SO WE SOMETIMES OFTEN HAVE OVERLAP OF DATA COLLECTION, THAT SOMETIMES WILL LET US KNOW, HEY, WE'VE ALREADY SEEN THAT.

AND IF WE HAVE THAT DATA, WE'LL ACT ON IT.

>> THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE TO MAKE

DECISIONS ON. >> YEAH, SO THEN I GUESS ALE GO AHEAD AND READ THE CONDITION FOR YOU.

SO THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION WOULD BE APPLICANT AGREES TO DEDICATE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN AND CONFIGURATION OF WHICH MAY BE MODIFIED BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT OF THE APPLICANT AND THE CITY OF AUBURN REGARDING DRT AND REVIEW OF THE PROJECT.

>> CAN WE ADD THAT AS A CONDITION WHAT YOU SAID?

>> YEAH, THAT WILL WORK. >> I MAKE A MOTION FOR CASE

CU-2026-044 WITH CONDITIONS. >> SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOUR.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

[9. Conditional Use – NEOS Church – PUBLIC HEARING]

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ITS USE LOCATED AT 665 OPELIKA ROAD FOR A CHURCH. THE ZONING DISTRICT IS FOR REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT URBAN. YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT THE PROPERTY HAS ACCESS DIRECTLY OFF OF OPELIKA ROAD.

SO AS WE GO -- YEAH, AND THERE'S THE FUTURE LAND USE, MIXED USE 1. SO LOOKING AT THIS EXHIBIT HERE, THIS IS THE EXISTING BUILDING WHICH -- THE SITE PLAN IS SPLITTING THIS BUILDING IN HALF ALMOST.

THE ENTIRE BUILDING IS ABOUT 16,000 SQUARE FEET.

AND THE CHURCH USE, WHICH PREVIOUSLY WE HAD A CHURCH USE HERE THAT WAS APPROVED IN NOVEMBER, WHAT WE DID -- OR DISCOVERED DURING THE INSPECTION PROCESS OF THE BUILD-OUT WAS THAT THE SITE PLAN DID NOT MATCH WHAT THE APPLICANT WAS ACTUALLY WANTING TO BUILD OR WHAT WAS GOING ON INSIDE, THUS PROMPTING ANOTHER CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST. SO PREVIOUSLY, A CHURCH USE WAS APPROVED AS WELL AS A BY RIGHT OFFICE USE.

NOW THE APPLICANT IS COMING BACK AND SAYING, HEY, THIS IS A NEW SITE PLAN AND WITH THAT THEY'RE WANTING A NEW CONDITIONAL USE.

THEY SAID THAT THE CHURCH COULD HOLD ABOUT 80 TO 100 PEOPLE IN THE MAIN AUDITORIUM, WHICH IS ABOUT 20 TO 25 PARKING SPOTS

[01:35:02]

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS? BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE OF NEOS CHURCH .

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME.

>> HEY THERE. I'M IAN MORRISON.

I LIVE IN AWE ABOUT YOUR AT 2703 KINTERRA COURT.

I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR KNEE OS CHURCH. THE PREFACE OF THE DISTRICT IS TO ENCOURAGE THE REVITALIZATION WITH A THOUGHT USE MIX OF USES.

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND

APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. DID YOU SIGN IN, SIR?

>> OH, SHOOT, THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD? SEEING NO ONE, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS? MOVE TO APPROVE CASE CU- CU-2026-045.

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

ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

[10. Conditional Use – Prosper at Plainsman Lake – Subdivision Amenity – PUBLIC HEARING]

>> ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS A REQUEST FROM BRANDON BOLT.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR AN OUTDOOR USE WHICH CONSISTS OF A PAVILION, POOL AND A PLAYGROUND.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1827CN AAI PASS.

YOU CAN SEE HERE THIS TAKES PLACE WITHIN THE PLAINS MAN LAKE SUBDIVISION. THIS IS AN AMENITY LOT AND FUTURE LAND USE SHOWS THIS AS LOW SUCH AS MEDIUM USE RESIDENTIAL. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, PREVIOUSLY THIS WAS APPROVED IN A FINAL PLAT BUT THE LABEL OR THE USE OF THE RECREATIONAL NATURE WAS NOT CLEARLY LABELED SO PROMPTING A CONDITIONAL USE. THERE WILL NEED TO BE AN ADMIN PLAT ADJUSTING THE LOT LINES OF THIS LATER ON BUT THAT WILL BE DEALT WITH AN ADMINISTRATIVE PLAT SO WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS? >> THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. FOR CONDITIONAL USE FOR SUBDIVISION AMENITY. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK SEEING NO ONE WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE -- >> I HAVE A QUESTION FIRST.

>> WE PROBABLY HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THE STANDARDS WOULD BE FOR PARKING. I GUESS IF IT WAS AN ADEQUATE DRT WE WOULD POINT THAT OUT. SO I GUESS LIKE THE MOST RECENT ONE, THE ONE I'M FAMILIAR WITH, OAK CREEK HAS A SIMILAR ONE WHERE IT'S KIND OF OFF STREET PARK, BUT THEY HAVE A POOL THERE. THIS DOES HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT BUT THAT PROBABLY SERVES A MUCH BIGGER KIND OF

NEIGHBORHOOD SHED. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOUR, ANY OPPOSED?

THANK YOU. >> THIS NEXT REQUEST IS FOR A

[11. Waiver - 136 South Debardeleben Street]

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS AT 136 SOUTH DEBARDELEBEN STREET.

IT IS APPROXIMATELY HALF AN ACRE AND THE APPLICANT IS IN THE PROCESS OF PERMITTING A FIVE-UNIT MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE. THERE IS A SLIGHT DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE SITE PLAN OR THE ELEVATION HERE AND THE STAFF REPORT. THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THE WAIVER WOULD REDUCE THE FIRST STORY HEIGHT FROM 15 TO 12 FEET.

IT ACTUALLY NEEDS TO BE 11 FEET 6 INCHES SO A 3-FOOT 6-INCH

[01:40:03]

SO -- BUT FROM HERE TO HERE IS 11 FEET 6 INCHES AND THIS IS GOING TO GIVE THE APPEARANCE OF A 13-FOOT 6-INCH FIRST FLOOR

STORY HEIGHT FROM THE OUTSIDE. >> THIS IS THE SIDE ON THE LEFT THAT WILL BE FACING DEBARDELEBEN.

>> YEAH, FACING THE STREET. >> AS A WAIVER IT DOES NOT

REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SHE SAID IT'S 11 FEET 6 INCHES, 11 AND A HALF. IS THAT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM? AREN'T WE LOOKING AT UPDATING THIS TO HAVE THEM ALL TO 12 FEET

OR -- >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

SO I THINK I'M -- NORMALLY I THINK ON THINGS LIKE THIS I'M FINE KIND OF CHALLENGING DESIGNERS TO KIND OF MEET THE STANDARDS, TOTALLY FINE BUT I THINK KIND OF TO YOUR POINT ABOUT WHAT THE FUTURE GOING TO BE ON THIS ONE, DEBARDELEBEN WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ON THE CORRIDOR SO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF 15 FEET DEFINITELY WON'T APPLY TO THIS ONE. I THINK EVEN THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF THE 12 FEET MY MEY NOT APPLY TO THIS ONE.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE THAT NUMBER TO AND THEN ALSO WHAT CHOSE CORRIDORS ARE GOING TO BE BUT PRETTY SURE KIND OF LIKE IN THE PRELIMINARY STUFF THAT WE LOOKED AT DEBARDELEBEN IS NOT ON THE CORRIDOR SO IT WOULD BE AN 11-6 -- 12 NOT

REALLY MINISCULE. >> IS THIS ONE THAT THE

ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE REVIEWS? >> YES AND SO THEY HAVE NOT MET.

THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO MEET AGAIN UNTIL AUGUST, WHICH IS REALLY KIND OF STANDARD FOR THEM. BUT THE BIGGEST THING WITH THIS ONE WAS LIVING SPACE AND THEY WANT DOORS ON STREETS SO THEY ARE NOT KEEN ON, IF YOU WERE JUST GOING TO HAVE A BLANK WALL, WINDOWS, GARAGES, THEY ARE VERY HOSTILE TOWARDS THAT.

SO THEY HAVE SUPPORTED THE 15 TO 12 LIKE I SAID I THINK IF THE LATEST CONVERSATION THEY WANT TO ESTABLISH CORRIDORS AND LIKE I SAID IF THIS IS ONE OF THE CORRIDORS, WE WOULD NOT BE

MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS SO --. >> OKAY THEN I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE WZ-2026-007, 136 SOUTH DEBARDELEBEN STREET.

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

THANK YOU. >> OKAY, NOW TO THE FUN PART.

NOW WE'RE THROUGH -- >> OH, WE CAN'T GO HOME.

>> NO, YOU'RE NOT FINISHED YET. OKAY I'M NOT UP FOR THIS.

NO JOB FOR ME. BUT WE DO HAVE THE JOY OF

[OTHER BUSINESS]

AND THEN ALSO JENNIFER HAS EXPERIENCE ON CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS PLANNING COMMISSION. SO I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY THAT Y'ALL ARE VOTING BUT I WANTED TO GIVE YOU MY THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE PEOPLE WHO I FEEL HAVE THE EXPERIENCE TO MOVE FORWARD. SO I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN NOMINATIONS FROM THE FLOOR FOR CHAIR.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A NOMINATION FOR OSCAR MOSLEIGH TO

BE THE CHAIR. >> DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND?

[01:45:02]

>> SURE.

ARE YOU WILLING TO ACCEPT A ROLE IF VOTED IN?

>> YES. I WOULD ACCEPT IT.

>> BECAUSE I IMAGINE IT'S THAT AND IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO NOMINATE ANYBODY ELSE -- YEAH, THEN TAKE VOTES.

>> GO FOR IT. >> YOU'RE STILL ACCEPTING NOMINATIONS FROM THE FLOOR FOR CHAIR.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE DANA CAMP AS CHAIR.

>> THERE YOU GO. DANA ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE THE POSSIBILITY -6G9 CHAIR? ANYONE ELSE OF THIS CHAIR? ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO NOMINATE FROM THE FLOOR? OKAY GREAT. NOW EVERYONE, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE NEED TO VOTE. I'M SORRY, THIS IS NEW FOR ME.

TRYING TO GET THROUGH IT. DO WE VOTE INDIVIDUALLY OR ALL

TOGETHER, DO WE ROLL CALL -- >> I IMAGINE -- YEAH, SO A ROLL

CALL IS WEIRD. >> IT IS.

>> SHOULD BE LIKE ALL IN FAVOR --

>> I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I WOULD BE AT ON IT.

>> WE DO THIS ONCE A YEAR, RIGHT SO IT WOULD BE LIKE A

ONE-YEAR -- >> NO, I MEAN, OSCAR -- YEAH, SO WHOEVER GOT NOMINATED FOR THE CHAIR WOULD BE THE CHAIR UNTIL THAT PERSON WAS KIND OF -- UNTIL THEY DECIDED THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE CHAIR. BUT YEAH, THEY WOULD BE THE

CHAIR. >> DEFINITELY HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR. (CHATTER).

>> IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE THEM ALL THE TIME.

>> YEAH, WE HAVE THEM EVERY JANUARY.

>> SO ANNUAL ELECTION IS IN JANUARY.

>> WELL, NO I WASN'T SURE. OKAY, SO IT'S AN ANNUAL THING.

>> YEAH, THAT'S TRUE. >> OKAY, GREAT.

>> SO WE HAVE TWO NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIR.

ALL IN FAVOR OF OSCAR MOSLEIGH, AYE?

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> I HAVE 3. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD.

DO I HEAR 4? SEE, THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T DO THIS

VIA AYE. >> WRITE IT DOWN ON A PIECE OF

PAPER? >> LET'S JUST DO ROLL CALL, MAN

THIS IS REALLY COMPLICATED. >> DANA CAMP?

>> YOU CAN'T VOTE FOR YOURSELF. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR

YOURSELF? >> WHY NOT DO A ROLL CALL AND THEN YOU SAY WHO YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR.

>> THAT'S FINE. THERE'S ONLY TWO PEOPLE THAT ARE

NOT -- >> YEAH, THAT'S FINE.

>> OKAY, GREAT. ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

>> DANA CAMP. I ACCEPT.

YES. >> THANK YOU.

>> SAY WHO YOU'RE VOTING FOR. >> ARE YOU VOTING FOR YOURSELF?

>> YEAH. >> NANETTE REISS?

>> DANA. >> VANESSA?

DANA CAMP. >> OSCAR MOSLEIGH.

>> PHILIP CHANCELLOR? >> DANA CAMP.

>> JENNIFER STEVENS? DANA.

>> OSCAR MOSLEIGH? >> DANA.

>> WALKER DAVIS? >> OSCAR.

>> DANA CAMP. >> CONGRATULATIONS.

CONGRATULATIONS. FOR VICE-CHAIR, WE WOULD NEED NOMINATIONS FOR THE VICE-CHAIR. I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE PHIL

CHANCELLOR. >> I NEED A SECOND.

>> I VOTE MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FROM THE

FLOOR FOR VICE-CHAIR? >> IF NOMINATED DO YOU ACCEPT

THE POSITION -- >> I'LL BE GLAD TO.

>> ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? SEEING NONE, CONGRATULATIONS.

AND FOR SECRETARY -- >> I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE

OSCAR MOSLEIGH. >> WELL, HE IS CURRENTLY SECRETARY SO YOU REALLY TECHNICALLY DO NOT HAVE TO VOTE

THAT ONE -- >> I'M ALREADY THERE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE? >> OF COURSE.

I'M HERE TO SERVE, WHICHEVER WAY THE MISSION NEEDS I WILL SERVE.

>> WE DO CURRENTLY HAVE A SLATE OF OFFICERS, DANA CAMP AS CHAIR, PHIL CHANCELLOR AS VICE-CHAIR AND OSCAR MOSLEIGH AS SECRETARY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.

THANK YOU AND CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU ALL.

[CHAIRMAN’S COMMUNICATION]

>> CONGRATULATIONS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO TELL YOU MY FAREWELLS.

I HAVE TRULY ENJOYED THIS. I HAVE ENJOYED EVERY CITIZEN WHO TOOK THE TIME OUT OF THEIR DAY TO COME HERE.

I HAVE LEARNED AN IMMENSE AMOUNT ABOUT OUR MUNICIPALITY, HOW IT WORKS AND WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO

[01:50:01]

AND -- >> IF I COULD SAY SOMETHING.

I'VE ENJOYED BEING HERE AND WORKING WITH NONETTE.

SHE'S BEEN JUST GREAT AND I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU, IF THERE'S NOTHING YOU NEED TO DO ON A THURSDAY NIGHT, THURSDAY

EVENING, COME ON DOWN. >> YOU MIGHT SEE ME AGAIN.

I JUST WON'T BE IN THIS SEAT. >> WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

WE NEED TO VOTE TO ADJOURN. UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER --

>> NO, I DON'T THINK SO, I'M GOOD.

>> OKAY, GREAT. >> MOVE TO

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.